Posted on 11/25/2007 10:26:20 AM PST by pissant
Perhaps he wants to be Thompson’s running mate.
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, 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."
"No person shall be...deprived of life...without due process of law..."
"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
Justice Blackmun predicated Roe vs. Wade on the premise that an unborn child is not a PERSON.
Do you agree with Blackmun or not?
If you say yes, God help you.
If you say no, than you cannot believe that any state has a right under the Fifth and the Fourteenth Amendments to allow abortions to continue.
What say you?
The Huckster is a populist, he’ll say anything to get elected, then it’s somethin’ else.
Murder defined, is murder relative...
Actually, induced abortions have been occuring since ancient times. Ever hear of pennyroyal? Ergot?
Not to mention physical interruption of pregnancy techniques.
I already SAID I believe that abortion should be outlawed and that an embryo is a person. I am not STUPID enough to think that I can impose MY views on the country. I will work to get rid of abortion incrementally, and not wait around for perfection, like you want to do.
I would rather have abortion nearly ended in 35 states and work from there than wait for YEARS to get an amendment.
And I notice you ignore the fact that you LIE repeatedly and knowingly on this forum.
I've done nothing of the sort.
You'e past rhetoric that I've read has been ambiguous on this issue. If you now favor overturning Roe v Wade and sending it back to the states, along with support for a HLA, then you're contradicting what you believe the Constitution says on the abortion issue.
>>>>>Where I differ from Fred Thompson, Ron Paul, Mike Huckabee, Rudy Giuliani, John McCain, Mitt Romney and YOU is that I don't believe that any state has the right to revoke the unalienable rights to life and liberty.
Rudy doesn't believe Roe v Wade should be overturned and a HLA added to the Constitution. And I'm not sure what Romney believes when it comes to the abortion issue. Paul, Huckabee, McCain and Fred have all supported abolishing RvW as the law of the land and ending abortion on demand as the national policy of the federal government. However, the Huckster seemks to be changing his mind.
Frankly, there is nothing written in the Constitution about abortion. That makes abortion a state issue under the 10th amendment. The same place it resided for 200 years. Until 1973, abortion was not a federal issue. There is also nothing in the Constitution about when life begins or anything that calls the fetus a "person". That is why we need a HLA to set the record straight. The short term goal is to overturn RvW and reduce the number of abortions, ASAP.
Then there’s this:
Mike Huckabee disses Americans, Mexicans, promotes illegal immigration
http://lonewacko.com/blog/archives/005609.html
Christians Need To Beware Of Mike Huckabee
http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2007/cbarchive_20071102.html
While Gov. of Arkansas, Huckabee was AGAINST proving citizenship in
order to register to vote. He called those who were in favor of this
“racists”..
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20050218/news_lz1e18perkins.html
Huckabee fought hard to kill an Arkansas bill which would have cut off
social services for illegal aliens. Huckabee called the bill,
“anti-Christian” and “un-American”...
http://www.arkansasnews.com/archive/2005/01/28/News/316347.html
Huckabee supported in-state tuition for illegal aliens...
http://www.arkansasnews.com/archive/2005/03/11/News/318458.html
Huckabee’s opposition to the illegal aliens bill:
http://www.diggersrealm.com/mt/archives/000718.html
Again then, you must agree with Blackmun that an unborn child is not a person.
Because, if they are a person, even Blackmun admitted that they were and are protected under the Fourteenth Amendment.
Actually, those who agree that an unborn child IS a person, and still don't see the simple fact that they are therefore protected under the Fifth and the Fourteenth Amendments, are in point of fact WORSE than Blackmun. At least he took the trouble to dehumanize them before he agreed to their destruction.
Baloney. I've been as clear as can be. You just twist what I say so much that you can't keep your story straight.
No, not at flip flop. Just the truth. Think about it...if Roe is overturned the decision about abortion WILL return to the states...Unless there is a constitutional amendment (which probably won’t happen).
More baloney.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
The Constitution clearly prohibits to the national government AND the states any power to kill innoncent persons.
Again, you agree with the main justification for Roe, then.
"A. The appellee and certain amici argue that the fetus is a "person" within the language and meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment. In support of this, they outline at length and in detail the well-known facts of fetal development. If this suggestion of personhood is established, the appellant's case, of course, collapses, for the fetus' right to life would then be guaranteed specifically by the Amendment." - Roe vs. Wade
Do you agree with Blackmun or not?
If you say yes, God help you.
If you say no, than you cannot believe that any state has a right under the Fifth and the Fourteenth Amendments to allow abortions to continue.
What say you?
I say that a fertilized egg is not a person. What makes you think it is?
Do it. But don't try and convince us that you can possibly do so by throwing away the primary reasons that abortion is wrong, and unconstitutional; or by claiming that unalienable rights are somehow alienable by the several states.
Abortions were going on in the 1800s, EV - and you're going to sit here and tell us people then pretended to be all innocent and what they were doing was just the equivalent of having menstrual cycles?
You've been smacked down on this subject dozens of times. Give it a rest.
Common sense. Science. DNA. Scripture.
What do you offer as proof that it isn't?
Smacked, yes. Pleanty of times. Smacked down? Not once.
Those who claim that God-given rights are alienable by any man, or any division of government, don't have a leg to stand on.
It is incapable of life apart from the mother’s body. It has no thoughts or organs. And while scripture addresses life within the womb, I must have missed the passage where it specifies the time.
Yes it was. I'm going to remember that one.
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.