Posted on 12/20/2004 2:26:56 PM PST by Ed Current
Good point. Oh, my bet is on Afghan & Iraq.
Have a great Christmas.
Ethic of Reciprocity - Every person shares certain inherent human rights, simply because of their membership in the human race.
"Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets." Matthew 7:12, "And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise." Luke 6:31
Atheist and Agnostic Pro-Life League Homepage - James Matthew (Matt) Wallace, aka The Compleat Heretic; a Secular Humanist atheist and a pro-life advocate. A nontheistic and nonreligious opposition to the life-denying horror of abortion"... because life is all there is and all that matters, and abortion destroys the life of an innocent human being."
As I contemplate the Declaration of Independence on the anniversary of its signing, I am chastened by the tragic fact that too many Americans are denied their "unalienable rights" of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Ironically, these same rights are used as an argument for alienating these oppressed and persecuted Americans from their rights as human beings. These Americans are the more than one million preborn children violently killed annually by abortion.
The day will come when we as a people will live out the true and full meaning of our dearest creed: All human beings are equal under the law. We will no longer deny the humanity and the human rights of preborn children. Freedom will cease being corrupted into the right of a mother to slaughter her innocent and helpless child within the sanctum of her body. The inhuman and barbarous genocide that is abortion as birth control will end. On that day, all Americans will be free at last.
In 1976, when she became pro-life, Doris Gordon founded Libertarians for Life "because some libertarian had to blow the whistle."
As libertarians, LFL's interest in the abortion debate is in everyone's unalienable rights. LFL's reasoning is philosophical, not religious. Some LFL associates are religious; others, such as Gordon, are atheists.
LFL focuses mainly on two central points: personhood (what "person" means, and why all preborn children are persons); and parental obligation (how parents incur it). From our answers we conclude that prenatal children have the right to the protection of the law.
Libertarianism affirms the central, inalienable right of all persons to be free from aggression (the initiation of force or fraud). Nonaggression belongs in every code of morality. LFL also affirms that from conception to death, we are persons with the right not to be killed. The killing of an innocent person, as in abortion, violates this right.
LFL further affirms that, under libertarian principles, parents owe their dependent children, born and preborn, care and protection from harm. Even if abortion were merely a case of "abandonment" or eviction, as some wish to rationalize it, it would still be wrongful death.
Dependent children are like "captives" of their parents, for they are in the parents' control. This is not voluntary for the children, but it is for the parents. Therefore, when parents choose not to provide care and the children get harmed, the parents have initiated force, and they are accountable.
Abortion, then, violates two rights of children: the right not to be killed, and the right to parental care and protection. Even when pregnancy is due to rape, both parents still have the general obligation not to kill or further endanger their innocent preborn child.
They are a victory for the left, not for conservatives across this nation.
You nailed it down completely!
No, I wrote what I meant to say. Thanks.
How to you propose the government implement the policy of forcing a women to bring an unborn child to term against her will? There are many ways to abort a child without a doctor including the use of commonly available herbs that have been used for centuries throughout many cultures. If a woman is pregnant, does the government have the right to keep her from engaging in risky behavior, e.g. drinking, smoking, kickboxing, bungy-jumping, or imbibing certain completely legal herbal concoctions? How do you suggest such government controls be implemented? May I suggest we take all pregnant women who seem to have a predisposition toward abortion and place them in an artificial coma for 9 months until the unborn child comes to term. That way we can be certain the mother doesn't do anything that might harm the unwanted baby.
no 'compassionate wuss conservatives',
Arinie is one of the best 'girlie' men the feminized left has.
So put it on the ballot. And live with the result.
I'm in favor of a ballot measure. Are you?
Wow. Thank you for posting that.
Read & understand the CONSTITUTION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
What's with the shouting?
Personally, I think ROE should be repealed, because it is bad law. That said, I am confident that most states will then legalize abortion.
Sounds good to me.
So go find a state you can take over, and outlaw abortion. Move there. Or to Iran.
Personally, I think ROE should be repealed, because it is bad law.
Finally, you start to make sense. I was beginning to think you were a fresh recruit from Moveon.com!
Rehnquist, "Roe V. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973):
"To reach its result, the Court necessarily has had to find within the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment a right that was apparently completely unknown to the drafters of the Amendment. There apparently was no question concerning the validity of this provision or of any of the other state statutes when the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted. The only conclusion possible from this history is that the drafters did not intend to have the Fourteenth Amendment withdraw from the States the power to legislate with respect to this matter." caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=410&invol=113
FT January 2003: Constitutional Persons, Robert H. Bork made the following comments about Roe v. Wade:
"Blackmun invented a right to abortion....Roe had nothing whatever to do with constitutional interpretation. The utter emptiness of the opinion has been demonstrated time and again, but that, too, is irrelevant. The decision and its later reaffirmations simply enforce the cultural prejudices of a particular class in American society, nothing more and nothing less. For that reason, ROE is impervious to logical or historical argument; it is what some people, including a majority of the justices, want, and that is that....Science and rational demonstration prove that a human exists from the moment of conception....Scalia is quite right that the Constitution has nothing to say about abortion."
So go find a state you can take over, and outlaw abortion. Move there. Or to Iran.
POST #42
I am not sure why the admin mod removed my comment; it must have been for lack of details.
I was in a Catholic school until 15. The nuns were sadistic, to say the least.
In 1974, my best friend, in the world, William Morrisette (Bill), shot himself in the head with a .22 rifle, while "cleaning it."
Turns out he was being molested by the head priest of the "Our Lady of Sorrows" Parish, in Farmington Hills, Michigan.
Priest's Name was Father Gary.
Feel better, Admin Mod? You could have left the allusions alone.
Check my signup date, newbie.
Turns out he was being molested by the head priest of the "Our Lady of Sorrows" Parish, in Farmington Hills, Michigan.
POST #9
Because thanks to liberal legislation created by the Supreme Court, the only process that might change things would be a Constitutional Amendment. A few have been started, but amending the federal constitution is a Herculean process.
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.