No you are wrong! Thomas’ base is Natural Law Theory and God’s Laws....he is exactly like our Founders and Cicero.....He thinks our positivism is a gross violation of the intent of our Constitution.
Laws immersed in Natural Law Theory and are aligned to it....are Just Law. Everything else—man-made laws ==are all created on the whims of man and are always political and about granting power to some groups/individuals/corporations over others—creating unequal justice under the law. It is always evil and unjust.
Scalia claims that inalienable rights —such as the rights of life—can be denied to certain classes of individuals in the womb if you have a majority vote in the state. He claims it is a states right and they have the power to deny inalienable rights to the child in the womb.
It is a complete denial of Natural Law Theory—as is “gay” marriage which takes the definition in Black’s Legal dictionary and CHANGES it —just as all good marxists do when they try to force a nation to turn from God’s Laws which is in our Founding documents and is the basis of our legal system.
Scalia falls for the Postmodern/Holmesian twisting of our Constitution. Thomas understands, just like Cicero, that all man-made laws not inline with natural law is evil and unconstitution. The US was founded with a government which Cicero envisioned as being the “perfect” Republic. We were until Holmes removed our laws from morality (God’s Law) which should be unconstitutional.
Natural Law Theory always understands that our rights come from God. God can NEVER be removed from our legal system which is what the Postmoderns have been doing for the last 100 years to create a Communist/Socialist country which is totally unconstitutional.
Who speaks for God to establish Natural Law? Try as you wish you can’t get beyond the fact that our system requires laws be passed by legislatures of men. And men dispute what are “rights”. Slavery was once considered a right and strongly supported by most Southern churches. Now many believe health care is a “right” and we see that working out.
Very nicely stated. :-) And I was unaware of Scalia’s right to life vs. states’ rights position, so you taught me something. Thanks.
You’d think he’d know better.