Posted on 06/11/2012 9:17:17 AM PDT by EternalVigilance
"All officers of government in this country, in every branch, at every level, have as the first obligation of their sacred oath the protection of all innocent lives within their jurisdiction.
Should I be elected to the office of President of the United States, I will keep my oath.
Justice Blackmun, in Roe vs. Wade, admitted that “of course” the child in the womb is protected by the Fourteenth Amendment, if they are a person.
Since it is self-evident that they are a person, my first act as President, after having sworn the oath, will be to publish a presidential finding to that effect.
My second act will be to ask for the resignation of anyone in the executive branch who will not act accordingly.
My third act will be to order the closing of every abortion facility in the country, as per the explicit, imperative requirement of the Supreme Law of the Land.
'No person shall be deprived of life without due process of law.'
'No State shall deprive any person of life without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.'”
-- Tom Hoefling
Read for yourself. I and other ABO posters were attacked and insulted multiple times by numerous posters.
sitetest chose to side with the attackers.
Which is exactly why the left uses times like this to push their liberal social agenda.
And for the record, even in the best of times the libertarians and RINOs are always trying to silence social conservatives.
As I posted earlier if this country goes down the tubes financially, the last thing people will have a concern with is abortion and gay marriage. They will be worrying about where their next mouthful of food comes from.
You are making a typical libertarian mistake in trying to separate the two.
Prior to the breakdown of morality, America didn't have the fiscal problems it does today.
Nations prosper when they have normal population growth, they perish when population growth is interfered with.
The financial problems we are facing with the aging Baby Boomers is a direct result of over 50 MILLION consumers and taxpayers being murdered.
We are both conservative..I just place economic issues first(smaller gov't, less taxes, less instrusive gov't) and social issue second mostly due to what I believe above.
A baby is murdered EVERY 20 SECONDS and this has been going on for nearly 40 years, were it not for this there wouldn't be any dire economic issues.
At no point did Churchill ever delude himself that Stalin was a virtuous man. But he made a cool calculation that the evil of Stalin could be overcome in the long run, while the evil of Hitler could not.
And as we learned in 1989-91, he may well have been right.
What struck me as so totally incongruous was Tom Hoefling quoting Churchill, of all people, in behalf of Tom's philosophy of "100.00% total purity, or utter depravity....nothing in between!"
sitetest chose to side with the attackers.
**************************
That's not the same thing. Is it?
Do you think he would have joined in an alliance with Stalin to butcher fifty million British babies?
Thank you.
Far from it, I wish the social conservatives would spend a lot more time trying to win over moderates and liberals to their side. It would be a good thing for the country, and it would be the only way that the changes they would like to see are ever going to be made.
Most of the so-cons I see here on FR seem to want spend all day standing around in a hermetically sealed choir room, speaking only to their fellow members.
Let me be even more clear:
I too would have made an alliance with Stalin to defeat Hitler.
But I will not make an alliance with anyone to kill another fifty million American children.
Clear enough?
If Hitler threatened to butcher fifty million babies, and Stalin threatened to butcher ten million, he'd have said "hmmm... forty million saved" and picked a side. Me too.
Here's where rubber meets road. If you choose to save no babies until you can save them all, then those who might have been saved by compromise in the interim are partially your responsibility. Do you accept that responsibility?
And for the record, even in the best of times the libertarians and RINOs are always trying to silence social conservatives.
***************************
I can't recall a period since I have been on this site when that was not the case.
How do you explain the great Depression of the 1930's and earlier depressions? We had pretty good morals back then. Read up on the horrendous economic depressions of Panic of 1837 (leading to a six year depression - from 1837-43, Panic of 1857 Panic of 1873 ** Panic of 1893. Those 1800's depressions were terrible.
The financial problems we are facing with the aging Baby Boomers is a direct result of over 50 MILLION consumers and taxpayers being murdered.
Please take an basic college Econ 101 class and it will explain why we have the problems we have today. Hint: gov't regulation forcing co's to move overseas, globalism so that America is competing with lower wage countries,gov't out of control with spending, many other issues. There are countries with high birth rates who are having the same economic problems we are.
Nations prosper when they have normal population growth, they perish when population growth is interfered with.
Our nation has had normal population growth through births and immigration-legal and illegal.
A baby is murdered EVERY 20 SECONDS and this has been going on for nearly 40 years, were it not for this there wouldn't be any dire economic issues.
Again, why did we have serious economic depressions when our birth rate was high?
I think you’ve worn out that hypothetical. It’s time for a new one.
Let’s say that you were having an election in your mental.health facility and you and your fellow patients had to vote for either Charles Manson or Jeffrey Dahmer to serve as Night Watchman in your ward so the rest of you could sleep at night and try to recover from the derangement syndromes you’ve described. Now, for the questions:
Which of the two candidates do you think is most like Mitt Romney?
And, wouldn’t you like to have a third choice, even if he might not win?
Not always, however when someone insults you and another person agrees then there isnt a significant difference.
I do find it interesting that you are spending so much time challenging me and yet apparently ignoring so many others. Not to mention the original poster who proposes to use the military to enforce his illegal proclamations.
I’m glad that you find me interesting. It’s more than refreshing, it’s unusual.
Which of the two candidates do you think is most like Mitt Romney?
***************************
That's easy: Charles Manson. He was quite a manipulator of people, and as far as we know, Romney has yet to become a cannibal.
No. Those who kill babies, and those who give aid and comfort to the killers of babies, are responsible for the killing of babies, not those who firmly oppose the killing of babies. Wake up.
Illegal? Please show me the law that prevents the President from fulfilling the primary purpose of his office.
“Illegal? Please show me the law that prevents the President from fulfilling the primary purpose of his office. “
Please show me where the ‘primary’ purpose is defined. The Constitution limits the office of the President to enforcing current laws.
It doesn’t allow making up his own and creating a military dictatorship. So go read the Constitution.
“Those who kill babies, and those who give aid and comfort to the killers of babies, are responsible for the killing of babies, not those who firmly oppose the killing of babies.”
Blocking a change which would reduce the number of abortions is giving aid and comfort to the abortionists.
LOL. Just lurking, but that there is funny. Love your tag line too.
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.