[ejdrapes]

So Perry thinks States have the right to decide if murder is legal or not? Sorry Rick that doesn't fly.

[wideawake]

The XIVth Amendment guarantees everyone in America the right to life at the federal level. Perry is wronger than wrong.

[EternalVigilance]

"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..." -- The Declaration of Independence

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." -- The Preamble, or Statement of Purpose, of the United States Constitution

"No person shall be deprived of life without due process of law." -- The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution

"No State shall deprive any person of life without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." -- The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution

"The appellee and certain amici argue that the fetus is a 'person' within the language and meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment. In support of this, they outline at length and in detail the well known facts of fetal development. If this suggestion of personhood is established, the appellant's case, of course, collapses, for the fetus' right to life would then be guaranteed specifically by the Amendment." -- Justice Harry A. Blackmun, Roe vs. Wade, 1973

"You shall not murder." -- Exodus 20:13

"God who gave us life gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that his justice cannot sleep forever." -- Thomas Jefferson

[Grey Eagle]

Gov. Perry is big on states rights issues. That is why he and Obama have clashed so much. You either follow the Constitution or you don’t. He does. He could also do more with a conservative Congress, who confirm conservative justices. Until then, we are at the mercy of a Democratic controlled Senate and an ultra-liberal President.

[bimboeruption]

Was the issue of slavery left up to the states?

[liberty or death]

It’s not a “State” it’s the citizens of that State who vote these decisions. I would rather have Californication abort and gay marriage itself into the obvious cesspool/oblivion that it wills itself to be and not have any authority to then make Montana follow their same laws.

With all of the votes the pro-abort gay states have in our House of reps the only answer is the one the founding fathers gave us and that is states rights.

Rick has this right.

[untwist]

Perry’s position is in line with mine. The states were for the most part holding true to the Constitutional right to life. It was a liberal Supreme Court that decided that they would play God and determine what is human life and what is not. The old goat Justice Brennan in his late days even admitted that they made a mistake and he did not foresee the problems that Roe v. Wade would cause.

This critical decision belongs in the hands of the people. We only do as much in determining the fates of the worst murderers in our country. Some states have capital punishment, some do not. In all cases, the “rights” of the condemned are followed to the end. Hell, in my state of FL, we have some Death Row inmates who committed their crimes in the 1960’s and 70’s. We need the same concerns about the rights of the unborn and the Supreme Court took it away from us.

[smoothsailing]

Perry has this right. I've been around since well before Roe v. Wade, and back then far more babies survived because almost all states and citizens were appalled by abortion and didn't allow it.

I would guess that most posters on this thread didn't go to the link and read the full article.

The last two paragraphs are instructive and give the reader a sense of Rick Perry's reverance for life....

The National Right to Life Committee responded to Perry’s categorization of abortion as a states’ rights issue in a statement, saying, “Our society has an obligation to enact laws that recognize and protect the smallest members of our human family. Prior to Roe, states had the ability to enact laws that extended full legal protection to unborn children. We look forward to the day when Roe v. Wade is changed, and the states will once again have the ability to pass legislation that fully protects mothers and their unborn children.”

In a win for anti-abortion activists earlier this year, Perry signed a law requiring doctors to conduct a sonogram before performing an abortion, an initiative he deemed an “emergency item” for the 2011 legislative session.

[right way right]

Abortion is murder.

Is murder a state right?

Another Fence riding RINO.

There is Law and there is morality.

Today we need a moral leader.

[Polybius]

So Perry thinks States have the right to decide if murder is legal or not? Sorry Rick that doesn't fly.

So what would you prefer?

To have Roe v. Wade trample the Tenth Amendment, as it did, and dictate that abortion is legal in ALL 50 States or give each State the right to outlaw abortion as the Tenth Amendment requires? (Unless you believe in "penumbras")

Are you one of those people that would deny the State of Texas it's constutional right, under the Tenth Amendment, to make abortion illegal just so that you can brag that you are more anti-abortion than Perry is?

[little jeremiah]

Moral Absolutes Ping!

Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.

FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]

This is very revealing. So should individual states be allowed to legalize hiring a hit man to murder one's wife or husband or child? If not, why not? If he considers abortion a states' rights issue, he's (a) an idiot and (b) not pro-life. Maybe pandering to some strange group as well - pro-abortion Rs?

[normy]

The Roe case arose out of a Texas law that prohibited legal abortion except to save a woman's life. At that time, most other states had laws similar to the one in Texas. Those laws forced large numbers of women to resort to illegal abortions.

Jane Roe, a 21-year-old pregnant woman, represented all women who wanted abortions but could not get them legally and safely. Henry Wade was the Texas Attorney General who defended the law that made abortions illegal.

After hearing the case, the Supreme Court ruled that Americans’ right to privacy included the right of a woman to decide whether to have children, and the right of a woman and her doctor to make that decision without state interference.

[SoConPubbie]

Hey Rick, you moron, whatever happened to the “Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

[Rembrandt]

And so, the attacks begin. Can’t have anyone threatening the Messiah without a full-out defense against him/her.

[wtc911]

Palin(™) CBS interview, October2008....

"Q: Why is Roe v. Wade a bad decision?

A: I think it should be a states’ issue not a federal government-mandated, mandating yes or no on such an important issue."

[EternalVigilance]

The Tenth Amendment refers to "powers," not "rights."

And no governmental entity or individual has any legitimate "right" to alienate unalienable rights. All they have is a sacred obligation before God to protect the rights of the individual, beginning with the right to life.

 

The Equal Protection for Posterity Resolution

A Resolution affirming vital existing constitutional protections for the unalienable right to life of every innocent person, from the first moment of creation until natural death.

WHEREAS, The first stated principle of the United States, in its charter, the Declaration of Independence, is the assertion of the self-evident truth that all men are created equal, and that they are each endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, beginning with the right to life, and that the first purpose of all government is to defend that supreme right; and

WHEREAS, The first stated purposes of We the People of the United States in our Constitution are “to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity”; and

WHEREAS, The United States Constitution, in the Fourteenth Amendment, imperatively requires that all persons within the jurisdictions of all the States be afforded the equal protection of the laws; and

WHEREAS, The United States Constitution, in the Fifth and the Fourteenth Amendments, explicitly forbids the taking of the life of any innocent person; and

WHEREAS, The practices of abortion and euthanasia violate every clause of the stated purposes of the United States Constitution, and its explicit provisions; and

WHEREAS, Modern science has demonstrated beyond any reasonable doubt that the individual human person’s physical existence begins at the moment of biological inception or creation; and

WHEREAS, All executive, legislative and judicial Officers in America, at every level and in every branch, have sworn before God to support the United States Constitution as required by Article VI of that document, and have therefore, because the Constitution explicitly requires it, sworn to protect the life of every innocent person;

THEREFORE, WE THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES HEREBY RESOLVE that the God-given, unalienable right to life of every innocent person, from biological inception or creation to natural death, be protected everywhere within every state, territory and jurisdiction of the United States of America; that every officer of the judicial, legislative and executive departments, at every level and in every branch, is required to use all lawful means to protect every innocent life within their jurisdictions; and that we will henceforth deem failure to carry out this supreme sworn duty to be cause for removal from public office via impeachment or recall, or by statutory or electoral means, notwithstanding any law passed by any legislative body within the United States, or the decision of any court, or the decree of any executive officer, at any level of governance, to the contrary.

Sign the Resolution ...

 

[newzjunkey]

He's correct because if Roe vs. Wade was voided legality would return to being determined by the states.

Besides, abortion already *IS* a state's rights issue. Abortion is regulated differently in Indiana than in California.

[RinaseaofDs]

Actually, it does fly, and he’s right. That’s what’s so bad about R v W.

Arguing the morality of abortion, and arguing whether abortion should be legal nationwide are two different arguments.

The reason why the gay marriage issue is still something states can decide for themselves is because of the mess R v W made of these sorts of issues.

No way we pass a national law about gay marriage after R v W. Won’t happen. RvW has been a headache for liberals AND conservatives since it happened.

Penumbras and emanations - it’s the day, specifically, the Supreme Court jumped the shark. It’s on the same level as Obama’s Nobel Prize. SCOTUS went WAAAAAY too far, and it made using stare decisis much more difficult for future courts.

Kelo is another doozy, jump-the-shark, boner for SCOTUS as well. Souter’s practically still living in his Mom’s basement. How he ended up on the Supreme Court is beyond me.

[CharlesWayneCT]

Not sure I could agree with him on this.

On the other hand, there are only a few instances now where the federal government has the right to arrest a person for murder. It would be hard to fit an abortion into those constitutional guidelines. It’s not a crime across state lines, it’s not a crime against a federal official.

It might attach to the 14th amendment, but that has been stretched pretty thin already.

We already make most murder a “states-rights” issue. For example, each state decides whether killing an intruder is murder or self-defense. State attorneys always decide whether to prosecute a death as a murder or manslaughter, with each state having their own rules.

But I’m certainly tempted to use the 14th amendment to claim a civil rights application for the unborn. That’s because of my emotional response to abortion. I’m not sure if that is an appropriate conservative limited-government constitutional position though.

Interestingly, if we passed a constitutional amendment saying that life begins at conception, it would not necessarily force states to prosecute all abortion as murder. For example, a state might still decide that a doctor can abort a child if he determines the life of the mother is at risk. It would be like a “self-defense” law.

I suppose you could write a constitutional amendment that made all abortion punishable (although the constitution doesn’t generally define criminal law or set punishments.

[all the best]

When I was a kid (about 10) a friend told me that murder was not a federal offense. I couldn’t believe it. Turns out he was right.
Murder is an offense that takes place within a state. Every state has it covered of course no need for the feds to be involved.
I am absolutely against abortion. Absolutely in all cases. However, not the business of the federal government. The idea that a few folks rule over the rest of us-all 300+milllion-is what got us into this mess.

[Happy Rain]

Well,such a cold,unChristian,unfeeling,and cynically technical acceptance of state permited infanticide along with his being just FINE with unholy Homosexual Matrimony in New York,pretty much puts the POTUS out of his reach.