Posted on 04/18/2007 7:14:49 AM PDT by Spiff
Edited on 04/18/2007 8:48:59 AM PDT by Lead Moderator. [history]
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court upheld the nationwide ban on a controversial abortion procedure Wednesday, handing abortion opponents the long-awaited victory they expected from a more conservative bench.
The 5-4 ruling said the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act that Congress passed and President Bush signed into law in 2003 does not violate a woman's constitutional right to an abortion.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
First of all, the preamble creates no substantive, enforceable rights. Those are recognized only in the Bill of Rights and following Amendments.
Secondly, "procure blessings for our posterity" has in mind only the establishment of a civil order that will last for posterity. It is not intended to create any substantive rights.
But of course - the wacko brigade.
Perhaps this "loss" will provide the impetus...
Father in heaven thank you for giving us hope.
The blood of the martyrs paid for this.
The lack of respect for life in Virginia and all over, those fighting for freedoms of peoples who were lost... for justice, paid for this.
Is that? it for PV Abortion? I mean, is this victory as big as it seems?
It upholds a law that can be repealed as soon as a pro-abort (Hillary, Obama, Rudy, etc.) sits in the Oval.
At the instance of conception all 46 chromosomes exist and a human being exist. Nothing is added, except food and air.
The child exists at conception:
“Begat sons and daughters” Gen 5:3,4,28-30 Begat always refers to conception and fertilization.
“children & sons in womb” Gen 25:21-22; 2 Ki 19:3; Ruth 1:11
“a man child conceived” Job 3:3 notice the difference: day of birth, night conceived see Rev 12:5 “man child born”
“mother” of unborn child Num 12:12; Lk 1:43
Rom 9:11 for though the twins were not yet born, and had not done anything good or bad
“baby leapt for joy” in mother’s womb Lk 1:41,44
conceived a “son” Lk 1:36; Acts 7:29
“Whosoever is holy [i.e., in a state of sanctifying grace], let him approach. Whosoever is not, let him repent” (Didache 10)
Considering there has never, ever been a legal system that considered abortion either homicide or murder, this cannot be true. At most, you have early Christianity holding that it was immoral. Roe v. Wade is correct that at no time in our legal system was abortion considered homicide, even if it was immoral.
I cannot believe this happened in my lifetime. At first I was a bit concerned about what the libs might do, how it will “help” them raise money to combat this “freedom” being taken away, but now I realize it forces them to defend PBA. If conservatives are smart, they will PUSH this.
Neither is conservative.
It is not possible to be a political or social conservative and also be anti-life. It is possible to be pro-life and not be a political conservative.
So, your question suggests you would vote for an anti-life Rino over a pro-life true conservative.
Why do you hang out at Free Republic?
Are you aware that unborn children (”fetuses”) can inherit property?
Great point.
“When an astronaut is inside the spaceship or space station, he/she is a human being. When the astronaut puts on a space suit and steps outside the ship for an EVA, he/she is *still* a human being.
When the baby is in the uterus, it is a human being. When he/she is born, the baby is STILL a human being.
Environment changes don’t change a damn thing, regardless of what the ‘law’ says. Laws have been wrong before.”
That is not a good analogy. It’s not an issue of “environment”...it’s an issue of development.
Yes it is.
His whole purpose is to kill, steal, and destroy.
He doesn’t care when or where.
It is not that we are naive or suffering from tunnel-vision. I am looking at this from all angles and my focus is not on what may or may not be good for me, but what is right and just and pleasing to God.
There are some issues that we should be ready to seek compromise on. The wholesale slaughter of the innocents and the human sacrifce of our posterity on the altar of economic prosperity and "choice" is not something on which I am willing to look the other way simply for the sake of some feeling that one abortion proponent might be stronger on defense than another abortion proponent.
I will not dirty my own hands by willingly voting for a man who not only has no conscience about abortion, but thinks that it is such a fundamental right that the taxpayers ought to foot the bill so that everyone has the opportunity to "freely" exercise that right.
Maybe Rudy can talk up a strong defense, but the defense of this nation is not in the hands of Rudy, but in the hands of God.
Except the LORD build the house, they labor in vain that build it: except the LORD keep the city, the watchman waketh but in vain. (Psalms 127:1 KJV)
The president is our watchman, but unless the city is kept by God, then he will watch in vain.
I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live: (Deuteronomy 30:19 KJV)
As for me, I will choose life. I will trust the Lord and if necessary suffer the consequences of that choice.
Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding. (Proverbs 3:5 KJV)
Tunnel vision? Some might call it that.
Naive? Some might call it that.
One more verse for those who are willing to compromise on principle because they suppsedly see the bigger picture and Rudy is their hope.
Thus saith the LORD; Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the LORD. (Jeremiah 17:5 KJV)
Real Politik?
Get real.
BTW thank you for the opportunity to post many of my favorite verses.
The UNBORN are mentioned. And the preamble states the parameters of the constitution. Therefore, it cannot be interpreted outside those parameters.
The government cannot find in favor of the general demise of the population.
It cannot find in favor of the death of our posterity....our unborn.
Altogether simple, imho.
Actually it does nothing of the sort. They can still kill babies right up to the day of delivery, they just can’t do it using that specific procedure.
See, this Manichean dichotomy is why FR is becoming more and more like DU every day. If you don't agree 100% with the party line, you're a "RINO" who shouldn't be here.
There are many different ways one could be "conservative." A conservative could easily hold that abortion is a State question, or that abortion is a relative non-issue compared to the war in Iraq and the WOT, and so think Giuliani is the best choice.
Not all Conservatives see everything the same way. Some conservatives are into realpolitik. Others are more libertarian. Still others are Christian right. These groups don't see everything in lockstep.
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.