But first I want to make what I believe is an even more important point to consider:
We are engaged in a culture war with the left that has claimed more than 50 MILLION innocent lives since 1973, with 3,500+ new deaths each day.
We want to change the culture and “the laws” but it seems to only get worse.
WHY?
How do we change the culture?
The ONLY way we can is through education—beginning with kids at pre-K and lasting through high school.
Now public schools are lost. But private schools and especially Christian are not—yet.
But here is the problem. NO CATHOLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM that I have looked at teaches in any serious way what the Church itself has taught since the time of the Apostles on the sanctity of the life of the PreBorn. I’ve looked into many Protestant school systems and found the same thing.
Catholic and Protestant schools could have turned this culture around if they would have begun comprehensive Pro-Life education Pre-K through 12th grade. But I’ve found only a handful nationwide.
I’ve spent many years making this very program and it’s free at my website. Sadly, i’ve visited many school systems with no real success.
Unless and until a sizable number of future voters are steeped in the Traditional Christian teachings on the sanctity of life marriage and family we will not win. We CAN NOT win.
I go into more depth on this in THE MISSING KEY OF THE PRO-LIFE MOVEMENT with links to my free Respect Life curriculum which you can use at home or bring to your school and try having it used there. If you do I’d appreciate feedback.
The one positive I have is news through back channels that Judie Brown and all.org might be coming out with their own curriculum. If true that might really make a difference.
We want to change the culture and “the laws” but it seems to only get worse.
3.Now public schools are lost.
4.NO CATHOLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM that I have looked at teaches in any serious way what the Church itself has taught since the time of the Apostles on the sanctity of the life of the PreBorn. I’ve looked into many Protestant school systems and found the same thing. Catholic and Protestant schools could have turned this culture around if they would have begun comprehensive Pro-Life education Pre-K through 12th grade. But I’ve found only a handful nationwide.
I’ve spent many years making this very program and it’s free at my website. Sadly, i’ve visited many school systems with no real success.
Unless and until a sizable number of future voters are steeped in the Traditional Christian teachings on the sanctity of life marriage and family we will not win.
I go into more depth on this in THE MISSING KEY OF THE PRO-LIFE MOVEMENT with links to my free Respect Life curriculum which you can use at home or bring to your school and try having it used there. If you do I’d appreciate feedback.
Those are excellent points of light. The following only addresses the first three points of light.
It is far more difficult to persuade pro-lifers to believe the Constitutional text than it is to get pro-murderers to convert to pro-life. They have been led to believe that text is beyond comprehension; because no matter how many times they read it, it hardly matches court majority opinion. Obviously, the demigods in black robes must be geniuses; and anyone disagreeing with majority opinion is a dolt. Pro-lifers are weary of the anti-abortion stigma, and have no desire to bear the additional burden of illiteracy.
The link in point #1 is most informative. It contains several salient points. Rehnquist stated, "the drafters did not intend to have the Fourteenth Amendment withdraw from the states the power to legislate with respect to this matter [i.e., abortion]." Every pro-lifer should be in agreement with Rehnquist; because the documentation noted in post one of this thread removes all reasonable doubt about Rehnquist’s statement. This fact has been well known for decades; but politicians fail to act upon it. Their failure to act is caused by pro-life’s failure to demand action!
Consider what these judges are telling the President, Congress and each State in the link you posted:
Justice White stated that "this issue [i.e., abortion], for the most part, should be left with the people and the political processes the people have devised to govern their affairs."
In his brief dissent in Carhart, Justice Scalia stated that "the Court should return this matter to the people—where the Constitution, by its silence on the subject, left it—and let them decide, state by state, whether this practice should be allowed."
And in dissenting from the Court’s decision to strike down the Nebraska partial-birth abortion ban, Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justices Scalia and Thomas once more urged that the issue of abortion be returned to the states.
On post 21 of this thread, Dan Middleton quoted his late uncle: “The perfect is the enemy of the good.” The Tenth Amendment is the pro-life Amendment for the 30 states with unenforced abortion laws. [1] cpforlife.org made a very good point elsewhere: The perfect demand all or nothing at all. It’s every state or no state. Obviously, that’s not a good idea. In fact, it is antithetical to one of Free Republics stated mission goals on the About Free Republic webpage: “The preservation and complete restoration of our Constitution and Bill of Rights with special emphasis on the first, second, fourth, fifth, sixth, ninth and tenth amendments and, of course, our right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness -- free of government intervention….A return to a strictly Constitutional form of federal government will automatically repeal and abolish all unconstitutional federal involvement in states issues such as: crime, health, education, welfare and the environment. The Tenth Amendment will again be in effect, which will bar all federal attempts at legislating social issues.” Jim Robinson hasn’t given up on the Constitution. They are not just a jumble of meaningless words. They were written in a day when “the pen was mightier than the sword.” When that is no longer true, you have Mao’s dictum: “Power flows through the barrel of a gun." The day when a gun has to do the job that words once did is point of no return for a nation. One way to hasten the transition from Penn to Mao is to continue disregarding those words millions have died for.
Another objection is that women would just cross state lines, until they arrived in a murder state. Does the fact that they will obtain them in another country, or illegally in this country after passing an amendment preclude the argument for an amendment? There is an underlying, unstated theme that ties objections of this nature together. Vote for the smiley face whose anti-Constitutional actions contradict their pro-life rhetoric; because that’s what we have always done. They have told us that the only options are amendment or appointment of federal judges; and to keep voting for them. And don't forget to work on that culture while you are promoting us for office.
36 states have fetal homicide laws based on the same facts that abortion is murder! Why do pro-lifers refuse to acknowledge this? Why do they refuse to acknowledge that the liar, Blackmum, lied about the inability to discover the onset of life?[2] Why do they refuse to acknowledge that a court opinion repugnant to the Constitution is VOID? Why do they disregard the fact that the paramount duty of state government is includes the protection of human life? Why to they reject the fact that state officials take an oath to the Constitution, not a court’s opinion of it. Why do they refuse to acknowledge that nullification of a state´s properly promulgated laws is specifically delineated as an offense committed by King George against the states, for which separation became necessary via The Unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America.
Point #2 only applies to the minority of states without abortion laws. Education is overflowing out of every bodily orifice in the majority of states; else they would not have fetal homicide laws and unenforced laws against abortion. The problem is a lack of Constitutional WILL POWER. The reason the situation is getting worse must be blamed on voters electing politicians who refuse to abide by their oath of Office. If education has any part to play, it must focus on the pro-life electorate’s susceptibility to the lie that politicians must kowtow to an errant court.[3] BUSH proved that to be LIE![4] Lincoln proved it to be a LIE. Jackson proved it to be a LIE! Why do pro-lifers refuse to follow their lead to the simple Constitutional truth? "In questions of power, then," Jefferson declared in his draft of the Kentucky Resolution, "let no more be heard of confidence in man but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution." Further, "Our peculiar security is in the possession of a written Constitution. Let us not make it a blank paper by construction. I say the same as to the opinion of those who consider the grant of the treaty making power as boundless. If it is, then we have no Constitution. If it has bounds, they can be no others than the definitions of powers which that instrument gives."[5]
Point #3 Christians should have anathematized those pagan temples and forced Reagan to live up to his promise to abolish the Dept of Cultural Transformation via Pagan Indoctrination. [6] They sowed to this wicked institution; and the reaping will be in the weeping after this election. This is the point that may have already put this nation in a position where tyranny will experience little to no resistance.
You can not beat something with nothing in the political arena; but pro-lifers have entered that arena decade after decade thinking they can. How many take a copy of the Constitution with them so they can refute the idiot opinions against it. Politicians need to be interrogated about the Constitution. The instant they start quoting some opinion contrary to the Supreme law of the land, they should be politely told to wise up, or take a very long walk off a very short pier. If the electorate never does this, it's not going to magically happen.
[1] http://www.peroutka2004.com/schedule/index.php?action=itemview&event_id=236 Standing Between the Butcher and the Baby August 01, 2004
[2] http://www.amazon.com/Who-Chooses-American-Reproductive-History/dp/0813031990 In 1860, the American Medical Association launched a campaign to convince state legislatures to prohibit abortions. RESOLVED, That, while physicians have long been united in condemning the procuring of abortion at every period of gestation, except as necessary for preserving the life of either mother or child, it has become the duty of this Association, in view of the prevalence and increasing frequency of the crime publicly to enter an earnest and solemn protest against such unwarrantable destruction of human life. Source: Records of the Rhode Island Medical Society, Rhode Island Medical Society Library, Providence, Rhode Island http://machaut.uchicago.edu/?resource=Webster%27s&word=gestation&use1828=on Displaying 1 result(s) from the 1828 edition: GESTATION,n. [L. gestatio, from gero, to carry.] The act of carrying young in the womb from conception to delivery; pregnancy.
[3] http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1290860/posts KRAMER ENDS THE BOOK with a call for ordinary citizens to "lay claim to the Constitution ourselves." He suggests that we must censure judges rather than submissively yielding to whatever the Supreme Court decides. As for more concrete actions, Kramer does note that judges can be impeached, the Court's budget cut, and the Court's jurisdiction curtailed. But, unfortunately, he spends little time developing these themes. http://www.traditionalvalues.org/pdf_files/JudicialSupremacy.pdf The Founding Fathers never meant to give federal courts ultimate power. http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=1464 Five Judicial Myths : Talking Points About the Judiciary:Despite what we hear today . .
[4] http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2006/04/30/bush_challenges_hundreds_of_laws/ President Bush has quietly claimed the authority to disobey more than 750 laws enacted since he took office, asserting that he has the power to set aside any statute passed by Congress when it conflicts with his interpretation of the Constitution.”
[5] http://www.fee.org/Publications/the-Freeman/article.asp?aid=1138 Judicial Monopoly Over the Constitution: Jeffersons View By Clarence B. Carson. Who, then, does decide constitutional questions? Let us leave to the side for the moment how they may be ultimately decided, so far as they ever are, in order to get to Jefferson’s intermediate answer. So far as the Federal government is concerned, each of the branches—and in the Congress, each of the houses—decides for itself in matters that come before them. “The constitution has,” Jefferson pointed out, “wisely made all the departments co-equal and co-sovereign within themselves.”[16] What I have been describing is a system of checks and balances, a system in which no branch has a monopoly of interpretation, in which any branch with a will can work to restrain the others. It is a system of limited government, limited toward the branch which most strictly construes the Constitution. Jefferson hoped that clashes between the branches over the Constitution could be avoided. To that end, he recommended that each branch refrain from approaching too near to the bounds of its powers. That would tend to limit government even more and give room for the liberty of the people, which he thought was the greater end of government.
[6] http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=41802 The federal Department of Education was made a part of the president's Cabinet by new world order facilitator Jimmy Carter. Prior to that, America had the finest education system in the world. In 1980, Ronald Reagan promised that, if elected, he would get this unconstitutional department abolished. http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/02/cultural_marxism.html Cultural Marxism