Posted on 07/27/2011 7:01:25 PM PDT by ejdrapes
Rick Perry Categorizes Abortion as a States' Rights Issue Despite holding personal pro-life beliefs, Texas Gov. Rick Perry categorized abortion as a states’ rights issue today, saying that if Roe v. Wade was overturned, it should be up to the states to decide the legality of the procedure. “You either have to believe in the 10th Amendment or you don’t,” Perry told reporters after a bill signing in Houston. “You can’t believe in the 10th Amendment for a few issues and then [for] something that doesn’t suit you say, 'We’d rather not have states decide that.'” The 10th Amendment reads: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
July 27, 2011 8:32 PM
ABC News' Arlette Saenz (@arlettesaenz) reports:
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.abcnews.com ...
Years ago I went along with the standard GOP position of leaving it up to the States. This is the GOP “cop out” position. They can claim they are against abortion.
But are they really?
After pausing long and hard some years back, I decided that I can’t live with that opinion.
Why would it be okay to have a right to life in one state, but not in another state? The left did not like leaving it to the states because they may not have control, so they went whole hog and made it national.
So whether or not a person has the right to live is dependent on who is running the state at the time. No thanks.
I can’t justify that and I no longer try. Granted letting states decide would save some lives for the lucky ones that didn’t get conceived in a death state, but it isn’t what what intended.
“States don’t have rights. People have rights..”
This amendment was the basis for the doctrine of “states rights”. Your diversionary tactics are erroneous and not germane to my post.
Tenth Amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Abortion is part of the marxist plan. Ushering in immorality will destroy the US. They know that. And you argue about states rights?! No wonder we've been such an easy target.
Look up Antonio Gramsci yourself. You need the information. Read what you find.
The tag line was from Eternal responding to your post. Since you were both PDSers, you both got my post. I will anxiously await either of you telling me which candidate has made anything close to the ridiculous “expectation” you noted:
“She had the chance on national TV to talk about the horror of abortion, the evil of killing the unborn, the stain on America’s soul; but she didn’t and never has.”
And for the Obummer didn’t abort his daughters, so he must be anti abortion analogy, you need to take a course in logic or better yet, common sense.
Do please tell us your candidates, or are you scared.
http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles/FonteCultureWar.php
I'm just suggesting that when you say "Gramsci stated that" you should be able to show where. If I said that to a liberal and couldn't cite, he'd be likely to make me look like an idiot by suggesting I was making up a quote out of whole cloth.
Conservatives need to read about Gramsci. And read more than one site. Your post was a cop out. It addressed nothing that I said.
Communist Antonio Gramsci Resides In The White House
How Obama Revolution Came to America: Antonio Gramsci and Saul Alinsky Style
If the answer is yes, why would you support a system that permits a state to declare the baby to be a nonperson?
If the answer is no, why oppose abortion at all?
Read Blackmun's opinion in Roe, he clearly acknowledges that once the unborn baby's personhood is established that any arguments in favor of abortion collapses because the baby then enjoys 14th Amendment rights.
“Er, it wasn’t the so-called PDSers who first brought Palin into this thread.”
Let’s see, upon quick scanning the other posts appeared to be 81, 115, and 121; they were innocuous and didn’t attack any other candidate. Maybe you should remove the little tagline next to your moniker:
“Can we keep our attacks focused on the real enemy: Obama”
There are many that think any enormity is fine as long as state gubberments approve.
That said, I would vote to repeal Roe in a heartbeat, it’s a good first step, but it isn’t the real argument. I wouldn’t be suprised if Roe is nixed some states that keep abortion will eventually legalize murder of small children up to a certain age. It sounds crazy, but some loons call for that now, and 100 years ago legalized abortion was unthinkable. 30 years ago “gay marriage” was unthinkable, now it is legal in some states. The problem with abortion is “you don’t like it, leave the state” doesn’t work.
AS far as Perry not being pro-life, compared to who? If he gets the nomination his court nominations would have to be better than pres. O.
Freegards
You fail to see something obvious, and fundamental.
The right to life is unalienable.
No governmental department, at any level, in any branch, has legitimate power to alienate the right to life. All they have is the sworn duty to protect it, as the Constitution imperatively requires of every officer of government, at every level, in every branch.
The Tenth Amendment argument which tries to defend the pro-choice for states is stupid. You're trying to make the amendment say something which it does not say.
If the first duty of government, of every officer of government, is to protect the God-given, unalienable right to life, it would be foolish to claim that they do not have jurisdiction to keep their own oath. That's silly.
FWIW, this is the same position taken last election by Fred Thompson.
Depending on how one looks at it, it is a forward step or a lateral step. It isn’t a step backward.
Where Perry is wrong is in his description of Life as an “issue.” Life is not an “issue.” It is a right....a personal right. More than that, it is an unalienable right granted by the Creator and subject to the whim of no man or group of men. It is the pre-eminent unalienable right, since without this one, no other right or issue makes a difference.
Would the nation be better off, if abortion were illegal in Texas and the other red states. You bet. That many fewer babies would be killed.
That is the line Perry, Thompson, and politicians of the states’ right ilk are trying to walk.
In the same way as I would support a bill outlawing abortion from the 8th week on, so I’d support states being able to outlaw abortion for their own state. That does not mean that I support abortion prior to the 8th week or in the states that would perform them.
I support any advance that can be had.
Oh, here are some more...
Q: If Roe v. Wade were overturned and states could once again prohibit abortion, in your view, to what extent should abortion be prohibited in Alaska?
A: Under this hypothetical scenario, it would not be up to the governor to unilaterally ban anything. It would be up to the people of Alaska to discuss and decide how we would like our society to reflect our values.
Source: Anchorage Daily News: 2006 gubernatorial candidate profile Oct 22, 2006"
I get it, Palin(™) herself wouldn't have an abortion but it's ok if the people decide it's ok. Where have we heard that position before? Oh, I know...every Catholic Democrat politician from Kennedy to Cuomo (and very likely, Pontius Pilate).
Nearly all abortions are already being performed in states that have no intention of outlawing them, and nearly all women are within a days drive of one of these states.
America has already tried the experiment of letting each state define who is and isn't a person and that experiment nearly destroyed our Republic.
At least you’ll have the comfort of knowing you’re right.
I understand your position. I think a different tactic is required.
Murder is just illegal killing. Illegal is defined by law. So to discuss whether killing should be illegal or not, you have to call it killing; it would make no sense to talk about someone being legally allowed to murder someone.
the right to life is guaranteed in the bill of rights in the 5th amendment and is also in the 14th amendment, btw, the constitution and bill of rights was based on what was written in the declaration of independence, that magna carta and other documents...
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.