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

To: EternalVigilance
The only way that could be a problem for you is if you agree with Blackmun that the child in the womb is not a person.

In matters of constitutional interpretation, it doesn't matter what I believe. What matters is what was understood and intended by the people who wrote and ratified the Constitution and it's Amendments. That's the whole point of "origianal intent".

If I believe something that is different than what they intended or did not address at all, then I have at my disposal the process of amendment to change the Constitution and rectify that. Once that's done, that Amendment then needs to be interpreted according to what I, and the people who wrote and ratified it intended.

75 posted on 12/20/2011 4:27:04 AM PST by tacticalogic (e)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies ]


To: tacticalogic
The founders stated the crowning purpose of the Constitution quite clearly in the document itself as being "to secure the Blessings of Liberty to Posterity."

pos·ter·i·ty/päˈsteritē/
Noun:
All future generations.
Synonyms:
progeny - issue - offspring

Abortion and euthanasia violate every other clause of the Constitution's clear statement of purpose as well, without exception.

And then of course there is the Bill of Rights:

"The whole of that Bill [of Rights] is a declaration of the right of the people at large or considered as individuals...[I]t establishes some rights of the individual as unalienable and which consequently, no majority has a right to deprive them of." -- Albert Gallatin, letter to Alexander Addison, October 7, 1789

77 posted on 12/20/2011 4:39:30 AM PST by EternalVigilance (With God Obama can't hurt us. Without God, George Washington couldn't save us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | 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