Posted on 11/18/2007 12:10:42 PM PST by dano1
Great point and I commented on that someplace on this thread on that very issue. I think Thompson is wrong on this being a states rights issue.
So, you believe that a state could legalize murder, then.
How absurd.
Every state is guaranteed a republican form of government, and you can't have a republican form of government, according to the American republican model, that doesn't protect the unalienable rights to life and liberty.
What you're supporting, though I doubt you realize it, is the dissolution of the Union, and a complete abrogation of the very principle that this free republic is built upon. You're repudiating the very reason for the existence of government, any government.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men..."
I think you're factually incorrect.
CA is #1, with over six illegal aliens per 100 people.
Arkansas is #28, with less than one per 100.
http://www.statemaster.com/graph/peo_est_num_of_ill_imm_percap-number-illegal-immigrants-per-capita
They are all horrendous and I think babies are viable at conception.
Maybe the word should have been barbaric, but that doesn’t work either.
Where are you getting you stats?
I posted a link. I’m sorry I don’t know how to post is as an active link, but you can always cut and paste it.
Americans differentiate between ethics and morality.
They see ethics as following the laws people have made for themselves by democratic means. Such laws are by the people and for the people, and can be changed by the people. They are also enforced by the people, and we seek that if anyone violates them, then the punishment should be the same for all.
Morality is seen as much more nebulous. While for many it is just as certain, for many it has no certainty at all. It is often seen as “the will of heaven”, which cannot be altered by men and is unchanging. It is a function of faith and religion, and its particulars are not shared between people of faith, religions, or even sects within the same religion.
Based on this difference, Americans are more comfortable with a politician they believe is ethical, in that he follows the written law, than one who claims to be moral. This is because they don’t know what he means when he says he is moral. The morality of someone who goes to your church, or the morality of a Wahabbi Muslim?
Liberal-leftist politicians often claim they are moral, even when though they are Catholic, they vote against what the Catholic church teaches. Implied is that they think their personal morality is better than that of their church.
So how does this relate to the abortion issue?
Well, the governor is right that it is a moral issue. But that is not enough for some of us to impose our morality on others. It is more important that it is also an ethical issue, again, like slavery.
Slavery was immoral, but it was also unethical, because it did not recognize that slaves were men too, equal to everyone else in the social contract that is the basis of our laws and ethical society.
The same applies to abortion. Claiming abortion is immoral, while felt in much of the country, neglects that vast parts of the country that feel it is perfectly moral. But ethically, it is unjust, like slavery, because it takes away the rights of the unborn on the pretense that they are not human.
So while the governor can declare against abortion as an immoral act, his stronger argument is that it is an unethical act. As much as a law that said some people could be killed at random for no reason. Or that said that some people could be enslaved.
Thompson's stance is both realistic and respectable.
The Constitution does not address “abortion” directly. But you must understand that “abortion” emerged only recently as a sterile politically correct term for “feticide,” the murder of unborn children. So the “abortion” debate—or whatever the politically correct term of choice is this week—focuses squarely on the “right to Life,” as our Founders wrote. They did not contemplate that Americans of a later generation could slaughter literally hundreds of thousands of their children every year with complete impunity.
The Declaration of Independence tells us that men institute governments to secure the certain inalienable right to Life with which our Creator endowed us. The Right to Life then does not come from or through any level, organ, or agency of Government but from Almighty God Himself, and no Government can abolish it. The Preamble to our Constitution intended the document “to secure the Blessings of Liberty to ... our Posterity.” But our Posterity cannot reap the Blessings of Liberty if we massacre them before they gain the age and wisdom necessary to understand liberty.
We then have the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. I explained these in post #71 (I think), but they explicitly protect the Right to Life generally and specifically against State governments.
The Department of Energy finds little Constitutional justification (perhaps in regulation of commerce, but I’m not really sure that it does much of anything), and the Department of Education enjoys even less. We probably would get more energy and education without those two federal bureaucracies.
In Texas you can kill someone for stealing your property. In New York you cant. In Texas you can kill someone who you believe is threatening you without retreating. In New Jersey you cant.
We have more than 50 different definitions when it is legal to kill the born person and when its not. Why should the unborn person have more rights than the born person?
If we want a federal law against killing we should amend the Constitution. But I submit to you that would open a whole different can of worms that neither you nor I will like.
I heard it but don’t have a link. However, I believe both Justice Scalia and Thomas have addressed this in terms of what can or cannot be done by the court.
Thank you! I have been trying to get a better handle on this and you provided it to me.
Here in Iowa we call that lying.
Going to the Supreme Court was never the issue. A majority of Justices who uphold the Constitution has always been the issue.
Yep.
You left out national security.
Anyway the abortion issue becomes a non-issue if terrorists are blowing up America. There will be no pregnancies if we're all dead.
Americans in general need to get their priorities straight.
Even President Bush doesn't understand national seurity. A big chunk of national security is illegal aliens in this country. He and the liberals want to legalize lawbreakers. Does anyone remember that the a9 9-11 crowd were here on visas.
The stupidity of most people is un-friggin'-believable.
"immigration reform." What a crock. Reform what? Those cock-roaches are here illegally. Enforce the law and kick 'em out.
Those who commit or empower abortions are of the exact same spirit as the terrorists. There is no difference whatsoever.
Both are a complete repudiation of everything America once stood for.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men..."
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
Note that I don't necessarily favor a federal law banning abortion or even the passage of a new constitutional amendment. I don't think they're necessary. If Roe v. Wade is overturned, then the abortion issue can indeed be returned to the states...and any state laws allowing abortion would be struck down as a violation of the 14th.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.