What is this "it" to which you are referring here nmh — do you mean abortion? If the Supreme Court were ever to overturn Roe v. Wade, all that would result would be to return the issue to the oversight of the several states. The Supreme Court cannot create positive law from the bench — that is, a ban of abortion, especially at the state level. (Such a ban would have to come from the individual state legislatures in a post-Roe world.)
What you want — an outright ban from the federal level — can only come from a life-friendly Congress; and we do not currently have one of those. What would be needed is a human life amendment to the Constitution. I'd be all in favor that; but as a political realist, I don't see such an amendment happening anytime soon.
It would take two-thirds of both houses of Congress to propose a constitutional amendment. OR applications to Congress from the legislatures of two-thirds of the several states that it call a Convention for proposing amendments — which cannot be limited to just the single life issue; all kinds of proposed Amendments might crop up. We could have a three-ring circus going on for months, if not years. In the case of the Constitutional Convention route, Congress is just as in charge as it is with the first mode of proposing amendments. Pro-choice members of Congress would be in a good position to throw monkey wrenches into the gears....
But whichever amendment route you take, in the end Proposed Amendments must be ratified by three-fourths of the several states in order to take effect as constitutional law.
So you'd be back to the states — which is what you wanted to avoid in the first place! In our constitutional system, there is no end-run around the states when it comes to amending the Constitution.
That the right to life is a "self-evident truth," you and I and Thomas Jefferson all agree. But there are plenty of people today who do not recognize that truth as at all "self-evident." It is "self-evident" only to people of our culture, which is Christian at its core and strongly influenced by the intellectual heritage of ancient Greece and Rome.
For persons who do not share this culture — indeed, who are opposed to it and would like to see it obliterated — the right to life is no "self-evident truth." Indeed, many of these folks refuse to believe that there is any such thing as "objective" truth at all. It's just one man's opinion against any other man's, and neither opinion is any "better" than the other (unless it happens to belong to the sort of person who would say such foolishness in the first place — some species of ideologue I'm sure).
This is what we're up against, nmh. I'm sure that you and I and Eternal Vigilence and roamer_1 all share the longing for a culture of life here in America, one that cherishes and protects life at all its stages, from conception through natural death. I believe we all share this goal; what we're quibbling about is the best route to take to get there.
I think some of the things I've said above are relevant considerations for planning our route, and I offer them to you in that spirit.
Thanks so much for writing, nmh!
While I appreciate your post, and certainly agree with much of it, I wouldn't characterize my heart or mind in this as one of "longing" for anything, exactly. Pining after justice just hasn't proven effective at bringing it about. So, I've chosen a new attitude.
We are now making an imperative demand (I'll include the definition of the word "imperative" at the end of this post) that every single sworn officer of the United States take his or her sworn oath seriously and act upon it. That includes strictly enforcing the purpose that the Constitution describes for itself: "to secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves AND OUR POSTERITY," and the necessary Fourteenth Amendment protection of all PERSONS, from fertilization to natural death, from being killed without first being charged, tried and convicted of a capital offense.
We will no longer offer an ounce of political support to any candidate who will not adhere to their sworn oath before God to do this, or accept any more mere lip service or excuses.
"States' rights," Constitutional amendments, no matter how attractive or seemingly good, 'better' judges, etc., are all nothing more than excuses now for politicians to break their oaths and to do nothing to stop the slaughter. Every member of the Executive branch, the Legislative branch and the Judicial branch is sworn before God to protect innocent human life, and it's far past time for us to demand without equivocation that they simply do it. Period. End of story.
Until Christians stop lending their sacred franchise to the enablers of abortion, including politicians like John McCain, it will not cease.
But, the moment the Body of Christ draws the line without compromise, we will be heading swiftly towards victory over this overriding evil. Deprive them of their votes and the politicians will come around so fast it will make your head spin. In America the people are sovereign, and they must begin to act like it again.
God bless you, and I pray that you and others like you will join with us in the new attitude of the Personhood Movement.
Main Entry:
im·per·a·tive
Pronunciation:
\im-ˈper-ə-tiv, -ˈpe-rə-\
Function:
adjective
Etymology:
Middle English imperatyf, from Late Latin imperativus, from Latin imperatus, past participle of imperare to command — more at emperor
Date:
15th century
1 a: of, relating to, or constituting the grammatical mood that expresses the will to influence the behavior of another b: expressive of a command, entreaty, or exhortation c: having power to restrain, control, and direct2: not to be avoided or evaded : necessary
synonyms see masterful
— im·per·a·tive·ly adverb
— im·per·a·tive·ness noun
Exactly.. especially purple States.. Any amendment must be ratified by the States.. Unless it is the Income Tax and Federal Reserve which was not ratified but forced on us anyway.. Some States will NOT ratify outlawing federal abortion..