Posted on 12/16/2011 8:36:43 AM PST by xzins
The Declaration of Independence states:"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".The Preamble of the Constitution states a purpose of the Constitution to be to:"secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity".We declare the unalienable right of Life to be secured by our Constitution "to ourselves and our Posterity". Our posterity includes children born and future generations yet unborn. Any legalization of the termination of innocent life of the born or unborn is a direct violation of our unalienable right to life.
The pre-born child, whose life begins at fertilization, is a human being created in God's image. The first duty of the law is to prevent the shedding of innocent blood. It is, therefore, the duty of all civil governments to secure and to safeguard the lives of the pre-born.
To that end, the Constitution of these United States was ordained and established for "ourselves and our posterity." Under no circumstances may the federal government fund or otherwise support any state or local government or any organization or entity, foreign or domestic, which advocates, encourages or participates in the practice of abortion. We also oppose the distribution and use of all abortifacients.
We affirm the God-given legal personhood of all unborn human beings, without exception. As to matters of rape and incest, it is unconscionable to take the life of an innocent child for the crimes of his father.
No government may legalize the taking of the unalienable right to life without justification, including the life of the pre-born; abortion may not be declared lawful by any institution of state or local government - legislative, judicial, or executive. The right to life should not be made dependent upon a vote of a majority of any legislative body.
In addition, Article IV of the Constitution guarantees to each state a republican form of government. Therefore, although a Supreme Court opinion is binding on the parties to the controversy as to the particulars of the case, it is not a political rule for the nation. Roe v. Wade is an illegitimate usurpation of authority, contrary to the law of the nation's Charter and Constitution. It must be resisted by all civil government officials, federal, state, and local, and by all branches of the government - legislative, executive, and judicial.
We affirm both the authority and duty of Congress to limit the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in all cases of abortion in accordance with the U.S. Constitution, Article III, Section 2.
In office, we shall only appoint to the federal judiciary, and to other positions of federal authority, qualified individuals who publicly acknowledge and commit themselves to the legal personhood of the pre-born child. In addition, we will do all that is within our power to encourage federal, state, and local government officials to protect the sanctity of the life of the pre-born through legislation, executive action, and judicial enforcement of the law of the land.
Further, we condemn the misuse of federal laws against pro-life demonstrators, and strongly urge the repeal of the FACE Acts as an unconstitutional expansion of federal power into areas reserved to the states or people by the Tenth Amendment.
In addition, we oppose the funding and legalization of bio-research involving human embryonic or pre-embryonic cells.
Finally, we also oppose all government "legalization" of euthanasia, infanticide and suicide.
That begins by acknowledging the truth.
“xzins” = “3rd Party Pimpage”
I’ve no problem with your comment.
However, at the moment I’m truly interested in putting before people a truly conservative position on the Sanctity of Life that truly does showcase the rationale behind a Sanctity of Life position.
Read the statement and tell me if it isn’t what you truly believe.
(Incidentally, as it stands right now, I will support a Republican nominee who is seriously pro-life: Perry, Gingrich, Bachman, Santorum. So your “pimpage” comment needs to be taken in that context. I will NEVER support Romney or Paul. EVER.)
Good post!
Innocent human life is sacred!
Innocent=NO crime in the womb
human=determined by genetic code
life=or you wouldn’t have to kill him/her
The issue of Life always gets played down by the economic conservatives. However, Rasmussen did a poll last month that showed 12% of Pubs will not vote for Romney under any circumstance because of his prior history on abortion. The poll also showed another 17% of Pubs who said they were unlikely to vote for Romney because of the issue of Life. If 1/2 of the unlikely voters don't vote for Romney it means he runs with 20% of the Pubs not voting for him. IOW, an obama win.
My point being that it makes sense to look for a 3rd party if a pro-abortion candidate gets the nomination. I think if Paul were to get the nomination I might still vote for him (unlikely) because he has always been strong on the Life issue. Romney I can't vote for. One day I will stand before my Savior and I don't want to be asked why I supported those that killed the unborn.
Do you mean because he is a strong supporter of the 10th Amendment? I know I've heard him speak very clearly about the need to protect the unborn.
Ron Paul does not believe that the Constitution authorizes a federal ban on abortion:
http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/abortion/
http://www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues/abortion/
Ron Paul wants to turn it over to the states. As states such as California, NY, etc. WILL NEVER ban abortion and as the states that will never ban abortion also account for well over 90% of abortions in America, the pro-choice-by-state approach is just another cop-out used to appear pro-life while actually doing nothing to end abortion.
Ron Paul does not believe that the Constitution authorizes a federal ban on abortion:
http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the-issues/abortion/
http://www.ronpaul.com/on-the-issues/abortion/
Ron Paul wants to turn it over to the states. As states such as California, NY, etc. WILL NEVER ban abortion and as the states that will never ban abortion also account for well over 90% of abortions in America, the pro-choice-by-state approach is just another cop-out used to appear pro-life while actually doing nothing to end abortion.
I see the double edge sword the 10th Ammendment presents. We can pass laws and live by the values we think are important in states where we are a majority, but we can't impose them on other states where we are a minority. I think we can win the war in most states, banning abortion except for rare exceptions.
In the states where our view doesn't prevail we can pursue changing that policy on a state by state basis. We will have a better chance of succeeding in a country where states rights are respected rather than a country ruled by an imperial judiciary.
The United States has already tried the experiment where each state had the right to declare a person a "non-person" and this was a total failure that nearly destroyed our Republic and left scars that still exist to this day.
As Rick Santorum points out, states rights is a canard when it comes to life. It was when it came to slavery, too.
Life is the ultimate right. Without it no other rights or issues matter. Dead men don’t argue policies.
So, you cannot be killing people in one state and not another and say “It’s OK because Californians just feel they can kill when they feel like it.”
Allowing the states to ban abortion does a lot to stop actual abortions.
Many states would ban it and other states would ban it in specific circumstances.
It took a civil war to resolve that. The courts failed. The legislative body failed. The executive body didn't do anything until secession.
Where are we today? The courts continue to fail us in the fight for Life. It seems every time a good bill concerning Life is passed at a State level a federal court stops it. Is violence the only way to resolve this? I don't think so. Every time a John Brown figure starts killing abortionists we condemn them and after they are caught convict them.
So how do we win this battle? I think the State sovereignty approach might work. The vast majority of States will ban abortions with very limited exceptions. Our resources then can be focused on the few very liberal States. As it stands now we are fighting for a Life Amendment that we can't even get voted on in the Congress.
The problem with the fed govt dictating to all is self evident in the obama presidency. It's great with a good leader, but all it takes is one evil person to radically transform this country. Under the obama regime we now have the fed govt using our tax dollars to subsidize abortions.
Ping
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.