YOU PRO-ABORTS WILL FIND IT GRATIFYING.
Time to stop sugar-coating this subject. This shot was taken by a pro-life activist behind an abortuary. But those aren’t human babies. The One has told us so.
Posted on 11/16/2008 8:23:44 PM PST by EternalVigilance
The Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) supported by Barack Obama is the product of the culture of death that reigns in America. We agree with opponents of FOCA that the evil of abortion should be opposed. However, opposing evil is only half of the equation. Scripture says, "Depart from evil and do good" (Psalm 34:14). We need a positive alternative.
Our nation has drifted far from God, who says clearly, "You shall not murder." The founding fathers understood the self-evident truth "that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." The 5th and 14th amendments to the U.S. constitution state that no person shall be deprived of life without due process of law. In 1947 at the Nuremberg trials Americans still understood that a higher law takes precedence over man's laws that allow deliberately killing innocent human beings. Today that understanding has been replaced by legal positivism (moral relativism applied to law).
Personhood is the crucial issue in the abortion debate. Adolph Hitler declared Jews to be nonpersons and slaughtered more than six million people. On April 25, 1967, Gov. John Love (R) of Colorado signed the nation's first law to deem preborn babies to be nonpersons and open the gate to begin the slaughter. California and other states followed suit. On Jan. 22, 1973, Roe v. Wade, a 7-2 decision issued by five Republican and two Democratic justices, nullified the remaining anti-abortion laws. Since 1967 more than 50 million American babies have been deprived of life without due process.
PBA ban a hollow victory
In the past 41 years, pro-life efforts to regulate abortion rather than ending it—it's sometimes called the incremental approach—have been largely ineffective. For example, pro-life organizations such as National Right to Life and Americans United for Life spent 15 years and raised a quarter billion dollars to promote the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act. However, legal scholars such as Robert Muise of the Thomas More Law Center and Dr. Charles Rice, Professor Emeritus of Law at the Notre Dame Law School, have pointed out that the PBA ban has no authority to save a single child's life. It merely outlaws one specific late-term abortion procedure.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruling that upheld the PBA ban, Gonzales v. Carhart, was issued by five Republican justices, at least four of whom are supposedly pro-life. However, that ruling has been described as "more wicked than Roe v. Wade" (see Supreme Court Keeps "Partial Birth" Abortion Legal ). The ruling says, "The question is whether the Act ... imposes a substantial obstacle to late-term ... abortions. The Act does not on its face impose a substantial obstacle..." The ruling repeatedly and aggressively affirms the right to kill unborn children, whether inside or significantly outside the womb, including by pulling the arms and legs of babies out of the birth canal and ripping them off.
Some pro-life leaders rejoiced when the PBA ban was upheld. Alan Keyes responded, "Why on earth am I called upon to rejoice in a decision that in every single line, in every single word, in every bit of logic in the whole decision painfully shows its regard for a concept that violates the law of God, the law of man, constitutional law, and every sane concept of decency?"
For a summary of the Gonzales ruling and a link to the full ruling, see "Summary of the Ruling Upholding the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban."
A positive alternative
A positive alternative is a personhood amendment to each state constitution and to the U.S. constitution. Christians, Jews, and all who worship the Creator and believe in the sanctity of human life need to pray for the end of the holocaust of the preborn and to support politicians who are genuinely committed to that goal.
We have made the commitment that we will not vote for any politician who supports, promotes, or funds killing babies. That is one reason why we could not vote for Barack Obama, John McCain, or Bob Barr this year. Obama's pro-abortion record and his support for infanticide (see www.bornalivetruth.org ) are obvious. McCain's pro-abortion record is more concealed but true (see "John McCain's Tragic Pro-Abortion Record" and "The other Republican platform" ). Barr's party, the Libertarian Party, also is pro-abortion.
The Democratic Party is a culture-of-death party with its mask off. The Republican Party is a culture-of-death party with its mask on. We refer to the national leadership, not necessarily to the rank and file members. The Democratic Party is openly pro-abortion. The Republican Party poses at times as a pro-life party but refuses to acknowledge the personhood of the preborn. It published and publicized a wonderful pro-life party platform in 2008, and then its presidential candidate quietly published his own platform, rejecting the party planks on abortion, stem cell research, marriage, and religious liberties.
A culture-of-life party was founded in June 2008 and already is the nation's third largest in number of registered voters. That party is America's Independent Party (see www.aipnews.com and www.selfgovernment.us ). Even as the Republican Party arose 150 years ago to combat the evil of slavery at a time when the Democrats and the Whigs would not, AIP is championing the sanctity of human life and the sanctity of marriage at a time when those values are under attack and the two major parties refuse to recognize the personhood of the precious little ones who are being killed.
Opposing the Freedom of Choice Act is a good thing. However, if we are to end the current slaughter of 3,000 babies a day we need also to do what we can to promote acknowledgment of the personhood of the preborn and pray for a spiritual revival such that the culture of life replaces the culture of death in our nation.
If Obama’s Mama had the option of legal abortion, facing pregnancy out of wedlock from a black man in the 50’s, we would not have the President-Elect that we do.
So, would that be a good thing, in your view?
YOU PRO-ABORTS WILL FIND IT GRATIFYING.
Time to stop sugar-coating this subject. This shot was taken by a pro-life activist behind an abortuary. But those aren’t human babies. The One has told us so.
No, it just poses an irony that Obama needs to deal with. Obama’s life is just as valuable as anyone else’s. Now, here is one back at you: When does a life lose its value? Capital punishment, war, self-defense are traditional exceptions to the all life is valuable rule. What do you think?
Of course they are.
Big billboards with the following:
Not Shocking, Just Exercising a Right
After all, since when is exercising a supposed ‘right’ shocking? When is having a simple elective procedure to remove some tissue, shocking? That is all that is in the bucket, right you pro-death people? It’s just tissues. It’s not shocking.
Well let’s start sticking it in your faces and talking about it. We have the surgery channels on cable. we need to see these procedures right out there. It’s just a medical procedure like any other. It’s just like giving birth - we’ve seen that a bunch of times. We’ve seen open heart surgery hundreds of times. GI bypass surgery countless times. Lets see the abortions going on. It’s no different.
They don’t want to show the fetus moving away from the instruments. They don’t want to see the face in pain. they don’t want to see instruments tearing apart what appears to be a baby (it is). That’s why you never see this thing that is just another simple ‘medical procedure’.
Here is our alternative: enforce child support laws as rigorously as we enforce laws on murder, rape, and theft. This will force men to be held accountable for their actions (rather than taxpayers and single mothers), discourage unprotected sex, nullify much of our welfare system, lower future crime rates, and bring back the nuclear family (the building block of an economy).
Why don’t we start with restoring an America that reveres God and respects the unalienable right to life of those who have been made in His image?
Yeah, but the government has no ability to do that. This country was founded to escape theocracy, because government sponsorship of religion leads to the destruction of religion.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men...
It is the departure from this self-evident truth that is at the core of why our republic is being destroyed from within.
Pro-aborts don't "like" abortion. They are human beings after all, with visceral empathy. What they hate is having to justify it, in effect rotating all of reality around that axis, in effect living a lie that they know to be just that.
Acknowledging God does not count as theocracy. Christianity needs a secular government, not one that will endorse a particular brand over the other. Or do you want Jeremiah Wright-style “Christianity” becoming our officially supported religion? You cannot give whoever is currently in power the power endorse a religion without expecting future leaders to exercise that same power—only for some other religion.
It’s OUR job to make this a Christian nation, not the government’s.
You’re creating all sorts of strawmen, since I never advocated for a theocracy. I’m a a small “r” republican, just like the founders of this country. My principles are their principles.
That said, may I commend you as spot-on with a correct understanding of Jefferson's oft-distorted "separation of church and state": the gov't must not dictate our doctrinal standards, even if they are of the religion that claims no religion (the religion of "atheism", which in practice has man as its deity).
It is the gov't that acknowledges the Giver of the Law that provides the atmosphere where even the atheist can live in safety and security. An honest atheist will acknowledge this. An atheistic government, by contrast... well, I'll defer to history to tell that sad tale.
Not strawmen, exactly, because I was countering arguments that do exist, and which can arguably be seen as the end of the slippery slope that I think you are sitting on—no offense.
I hear many Christians (most of whom are pretty statist economically) say we need to make this a Christian nation, and that more strident government recognition of Christianity is the first step. I totally disagree and so do many founding fathers.
When you create a government power you MUST foresee how future politicians will use it.
I think you’re missing the point of the original article. How is wanting all men, including the unborn, to be recognized as persons an effort towards “more strident government recognition of Christianity”?
The reason you seem to be creating strawmen arguments is because you are assuming that the effort to recognize the unborn is something that it isn’t.
Force men to be held accountable? They're already the only ones held accountable. A woman can get an abortion, choose to have a child, choose to divorce her husband and take custody of the child, etc., etc. without any ergard for the wishes of her male partner.
It's women who need to be held accountable for their actions, not men. Every aspect of a man's actions as a father is at the sufferance of the mother.
Then I suspect we share similar views. Those favoring abortion and euthanasia attempt to extend our values to those categories as well.
The abortion issue is not about keeping future “choices” legal,
it’s really about keeping past choices from having any guilt assigned.
I don’t think your approach would have the effect that you think it would.
It would be better (in my opinion) to let people who have been involved in abortion that the guilt is REAL, and it is RIGHT to feel guilty, BUT,
“God forgives you, even if you don’t forgive yourself. Just ask.”
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.