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

To: xzins; P-Marlowe; blue-duncan; Kolokotronis
It is not possible to be anti-life and also be conservative.

First of all, not everyone who supports abortion is "anti-life," so get rid of that from your lexicon. That is no different than accusing those opposed to abortion as being "anti-privacy."

Secondly, there are a large number (myself included) who believe that the abortion question properly belongs to State regulation.

Thirdly, the right to due process of law is guaranteed only to citizens. The Fourteenth amendment guarantees that only to those born in the United States. At no time in common law were unborn children vested with any rights prior to birth. Now, admittedly, this leaves a huge donut hole where a human being is without protections of law. Now, admittedly, this reasoning is disturbingly like Dred Scott, but unfortunately, it is legally unassailable.

The answer to the breathtaking judicial activism of Roe v. Wade is not to become judicial activists ourselves.

468 posted on 04/18/2007 10:16:00 AM PDT by jude24 (Seen in Beijing: "Shangri-La is in you mind, but your Buffalo is not.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 454 | View Replies ]


To: jude24; P-Marlowe; blue-duncan; Kolokotronis; Congressman Billybob; narses; Salvation; ...
Jude, if it wasn't LIFE, it wouldn't have to be aborted.

And you are wrong about the Constitution not recording pre-born Life.

It certainly does.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Posterity = the UNBORN

And don't give me that stuff about the preamble not counting: it is the PURPOSE statement of the Constitution. Therefore, as it's PURPOSE STATEMENT, it cannot be interpreted in contradiction to that STATED PURPOSE.

It says that the UNBORN are INCLUDED!

There is no way around it: Abortion at its worst is premeditated murder, and at its best it is homicide.

489 posted on 04/18/2007 10:31:33 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain And Proud of It! Those who support the troops will pray for them to WIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 468 | View Replies ]

To: jude24

Are you aware that unborn children (”fetuses”) can inherit property?


512 posted on 04/18/2007 10:40:31 AM PDT by juliej (vote gop)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 468 | View Replies ]

To: jude24
Thirdly, the right to due process of law is guaranteed only to citizens. The Fourteenth amendment guarantees that only to those born in the United States. At no time in common law were unborn children vested with any rights prior to birth

The last sentence is patently false, as can be demonstrated by inheritance and probate laws. The very abortion statutes overturned by Roe are futher evidence of the falsity of proposition that prenatal persons did not enjoy the protection of the law. Furthermore, by your logic and interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment, non-naturalized aliens would not be persons either, because they were not born in the United States. It is pure sophistry. It's like saying that because the Constitution requires that a person must be at least age twenty-five to be a Representative, that human beings under the age of twenty-five are not persons.

Cordially,

683 posted on 04/18/2007 12:50:17 PM PDT by Diamond
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 468 | View Replies ]

To: jude24; xzins
Secondly, there are a large number (myself included) who believe that the abortion question properly belongs to State regulation.

holy katz jude!

The same people that brought us the lottery, welfare and Louise Slaughter!

I'd rather leave it in Gods hands

685 posted on 04/18/2007 12:51:13 PM PDT by Revelation 911
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 468 | View Replies ]

To: jude24
First of all, not everyone who supports abortion is "anti-life," so get rid of that from your lexicon.

Not everyone who supports arson is anti-fire safety.

Not everyone who supports drunk driving is anti-traffic safety.

Not everyone who supports massive tax hikes is anti-tax cuts

See, I can do it too. It's kinda fun!

The answer to the breathtaking judicial activism of Roe v. Wade is not to become judicial activists ourselves.

Judicial activism is about writing new law from the bench. Affirming the clear right of the Congress to pass this law is not judicial activism.

The Constitution is not a suicide pact, nor is it a contract hit on small children. With your legal mumbo jumbo you strain out a gnat but swallow a dumpster full of dead babies.

851 posted on 04/18/2007 10:34:00 PM PDT by Mr. Silverback (A pacifist sees no distinction between the arsonist and the fireman--Freeper ccmay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 468 | 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