Replies

I don’t mean to imply you don’t know the Declaration, nor that you said it was wrong. This being a public discussion, my arguments have been rather broad. So please pardon me if I’m disputing positions you don’t hold. The aim of my posts has not been to attack you at all.

My fundamental point is neither a recommendation for revolution, nor a recommendation for following the Constitution. Rather, my point is that, when people are being slaughtered in this country, something has gone terribly wrong and desperately needs to be corrected. I have no doubt you will agree with that.

So what has gone wrong? And how can it be corrected? Babies are still being butchered with impunity, and there’s no end in sight. Nor are we even able to say, as Lincoln could regarding slavery, that abortion “is in the course of ultimate extinction.” Nothing has worked. Nothing is working. None of the “pro-life” actions of Pres. Bush have worked.

Is it the Constitution which has failed us? If so, it needs overthrowing.

Or is it that we have failed to follow the Constitution? If so, how so? And how do we correct our course?

It’s not that I “waver between chucking the republic and defending the republic.” I’ve argued from both angles in order to demonstrate that, in either case, the aim remains the same: protecting the right to life. No matter which side one takes, the aim is the same.

You wanna work within the Constitution’s restrictions? Fine. Stop the slaughter.

You wanna stretch the limits of (and even ignore parts of) the Constitution? Fine. Stop the slaughter.

It can be done either way. For the sticklers, I’ve offered reasons why the President can act on existing law. And for the not-so-rigid, their justification is found in God’s Natural Law and the Declaration.

(For the more draconian, who might wish to throw over the Constitution altogether, their justification can also be found in the Natural Law and the Declaration - the same sources to which the American revolutionaries and Lincoln appealed.)

(Nor is following the Constitution any worthy endeavor in itself - no more or less worthy than being a faithful subject of King George III. Fidelity to a form of government which fails to perform the duty of government is no laudable act.)

But make your own choice, my FRiend. Pick a position, any position. If our aim is to protect the right to life, there is a way to do it.

I’ve made my argument as best I can, but perhaps it hasn’t been persuasive enough. And I don’t want to strain your patience, so we can drop the subject whenever you’d like. Thank you for the honest discussion and the good points you’ve made. I look forward to your reply. :-)