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


1 posted on 08/12/2012 5:28:22 AM PDT by rhema
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: rhema

Fantastic.


2 posted on 08/12/2012 5:45:25 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks (I didn't post this. Someone else did.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rhema

Perfect.


3 posted on 08/12/2012 5:52:26 AM PDT by greatvikingone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rhema

Well-stated.


4 posted on 08/12/2012 5:59:58 AM PDT by butterdezillion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rhema
Eloquent.

I have been talking to my friends about going to the 40th anniversary of the Roe v Wade decision march January 2013. 40 Million+ babies and counting.

5 posted on 08/12/2012 6:40:36 AM PDT by thirst4truth (www.Believer.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rhema

bump


6 posted on 08/12/2012 7:05:56 AM PDT by floozy22 (Eat Mor Chikin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: wagglebee; Salvation; narses; NYer; MHGinTN; Caleb1411; lightman; SmithL; Honorary Serb
At the core, today’s “pro-choice” liberals are deeply pessimistic. They denigrate life and offer fear of the present and the future—fear of too many choices and too many children. Rather than seeing children and human beings as a benefit, the “pro-choice” position implies that they are a burden. Despite the “pro-choice” label, liberals’ stance on this subject actually diminishes choices, lowers goals, and leads us to live with less. That includes reducing the number of human beings who can make choices.

In contrast, pro-life conservatives are natural optimists. On balance, we see human beings as assets, not liabilities. All conservatives should find it easy to agree that government must uphold every person’s right to make choices regarding their lives and that every person’s right to live must be secured before he or she can exercise that right of choice. In the state of nature—the “law of the jungle”—the determination of who “qualifies” as a human being is left to private individuals or chosen groups. In a justly organized community, however, government exists to secure the right to life and the other human rights that follow from that primary right.

7 posted on 08/12/2012 10:53:43 AM PDT by rhema ("Break the conventions; keep the commandments." -- G. K. Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: netmilsmom; thefrankbaum; Tax-chick; GregB; saradippity; Berlin_Freeper; Litany; SumProVita; ...
Catholic Ping
Please freepmail me if you want on/off this list


9 posted on 08/12/2012 1:49:01 PM PDT by NYer (Without justice, what else is the State but a great band of robbers? - St. Augustine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rhema
Every person in this country was wounded the day this dreadful opinion was handed down by this nation’s highest tribunal. It made a mockery of the American idea that human equality and rights were given by God and recognized by government, not constructed by governments or ethnic groups by consensus vote. The abhorrent decision directly led to terrible bloodshed and opened up a racial gap that has never been completely overcome. The second time the Court failed in a case regarding the definition of “human” was in Roe v. Wade in 1973, when the Supreme Court made virtually the identical mistake.

This nation will bear the scars of Roe v. Wade long after this murderous ukase is overturned.

11 posted on 08/15/2012 6:45:06 PM PDT by annalex (fear them not)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | 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