Posted on 11/12/2004 3:42:20 AM PST by Always Right
Too bad there isn't an edit function. There's a typo in it and a couple of mangled syntaxes. That matters because folks who are pro-abortion seize on typos and grammatical errors as proof that those of us trying to save babies are STOOPID, and can therefore be disregarded.
If the Republican Party disregards what I wrote there, however, they will lose the 2006 and 2008 elections, and return to minority status for a generation. Because if the faithful pro-life voters are burned by people we trust, we will not trust them again no matter what they do.
That's why Republicans who don't care about abortion have got to realize that they don't have any maneuvering room on this issue.
Also, folks who are screaming about encroaching theocracy can relax. Abortion is the only religious topic that all Christians agree on. Once that is struck down, half the Christians will oppose the other half in practically all other social legislation. So, to those panicked by the fear of theocracy, I'd say: "Chill. Religious belief will change the abortion law, and that will be the limit of 'theocratic' encroachment. Once the babies are no longer being murdered, we Christians can get back to squabbling amongst ourselves." That's the truth of it.
WASHINGTON -- The Senate Republican leadership is considering a two-year waiver to delay Sen. Orrin Hatch's removal as Judiciary Committee chairman because of term limits, thereby forestalling Sen. Arlen Specter's succession to the post.
Specter has almost entirely backed down from his exuberant post-election comments warning President Bush that no foe of the Roe v. Wade abortion decision would be confirmed for the Supreme Court. Nevertheless, pro-life activists and other conservatives still suspect what course Specter would take as chairman and want to keep him out of that position.
An argument for giving Hatch a waiver is the fact that while facing re-election in Utah in 2006, he would have no committee chairmanship or even a subcommittee chairmanship despite advanced seniority in the Senate. Although Hatch and Specter have had their differences in the past, Hatch has publicly supported Specter as his replacement.
A hearty Pro-Life welcome, Vicomte13!
And thanks for your 39--it's powerful.
You stated: "Too bad there isn't an edit function. There's a typo in it and a couple of mangled syntaxes."
If I may suggest, why don't you do your editing and create a new thread based on your 39. Plenty folks here would be happy to spread it round. It might even be worth making a printer version so people can Fax and mail it in. It's time we took the gloves off -- because I agree the polititicians have not gotten it -- yet.
The only line I think may need tech adjusting is: "We know that this issue has to be settled in the Supreme Court, nowhere else."
First I am not an expert in any of this, but I have been reading that there are other Constitutional options in addition to an amendment that could end the holocaust even with the current Court. See http://www.cpforlife.org/id128
If I may be so bold as to suggest a change to something like "We know that this issue can be settled rapidly in the Supreme Court, but only if the Senate does the right thing."
Anywho, I think the post is awesome and would welcome spreading it through Freeperville and beyond.
God bless
If you want, I will amend the post slightly to correct the grammar and redundancies and let you forward it under my name as a new thread. I don't think I should be posting vanities on the main board, having not been here long.
As to the Constitutional Amendment business, it's a bridge too far. It would take 2/3rds of the House and Senate (67 Senators - the Republicans have only 55), and then 3/4ths of the States (39 States; Bush won 31 states and was close in only 6 others). It is much easier to change two justices on the Supreme Court and have them do it.
Of course, even if Roe is overturned, it doesn't solve the problem. Turning the issue back to the states will leave a lot of states with abortion on demand. Federal law is needed to prevent abortion as a matter of fundamental human rights to life.
All that said, if a really clear, powerful and horrible movie were put together of early stage abortions in high-definition ultrasound, and late-term abortions in technicolor, and seeing this film were made a mandatory part of the curriculum at every Catholic and religious school, as well as made a condition of receiving scholarships from religious charities, the effect would be electrifying.
People would be heartsick, heartbroken, probably physically sick, and traumatized for life in some cases. But just like the films of the Nazi Holocaust are what make it undeniable, the films of the Infant Holocaust in America would do the same.
Take any man or women into a slaughterhouse, and he or she will swear off meat for a few days, because it's just too horrible. Show people abortion, make them look at the babies struggling as they die, and you will traumatize millions. And you will gain millions of converts to the pro-life cause. And then an amendment would be possible.
A film that was brutal beyond belief, if people were forced to see it in many venues, would produce a brutal shock, and that brutal shock would transform into more voices raised to save babies.
I'll amend my e-mail and send it to you via side mail.
POSTING EDITED Edited Version (Geez!) in 5 minutes.
Didn't Specter basically promise the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette's Editorial Board that he would block the nominations of "extremist" judges? I assume "extremist" would refer to the strict constructionists we all desire?
Yes, it sure is!
Bump to help stop Specter
Bump!
Roe falling all at once does not sound like a plausible scenario. The opening move would be something like recognizing the personhood of a clearly viable fetus.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1279455/posts http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/ny-uscia1114,0,707331.story?coll=ny-top-headlines "The agency is being purged on instructions from the White House," said a former senior CIA official who maintains close ties to both the agency and to the White House. "Goss was given instructions ... to get rid of those soft leakers and liberal Democrats. The CIA is looked on by the White House as a hotbed of liberals and people who have been obstructing the president's agenda."
Specter you had best Kiss A$$ now!
The court can't move all of its lonesome to kick out a ruling it doesn't like. Somebody has to bring a case. The political circumstances are such that a PBA case is going to hit the Court long before a generic abortion case will.
bumping for the weekend crowd!
thanks for the ping
Youre welcome!
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.