Posted on 04/09/2010 5:11:47 PM PDT by EternalVigilance
Then the oaths of office of the Executive and the members of the Legislative branches are now meaningless formalities. There are no more checks and balances. We no longer live in a representative republic, but a judicial oligarchy.
You can't keep an oath to uphold the provisions of a document if you can't interpret what it says and means. And you have an obligation to uphold it even if every other officer of government in every other branch at every other level abrogates their oaths. You've sworn that oath before God and your countrymen. You can't slide responsibility for keeping it off on someone else. Not rightfully anyhow.
Your obviously don’t realize it, but your judicial supremacist mindset is one of the primary things that is destroying our republic.
Colorado RTL is informing pro-lifers, politicians and candidates of a crisis among the federal judiciary. For 35 years, pro-lifers have hoped that by electing pro-life presidents such as Ronald Reagan, George Bush, and George W. Bush, America would get judges who support the God-given right to life of the unborn. Justices, who we all hoped were pro-life, have made it increasingly clear that they are not.
Antonin Scalia has publicly stated that he would strike down any law that prohibited abortion in all fifty states, and Clarence Thomas has ruled that the public has the right to decide to legalize the killing of unborn children. Sadly, not even one of the seven current U.S. Supreme Court Justices nominated by Republican presidents support the right to life of the unborn.
Further, our pro-life presidents have nominated sixty percent of the U.S. federal judiciary, and yet the judiciary utterly rejects the right to life of the unborn. Also we should remember that the pro-abortion Roe v. Wade decision was written by a Republican Justice and passed by the Republican majority on the U.S. Supreme Court, and abortion was legalized in Colorado by Republican governor John Love in 1967.
Colorado RTL is educating pro-life politicians and candidates to the sobering judicial crisis because it tells us that the status quo strategy of regulating abortion over the last decades is leading to a judicial culture exactly the opposite of what the pro-life movement had expected. When we ask judges to uphold abortion regulations, that very request moves “our own” judges to accept that the government has the right to regulate the killing of children, which they do by upholding the pro-life movement’s own initiatives.
Thus Colorado RTL advocates enforcement of the God-given right to life and promotes the Personhood strategy to end legalized abortion in America!
What everybody needs to understand, is that if your not willing to die for liberty, you will not hold on to it...
What are Rats saying about this in the meantime. Are they secretly cheering, expecting that this will encourage more Rat voters to appear at the polls than they can get with ACORN and its successors?
In other words, Scalia and Thomas support status quo ante Roe.
The forces of death and societal destruction hate pro-life, pro-family ballot initiatives. Such efforts force them to expend their resources to fight, and generally they don’t fare so well. In thirty-one states where traditional marriage has been on the ballot, for example, the Left has lost every single time.
Pro-life and pro-family ballot initiatives turn out pro-life, pro-family voters.
However, in those circumstances where the “leaders” of the “conservatives” have been spineless and compromising in these fights, and where the battle ground is a narrow one where the Left can focus their money they have been able to beat us back.
That’s why we must open up many fronts and dilute Planned Parenthood’s resources.
The other key is to first soundly defeat the weak and pusillanimous arguments of the old failed organizations such as those described in the article at the top of this thread. They weaken and demoralize our movement and give the Left the edge they need to win.
Ping to my post #27 and Lesforlife’s post #23.
I agree with the gist of this article that we need a new legal strategy. The old shock and indignation and wishful thinking that people will be “nice” IS NOT WORKING. We need to find a powerful new legal strategy and ram it through.
The Personhood strategy is the perfect strategy, legally, constitutionally, politically, and morally, because it is immovably grounded in principle.
Even Blackmun admitted IN THE ROE DECISION that if the fetus is a child they are OF COURSE protected by the Fourteenth Amendment.
You do realize the doctrine of judicial review was created extra-constitutionally, right? Marbury v Madison was SCOTUS telling the other two branches, by fiat, that only SCOTUS could render a final, authoritative interpretation of the Constitution. Rather like asking the foxes who should have charge of the hen house, don’t you think?
Jefferson clearly understood Marbury to be a self-serving and unwarranted arrogation of power that was destructive to the principles of the Republic:
“It is a very dangerous doctrine to consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions. It is one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy.”
As to the remedy? Men and women of principle in the other two branches who have the courage of their convictions, who are willing to defy an unconstitutional judicial fiat of self-imposed constitutional ignorance, who will fulfill the duty of their oath to act within constitutional boundaries even if others by droves are abandoning their post.
From the closing paragraphs of the majority opinion:
Why does a judge swear to discharge his duties agreeably to the constitution of the United States, if that constitution forms no rule for his government? if it is closed upon him and cannot be inspected by him.If such be the real state of things, this is worse than solemn mockery. To prescribe, or to take this oath, becomes equally a crime.
It is also not entirely unworthy of observation, that in declaring what shall be the supreme law of the land, the constitution itself is first mentioned; and not the laws of the United States generally, but those only which shall be made in pursuance of the constitution, have that rank.
Thus, the particular phraseology of the constitution of the United States confirms and strengthens the principle, supposed to be essential to all written constitutions, that a law repugnant to the constitution is void, and that courts, as well as other departments, are bound by that instrument.
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.