Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: savagesusie
No. A vandal—up until ‘unjust law’...should be killed or whatever if you have to protect your private property. People have always had (until recently) the right to defend their property—with the killing of life if necessary.

People do generally have the right to defend their property, but there are restrictions. How exactly those restrictions are drawn is, within very broad bounds, a matter of state legislative authority. Some actions which in one state would constitute Murder in the First Degree would, in another state, be regarded as justifiable (if not praiseworthy) homicide. The primary duty of mankind is to care for their offspring and be responsible...do unto others as you would have them do unto you....that is the basis of Western Philosophy for thousands of years.

True, but to die without offspring may be regarded as its own punishment.

My argument is not whether abortion should be legal or illegal, but rather whether it is legitimately a matter of federal government authority. I would suggest that it is not. I would expect that many states would, if allowed to do so, impose more rules restricting abortion; some states would pass the least restrictive rules they could get away with. While I might not be happy with a state that decided not to impose any meaningful restrictions on abortion, I would not regard that as being in most cases a matter of federal jurisdiction.

139 posted on 08/31/2011 3:30:47 PM PDT by supercat (Barry Soetoro == Bravo Sierra)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies ]


To: supercat

My point is that abortion can not be made legal by either a Federal or State legislature, because of the fundamental principle of our Constitution and Bill of Rights. Either the Constitution is the Supreme Law or Marx is—there can be no compromise.

We have an ‘inalienable right to life’. You can never take away “inalienable rights” nor can you give them away, even if you wanted to. That is the definition of “inalienable”.

That life begins is determined by science—not some random woman. Our laws are based on Right Reason according to Nature—not by some arbitrary person, even if they are a “judge” or lawyer.

Our standard of law comes from the Creator. We use His standard of Right and Wrong—not Barney Frank’s standard. When our Congress makes up laws which don’t agree with Natural Law Theory and science and denies Biology—it is unconstitutional because it is not considered “Just Law” which is defined in Natural Law Theory—the philosophy of ALL the Founding Fathers and which was used to form our Supreme Law of our Land.

Arbitrary law was what Hitler, Stalin, and Barney Frank uses. It doesn’t work in a land where all is equal under the law.

Babies and Fathers have no say in abortion “rights” and the father has as much genetic material in the life as the woman. And the baby has a fundamental Right to Life. If we decide we can kill that life-—then there is no longer equal law.


144 posted on 08/31/2011 7:49:12 PM PDT by savagesusie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson