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

Our Declaration of Independence states that as free human beings, we are entitled to LIFE," and I put that in all caps, "liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The Declaration also says that these rights are "inalienable" and "granted by our Creator," God. If our government does not stand for and protect these basic rights, which are the essence of our creation and humanity, then it will not protect any others.

Perfect!

1 posted on 07/08/2005 6:06:04 PM PDT by wagglebee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-32 next last
To: cpforlife.org

Pro-life ping.


2 posted on 07/08/2005 6:06:33 PM PDT by wagglebee ("We are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom." -- President Bush, 1/20/05)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: wagglebee
"Rush, I'm a die-hard fan. Though I was raised to support a woman's right to choose...

Choose what?

3 posted on 07/08/2005 6:07:55 PM PDT by Texas Eagle (A lack of preparation on your part does not constitute an emergency on my part.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: wagglebee

Bump. I heard this today.


4 posted on 07/08/2005 6:10:32 PM PDT by wingman1 (University of Vietnam 1970)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: wagglebee
your child is not your personal property. Your body may be, but your child isn't.

I'm glad my kids didn't hear this. When they are disobedient I tell them that they've all been bought and paid for, I own them and they must do as I say.

Other than that, Rush has an excellent response to someone who was raised on liberal propaganda.

5 posted on 07/08/2005 6:11:19 PM PDT by SittinYonder (America is the Last Beach)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: wagglebee

Life first, everything else second.


7 posted on 07/08/2005 6:13:03 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: wagglebee

Not to mention that the body inside the woman is not actually her body. Therefore, as the child is merely within her temporarily and not part of her, she has no right to destroy it.


8 posted on 07/08/2005 6:13:08 PM PDT by The Phantom FReeper (So? People in Hell want ice water.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Coleus

Excellent little piece. As much as we think these things are plain, to many folks they are not.


9 posted on 07/08/2005 6:14:33 PM PDT by jocon307 (Can we close the border NOW?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: wagglebee

A child is not property. A child is a person. People are not things, or property.

But the problem starts with the idea that your body is your property. That's nonsense too. Your body is you. Every human being is a combination of body and soul. If you are a materialist and don't believe in souls, then all the more reason to say that your body is you.

Possessive individualism was a philosophical error that has led to a lot of trouble.


10 posted on 07/08/2005 6:16:44 PM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: wagglebee

Inalienable or unalienable?


11 posted on 07/08/2005 6:17:03 PM PDT by csmusaret (Urban Sprawl is an oxymoron)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: wagglebee

Outstanding!


12 posted on 07/08/2005 6:18:21 PM PDT by Luke (CPO, USCG (Ret))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: wagglebee

Very succinctly put Rush!


13 posted on 07/08/2005 6:20:27 PM PDT by Lorianne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: wagglebee
BRAVO bump for Rush.
21 posted on 07/08/2005 6:41:15 PM PDT by Artist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: wagglebee

Rush nailing it with clarity.


22 posted on 07/08/2005 6:44:51 PM PDT by Dustbunny (The only good terrorist is a dead terrorist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: wagglebee
But wait! Rush said that our rights are inalienable because they are granted by our Creator! God! Since there is so little respect for the Creator (to the framers of the Declaration of Independence that would have been the God of the Bible, Jehovah and His Son Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit - the Triune God) or for those who seek to obey His Words (the Bible), why, to you, would Rush's answer the "perfect" answer? The God who granted our rights as inalienable is also the God who will ultimately judged how we have used and will use those rights. The God who granted those rights has never become disinterested in how men choose to obey or disobey Him...He will judge. He will judge individual conservatives who believe that the Free Market System is the end in itself but who believe that they can ignore God's Holy standards with impunity, and He will judge the American nation as a whole for their rebellion against Him and for trying to make believe that this nation itself was founded independent of His blessings and Providence.
24 posted on 07/08/2005 6:50:54 PM PDT by Free Baptist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: wagglebee

Abortion is not about the mother's body, it's about the baby's body.


25 posted on 07/08/2005 6:51:59 PM PDT by lame_internet_name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: wagglebee

Which is why we need a 110 percent ProLife Supreme Court Justice.


30 posted on 07/08/2005 7:00:19 PM PDT by TomasUSMC (FIGHT LIKE WW2, FINISH LIKE WW2. FIGHT LIKE NAM, FINISH LIKE NAM.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: wagglebee

You know; I'm really beginning to think of Rush as our modern day Benjamin Franklin--at least as far as his common sense outlook, and expressing it with humor, in the language we all understand. Maybe we should send him to France.


32 posted on 07/08/2005 7:04:54 PM PDT by truthpls
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: wagglebee

Awesome, thank you for posting :)


39 posted on 07/08/2005 7:15:58 PM PDT by Trillian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: wagglebee

Amen to that, Rush!


40 posted on 07/08/2005 7:25:53 PM PDT by Tennessean4Bush (An optimist believes we live in the best of all possible worlds, a pessimist fears this is true.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: wagglebee

Sorry for this long post but this is an article worth reading that reinforces and expands on what Rush said today:

"While the demand for abortion grows,1 so does the scientific case against the arguments often used to support it. Recent powerful evidence comes from immunology.
Half a century ago, when the amazing mechanism of the human immune system was first being uncovered, Nobel prize-winning biologist Sir Peter Medawar made a significant comment. He declared that the survival of the genetically different child within a mother's womb contradicted the immunological laws that were thwarting their attempts at tissue transplantation.2 The immune system normally detects the presence of any "foreign" tissue in the body and it immediately sets up a defence against it (primarily what is now called the "killer T cell" mechanism).
This caused early experiments in organ transplantation to fail--the recipient's immune system attacked and rejected the donor's "foreign" organ tissue. So why doesn't the mother's womb detect the presence of the "foreign" tissue of the developing embryo and try to attack and reject it?
We now know that it does! And this is the cause of many miscarriages. Recent research has shown that the developing child puts up a very specific defence against the killer T cell attack. And as long as the defence mechanism works properly, the pregnancy will proceed to full term. However, when the defence mechanism fails, miscarriage results
In a landmark 1998 paper, researchers at the Medical College of Georgia, in Augusta, USA, found that the mammalian embryo (they worked with mice) produces a special enzyme, called indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase, or "IDO," which suppresses the mother's T cell reaction and allows pregnancy to proceed.2 Follow-up work in humans revealed the same effect, and it was also demonstrated that the IDO was produced on the embryo side of the placental membrane (which separates mother from child) and not on the mother's side.3 Further work in mice showed that IDO production peaked during the formation of the placenta--the most crucial time for establishing that vital link between mother and child.4 And the most recent work in humans has established beyond doubt that IDO is a specific mechanism at the mother-child interface for preventing the mother's immune system from rejecting the child.5
But what does this have to do with abortion? Well, a common argument in favour of abortion is that a mother has the right to control what happens to her own body.6 However, this research shows very clearly that the baby is not part of the mother's body. The baby has a unique genetic makeup (only half its chromosomes come from the mother, the other half come from the father, and each combination of chromosomes is unique) and that condition is sufficient to cause the mother's immune system to identify the baby as "foreign" and it mounts an attack via the killer T cell system. In the mouse experiments, when IDO production was artificially suppressed, the mother's womb rapidly rejected the embryos.2 It is only because the baby is normally well prepared for life in the womb by producing IDO and suppressing the mother's T cell reaction, that pregnancy can be healthy and go full term.
This research also highlights the fact that the child's individuality--its unique genetic makeup--exists from the moment of conception. At conception, the new person's genetic instructions come together for the first time--in a single cell called the zygote. But it is not until day 6 that IDO production kicks in.5 Why day 6? Well day 6 is a preparation for day 7, when the new embryo first attaches itself to its mother's womb so that it can draw nutrients from its mother's bloodstream.7 This is exactly the time when the mother's killer T cells would normally begin to attack and reject it--if not for the amazing protection already provided by IDO production on the previous day.
Psalm 139:13 tells us that God "knit me together in my mother's womb" and in Isaiah 46:3 God says "you whom I have upheld since you were conceived" (NIV). IDO is a marvellous part of God's system for individually "upholding" us in the womb and we should not violate it, or indeed the commandment not to take innocent human life, through the proliferation of abortion."
References and notes
1. For example, legally restricted late-term (>20 weeks) abortion was introduced into Western Australia in 1998. Under this legislation, 95% of requests have been granted and terminations as late as 8 months have been approved. See Dickinson, J.E., Late pregnancy termination within a legislated medical environment, Aust. N.Z.J. Obstet. Gynaecol. 44(4):337-341, 2004.
2. Munn, D.H., et al., Prevention of allogeneic fetal rejection by tryptophan catabolism, Science 281(5380):1122-1124, 1998.
3. Kudo, Y. and Boyd, C.A., Human placental indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase: cellular localization and characterization of an enzyme preventing fetal rejection, Biochim. Biophys. Acta. 1500(1):119-124, 2000.
4. Suzuki, S., et al., Expression of indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase and tryptophan 2,3-dioxygenase in early concepti, Biochem. J. 355(2):425-429, 2001.
5. Kudo, Y., et al., Indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase: distribution and function in the developing human placenta, J. Reprod. Immunol. 61(2):87-98, 2004.


41 posted on 07/08/2005 7:30:46 PM PDT by Pointblank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-32 next last

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