Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: roamer_1; mnehrling
And finally, relegating any of the enumerated unalienable rights to the mere authority of man, not to mention the states, endangers them all-

Do you really think that's what the end goal is?

The inalienable rights within the Constitution cannot be infringed by either the states or the federal government.

Our problem is that a majority of the people today do not see abortion as an issue regarding the inalienable right to life of the unborn person. Until they do, we're not getting anywhere. Sending the issue back to the states opens everything up for debate, and we can start from there. It would have the positive side effect of, oh, saving more babies in less time.

Nothing will stop people from pushing even further after that, you know. If it comes to be commonly accepted that the unborn are persons from conception, then we're done. Mission accomplished. The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments take over from there.

And I will serve you this warning, too. I will predict that if Sarah Palin runs, it will be the Christians that hand her defeat, more than any other faction.

Probably one of the bigger whoppers I've seen on this thread today. *chuckles*

384 posted on 03/06/2009 7:02:22 PM PST by Ultra Sonic 007 (To view the FR@Alabama ping list, click on my profile!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 367 | View Replies ]


To: Ultra Sonic 007
Do you really think that's what the end goal is?

It doesn't matter what the end goal is. "The end justifies the means" is a very liberal idea. It is not the states' to claim, and that is the end of it. Now, if the states would care to DEFY the supreme court on Constitutional grounds, that's a different story- But that is not what they are doing.

The inalienable rights within the Constitution cannot be infringed by either the states or the federal government.

But yet, they are.

Sending the issue back to the states opens everything up for debate, and we can start from there. It would have the positive side effect of, oh, saving more babies in less time.

You are advocating a return to the status quo, representing nothing but failure. Your method has been well tried, and has saved no babies in thirty years. *None*.

Probably one of the bigger whoppers I've seen on this thread today. *chuckles*

Watch and see.

The reason for Reagan Conservatism, and the POINT of it is to offer candidates who fulfill the requirements of all three pillars of Conservatism. The reason it is powerful is because it prevents rivals, and therefore, division.

Weakness on an issue of such great importance to a faction, as the Pro-Life issue most certainly is to the Christians, is bound to raise rivals, and raise them with good cause. And those rivals will create division.

Split the Christians, and the game is over.

392 posted on 03/07/2009 12:14:37 AM PST by roamer_1 (Proud 1%er... Reagan Conservatism is the only way forward.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 384 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson