Posted on 01/20/2004 2:15:21 PM PST by cpforlife.org
What a difference a year makes.
The map above has been updated to reflect the number of children murdered by surgical abortion in this past year, about 1.4 million in the U.S., roughly half the population of Mississippi, shaded in red. When added to the 17 states in black, this equals a population of 44,000,000. It's the sickening truth America,
44 MILLION innocent babies have been dismembered by surgical abortion since Roe v Wade on January 22, 1973.
The war on Terrorism:
To try to get some additional perspective on this number, lets look at the war on terrorism. Some 3,000 people died in the horrific attacks of 9-11-01. The number of U.S. service members who have died in Iraq since the war began last March of 2003 reached 500 in the last several days. Also earlier this month we suffered the 100th fatality in the U.S. military's two-year Afghan campaign. So we as a nation have lost some 3,600 people from the attacks of 9-11-01, AND all combat on the war on terror in the last 27 months. That is less than ONE DAY of killing for the abortionists.
What if every day, for the last two years, 3,600 Americans died at the hands of terrorists? Imagine if 2,600 service men and women were brought home in boxes every day; and terrorists butchered another 1,000 civilians here at home—every day. What would that do to our nation—mentally, emotionally, and spiritually?
Unimaginable.
From an unborn person’s perspective things are worse, much worse. Every day for the last 31 years, about 4,000 Americans HAVE died at the hands of terrorists!
About one out every fourth pregnancy in America is ended by abortion.
Abortionists are the most lethal and brutal terrorists in the world. Their kill rate is over 99%, far deadlier than any of Saddam’s henchmen. The pain abortionists inflict on unborn children older than 16-20 weeks is far more excruciating than the most vicious forms of torture Uday and Qusay ever used on their poor victims.
The last 31 years of “legalized” abortion has severely damaged this nation’s sense of basic right and wrong. As the CULTure of death metastasizes, nearly every imaginable attack against the Family and of innocent life has come to pass or is being seriously discussed.
Abortion is a very depressing subject, one we would prefer not to think about. But avoiding the topic and wishing it would go away is as effective as on any other deadly condition.
BUT WHAT CAN I DO TO STOP IT?
CLICK THIS LINK TO A LIST OF 56 DIFFERENT THINGS TO DO. THERE IS SOMETHING ON THE LIST FOR EVERYONE.
Beyond that there is only one thing (earthly speaking) that will end this culture of death. Comprehensive education, on the sanctity of life before birth, beginning in pre-K and lasting through high school. This will have to be done in order to have a sufficient populace who votes Pro-Life. There simply is NO other way to get the needed votes.
Bush needs to read your analogy!
Bush and everyone in America needs to read this analogy.
EVERYONE!
...The USSC has no ability to stop a state from prosecuting murder. Get your local prosecutor to indict, and hold a trial..
First, abortions are not "performed". They are committed. Surgery is performed, but abortion-killing cannot normally be rationally likened to anything resembling the life-saving procedure of a surgery. Clean up your language. This is a family forum.
Would it be that it such killings be prosecuted, but the practical outcome of any conviction, from a prosecutor's perspective, would be the overturning of the judgment by appellate courts, which in turn renders such prosecutions untenable.
None of the above regarding the raw power of the court changes the inherent evil, baseless irrationality of the Roe and Bolton decisions.
Cordially,
Can you or anybody on your side explain, in a straightforward and coherent manner, why we should accept and respect Roe as a valid interpretation of the Constitution?
Because we cannot allow fed, state, or local governments to have the power to prohibit 'sinful' behaviors.
No matter how morally repugnant a majority may find certain acts or objects, we must observe our bill of rights in regulating them, in a reasonable fashion.
Criminalizing early term abortion as murder is an unreasonable prohibition; -- states have no such power..
I have the same opinion on our RKBA's, as evidenced by a post I made earlier this morning:
The right to reasonably 'bear' [carry] property of all sorts -[including arms] about our land is inalienable, to rational men..
The concept that a state has the power to absolutely prohibit carrying such benign objects is repugnant to our constitutional principles on its face..
Thus the concept that a state must show reasonable & 'compelling needs' for any such regulations, before adopting them using due process.
Fiat prohibitions on carrying arms are not enacted within the due process of constitutional law.
You do not have accept nor respect Roe as a valid interpretation of the Constitution. Whether or not it is a bad law, the fact remains that it is still the law of the land and will remain so until overturned.
If you can relax long enough, you will realize that I am not defending abortion.
But the right to LIFE isn't?
The concept that a state has the power to absolutely prohibit carrying such benign objects is repugnant to our constitutional principles on its face..
So why is it not equally Constitutionally repugnant for the USSC to deny the power of a state to absolutely prohibit the killing of innocent human beings who may one day carry these beign objects, a right which you yourself correctly describe as inalienable? Without the right to life, the right to carry is meaningless and void. Of course the only difference is that the pre-born are not big enough to defend themselves, with or without firearms. But if you wish to relegate abortion-killing to a matter of pure arbitrary power of one human being over the life of another human being then please don't talk to me about inalienable rights, including the right to carry, or for that matter, one's own right to life. If one does not respect the right to life of others then one has no reason to demand that selfsame respect from others.
Cordially,
Cordially,
Is this semantics, too? Tell me, if you can; what is the purpose of law in the first place? Tell me: in your view, can there be any such thing as an unjust law, or any case where the law is applied unjustly?
Cordially,
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.