Posted on 10/11/2022 8:21:01 AM PDT by Navy Patriot
Yeah, I agree.
It’s the only way this is going to be seen for what it is.
These are humans from conception on. None of them are going
to turn into a frog, a dandelion, or a tomato.
If we’re not going to kill kids who aren’t adults yet, it
seems obvious we shouldn’t kill the unborn before they are
kids.
Correct choice. It is time to let democracy and the right to life moral persuasion to turn the tide against abortion.
Do we refuse to steal because it’s a crime, or because its wrong even if it weren’t a crime. We are supposed to follow G-d, whether the law demands it or not.
I also believe a human being has a Right to Representation and Advocacy in all courts of Man if they are unable to Represent Themselves.
Anything less invalidates the assembly as a "Court".
Agreed.
The Right to Representation is not just a State Court matter.
“Represent Themselves. “ Anything less invalidates the assembly as a “Court”.”
Morally I have no argument with you. Legally, out of great respect for the Constitution and our ability to hold the Republic together under it, I see where the Supreme Court is comming from - they see our moral view as no more directly evident/apparent in the Constitution than was the view of those who used the Court to declare abortion a right. The great Scalia was in agreement with them.
Excellent observation, this can be interpreted as all Constitutional Protections are granted to Preborn Humans in the USA.
That would be a SCOTUS duty to define.
I would reply that Justice Delayed is Justice Denied.
You caught me unprepared.
Your observation is good reason for SCOTUS to make courts consistent.
A reasonable deduction.
Your comment is accurate and I cannot explain why people do.
This is indisputable logic.
Understood, but it’s dead easy to cite Representation as the reason for hearing the case, it can’t be disputed, and it leads directly to a decision on Personhood.
Thanks.
“Understood, but it’s dead easy to cite Representation as the reason for hearing the case, it can’t be disputed, and it leads directly to a decision on Personhood.”
Yes. And that’s the reason the court avoided that decision. They are not going to make it. We have to, and if we want them to recognize it we have to make personhood EXPLICIT in the Constitution. That is why, for now, democracy and moral suasion are the tools we have on the issue.
Understood. Again well thought out.
I am hoping to speed up the process, I consider Personhood already implied in the Constitution, thus fair game for SCOTUS clarification.
Also, I would add that many see abortion as a way to get away with committing adultery.
You and I only only disagree on how we will/can get to the proper end, not what the end should be. Thanks for the discussion.
Sadly, I am too old, I won’t live to see Personhood explicitly enshrined in the Constitution through an Amendment or Convention Ratified by two thirds of the States.
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.