Posted on 02/03/2007 12:49:38 PM PST by OrthodoxPresbyterian
Add me to the list please. Go Ron!!
George, if you or anyone on the GRPL know how to track down ole' DrSteveJ by Email or phone, I think that he could be a big help. Thanks!
Everyone who's responded so far is on the list. I'll be talking with Ron Paul's political director later today, if possible.
Best, OP
Put me on the list.
The last Congress, controlled by Republicans, couldn't even pass a minimal bill requiring parental notification of a minor child hiring an abortionist to chop up a child and grandchild, deeming such a measure far too right-wing and extreme. They have become useless.
Cordially,
What would be necessary for such an "end run" legislative strategy to work would be to define unborn children as Persons and also legislatively remove Abortion from the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court altogether -- as proposed by Ron Paul's "Sanctity of Life" Act.
Hunter's "Right to Life" Bill, lacking this key provision, is absolutely DOA. He knows full well that as long as Abortion remains within the purview of SCOTUS, even Scalia would vote to scrap his Bill. However, it makes for good "Pro-Life" showboating, while (even if enacted) actually accomplishing absolutely nothing.
BTW -- Diamond, are you interested in supporting Ron in the Primaries?
I would love to see that cite.
If this is true, it only serves to confirm my suspicions that abortion is not an issue that may be solved in the legal or political arenas, but only in the hearts and minds. This is an arena where the Church, not the State, can and must intervene:
For Christians are not distinguished from the rest of mankind either in locality or in speech or in customs.... But while they dwell in cities of Greeks and barbarians as the lot of each is cast, and follow the native customs in dress and food and the other arrangements of life, yet the constitution of their own citizenship, which they set forth, is marvellous, and confessedly contradicts expectation. They dwell in their own countries, but only as sojourners; they bear their share in all things as citizens, and they endure all hardships as strangers. Every foreign country is a fatherland to them, and every fatherland is foreign. They marry like all other men and they beget children; but they do not cast away their offspring. They have their meals in common, but not their wives. They find themselves in the flesh, and yet they live not after the flesh. Their existence is on earth, but their citizenship is in heaven.This is a time for the church to step up and be truly counter-cultural - not in the sense of the crass, commercial Evangelical sub-culture all-too-realistically depicted in Friends With God, the recent HBO documentary by Aledxandra Pelosi (daughter of the current Speaker). (Unfortunately, this documentary did not distort anything.) Instead, the Church must be unapologetically pro-life while simultaneously compassionate to single mothers, and encouraging responsible sexuality amongst her own children (i.e., teaching chastity). However, the frantic rhetoric of the grandstanding protesters must go.- Epistle of Mathetes to Diognetus at 5:1, 4-9 (ca. 130-200 CE).
It's not frantic rhetoric to expect the Supreme Court to be consistent. And they have consistently ruled, as have lower courts, that when a pregnant woman is murdered, two murders have been committed, i.e. Lacy Peterson and her unborn son.
Like so much, the legal system strains to suit the times. And the times are wrong.
OP, it's great to see you again. I had not even given it a thought until this thread, which has been most informative. Put me on your list; you just sold me:^)
Cordially,
Yeah. Ever see anti-abortion protesters in front of clinics, or, say, Federal Courthouses? They aren't winning any friends.
It's not frantic rhetoric to expect the Supreme Court to be consistent. And they have consistently ruled, as have lower courts, that when a pregnant woman is murdered, two murders have been committed, i.e. Lacy Peterson and her unborn son.
No, it's not.
That's like saying that mugging is not an issue that may be solved in the legal or political arenas but by the Church.
What is the function of civil law in the first place? Does not the State have the obligation to protect the innocent and to punish the guilty, and not the other way around as it currently stands?
Then Jesus asked them, "Which is lawful on the Sabbath: to do good or to do evil, to save life or to kill?" But they remained silent.
However, the frantic rhetoric of the grandstanding protesters must go.
Easy for you to say - you've already been born. I think if you were, God forbid, about to be chopped up you wouldn't mind at the very least a little frantic rhetoric from someone trying to save your skin.
Cordially,
The problem is that the invasion of privacy required to adequately regulate abortions are ridiculous. An abortion may be accomplished, in the first few days, by a large dose of birth control pills. I have been told that there are few women who are unaware of that - and this has reduced the numbers of abortions in the US.
"THE RIGHT TO LIFE ACT OF 2005 Lacks Vital Language" ~~ http://www.theamericanview.com/forums/showthread.php?t=524
That's like talking about regulation of mugging, or regulation of slavery. How about outright prohibition of the abortion killing trade and the prosecution of the doctors who commit these killings as acts of commerce?
An abortion may be accomplished, in the first few days, by a large dose of birth control pills. I have been told that there are few women who are unaware of that - and this has reduced the numbers of abortions in the US.
It doesn't make any sense to say that mothers taking large doese of pills to kill their prenatal children reduces the number of abortions in the U.S. It may reduce the number committed by rebrobate physicians in office buildings, but not the overall number.
Cordially,
Your statement is tantamount to claiming that "the invasion of privacy required to adequately regulate wife-beating are ridiculous"... well, yes, if by "adequately regulate" you mean that no spousal abuse, anywhere, ever, goes unprosecuted.
In reality, probably the great majority of individual spousal abuse instances go unreported and unprosecuted, but that's no argument for making wife-beating Legal. We maintain the illegality of spousal abuse precisely so that there may be legal action taken in those cases where enough evidence of the crime is reported to allow a prosecution to occur, and the same would hold true if Abortion were made illegal by, say, Oklahoma -- probably the great majority of abortions would continue to go unreported and unprosecuted; but the State would, at least, have the authority to bring prosecution in those cases where enough evidence of the crime is reported to allow a prosecution to occur.
I will be posting State campaign info for each member of the GRPPL list as soon as Penny can get it for me. Residents of the following five states are particularly encouraged to get in touch with the campaign, as Ron will be developing his campaign in these States first:
However, even if you are not a Resident of one of those States, please feel free to alert me as to your State of Residence, and I'll get you Campaign info on your State as soon as possible.
Thanks!
I'm not sure why she said Kentucky was one of their five initial focus States... comes a bit later in the primary schedule... oh, well, I'm sure it'll all make sense in due time.
What's your opinion on switching affiliation from Libertarian to Republican in order to access the primaries with the aim to support conservatives who aren't statists like maybe this guy?
probably the great majority of abortions would continue to go unreported and unprosecuted; but the State would, at least, have the authority to bring prosecution in those cases where enough evidence of the crime is reported to allow a prosecution to occur
Doesn't the prospect of selective prosecution scare you? It bothers me a lot, because it invites blackmail or capricious prosecution.
I'm approaching the question from my perspective that a bad law, an unenforceable law is worse than no law at all. Morally, I'm as pro-life as anyone on this board. I just don't see how to make it work from a Constitutional Law standpoint nor from a policy standpoint.
Well, I'm doing it. For that matter, Ron Paul himself has done it -- while he remains a paid-up lifetime member of the Libertarian Party (and was their Presidential nominee in 1988), he switched his voter registration back to Republican for his successful 1996 election to Congress.
I was registered Libertarian when I lived in Florida. However, I now live in Oklahoma, and I am re-registering as a Republican in order to vote for Ron Paul in my State GOP Primary, February 5, 2008.
Personally, I think we should do everything in our power to support Ron Paul to victory in the GOP Primaries, so we won't have to even bother looking at the Libertarian or Constitution Party nominees. Heck, if the Libertarians are smart, they'll just nominate Ron Paul (again) and support a grand unification ticket.
Shall I put you on the GRPPL list, for Florida?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.