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

To: Nifster; Responsibility2nd; DJ MacWoW; little jeremiah; Coleus; narses; TheOldLady; xzins; ...
You cannot pick out a single paragraph and go AHA m point is proved. It is not.

Nonsense. And I didn't pick out a single paragraph from some unnamed source, YOU DID. I posted a passage of the ACTUAL DECISION issued in Roe where it clearly states that the case for abortion COLLAPSES with the establishment of personhood.

You either believe that a baby is a person or you don't. Which do you believe? Do you believe that the baby might develop into something other than a person, and if so what? Does the mother have a giraffe inside of here, because in that case she certainly has every right to remove it. What she DOES NOT have is the right to kill another person.

The law of the land is that abortion is legal.

First of all, the Supreme Court DOES NOT and NEVER HAS been empowered to make law, there is simply no foundation for believing otherwise.

Secondly, murder of a person has NEVER been legal anywhere in the United States.

You can hate that all you want butyour paragraph quotation does NOTHING to change the overall ruling

The ruling is just that, it is a ruling that says abortion is fine as long as what is being aborted isn't a person; otherwise, it is illegal. The fact that nearly all, including the vast majority of those who claim to be pro-life, have misinterpreted, and subsequently miscodified, the ruling doesn't change the facts.

I must say that I find your defense of Roe somewhat troubling. You seem to be going out of your way to justify it as somehow being lawful.

116 posted on 05/21/2015 12:49:43 PM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies ]


To: wagglebee; Nifster; Responsibility2nd; DJ MacWoW; little jeremiah; Coleus; narses; TheOldLady; ...
First of all, the Supreme Court DOES NOT and NEVER HAS been empowered to make law, there is simply no foundation for believing otherwise.

Secondly, murder of a person has NEVER been legal anywhere in the United States.

First, let's look at your first point. Ben Carson actually spoke to this idea about a week ago and was ridiculed for it. He made a distinction between laws passed by a legislature and what he called 'judicial laws'. His opinion was that we actually were under no obligation to follow judicial law. The reality is that Roe v Wade truly is 'judicial law'. Abortion has NEVER been considered by our Congress. There has never been a vote. Abortion truly is judicially imposed law. Purely judicially imposed.

Your second point is that murder has never been legal anyplace in the US. That is true. One cannot take any life until a trial and conviction by a jury of peers for a capital offense.

A baby has obviously not committed a capital offense. An aborted baby has received no trial. It's death by abortion is, therefore, murder.

The only excuse would be that the baby is somehow not a human life. As you point out, it certainly isn't a giraffe.

If God gives the right to life -- and I believe He does -- then abortion is murder.

117 posted on 05/21/2015 1:05:06 PM PDT by xzins (Donate to the Freep-a-Thon or lose your ONLY voice. https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies ]

To: wagglebee

I am not defending Roe. Imam acknowledging what is. States can pass laws. The congress could pass a law but won’t. To deride someone (Paul) for his understanding that abortion change must come state by state is disingenuous. Even the homosexual community understood that that was the way forward. I expect conservatives to be at least that smart.


121 posted on 05/21/2015 2:33:20 PM PDT by Nifster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies ]

To: wagglebee

Abortion is NOT legal. It can never be legal, because any purported law that withdraws the protection of the homicide laws from any class of people is null.

Roe says that if it is established (they don’t say by whom) that the fetus is a “person within the meaning of the 14th Amendment,” then Roe’s case collapses.

George Bush had a Republican House and Senate for six years. They could have established by law the unborn are persons within the meaning of the 14th Amendment, and then started prosecuting all the governors, attorneys general, state’s attorneys, prosecutors, chiefs of police, etc., who failed to extend the protection of the homicide laws to the unborn. Forget about any state laws specifically referring to abortion. Just prosecute all state officials who do not enforce their states’ homicide laws equitably as required by the 14th Amendment.

If the Supreme Court tries to interfere, Congress can remove abortion from the USSC’s appellate jurisdiction—another action that was never mentioned during the six years Republican controlled the White House, House, and Senate.

BTW: The official purpose of the March for Life has always been the Paramount Human Life Amendment—an absolutely hopeless cause. The March for Life should be officially devoted to removing abortion from the appellate jurisdiction of the USSC.


126 posted on 05/21/2015 5:23:58 PM PDT by Arthur McGowan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | 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