[roamer_1]

Our founding fathers, while deeply imbued with a Christian worldview -even those not Christian- would have been horrified at the activities of Christians today to jockey for federal power to get their stuff accomplished. They would have responded with something like "what????? are you daft? that is the tyranny we just fought a war to ESCAPE."

You are wholly and absolutely incorrect. The Christian view is the correct one from a Constitutional and libertarian point of view on the two issues I suppose you are referring to- namely Abortion and the protection of marriage, albeit for different reasons. Especially wrt Life, the pseudo-federalists have no idea what damage they cause.

I have every confidence that these issues, had the founding fathers the advantage of prescience, would have been written as boldly as possible into the very foundations of the Constitution. After all, Life itself, certainly is already, and yet everyone from the left to the right try to ignore that very fact- Even though it is defined there explicitly and is enumerated as coming from God Almighty Himself. No man has the right to take life from another without due process of law, period.

[slnk_rules]

I don't think I have to yeild my pro-life credentials to you for a second. The founders did not write the issue of abortion into the constitution because the issue of murder is, AND SHOULD BE, left to the states. There are no FEDERAL LAWS pertaining to murder, other than the murder of federal agents, mass (terrorism) murder and a few other tangential issues. Issues of murder rightly belong to the states....., and that is where abortion was until the USSC hijacked the issue in 1973. It needs to go back to the states. We may, for a while, have a divided electorate on the issue. We have had that before. HOWEVER

WE STAND A MUCH BETTER CHANCE PROTECTING LIFE IF WE ADOPT A FEDERALIST STRATEGY.

I don't feel like listing my bona fides here on FR yet again on the pro-life issue. I will just say I have been as big an activist on this issue as -I would be willing to bet money- anyone here. I do NOT understand the unreasoning kamikazee mentality of evangelicals, who had rather have one hundred per cent of ZERO, than 80 per cent of 90 per cent, with the goal of changing the state constitutions to restrict abortion state by state. Did you know that this was one of the reasons for Harry's abortion? New York state was about to restrict abortion yet again. You can read about it in the book Aborting America by NARAL founder (and now pro-life) Bernard Nathanson, a self professed "secular humanist."

On the issue of marriage, the issue is similiar. Rather than insist on bringing the issue under federal jurisdiction, we should be insisting that states are sovereign in the issue. EVERY SINGLE PLACE where the issue has gone to a state (not to a court), we have won, and won handily. Why in God's name you people would want to reverse that and amend the constitution (which you will NEVER accomplish, btw) is beyond me. Stick to the venues already provided for you in a GREAT legal document. Demand that the courts do the same. That is the path to get what you want, as well as the path that will insure other liberties that neither you, nor the founding fathers, envisioned assaults upon.