I think people also forget that Americans believe in a higher law greater than man. The revolution was “illegal” too, but that didn’t make our Founding Fathers any less “civilized.”
posted on 06/07/2009 11:57:30 AM PDT
("Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?")
The Founders would totally reject the notion that something like abortion law could justify revolution, which they saw as a last-ditch recourse to solve problems that the political system cannot, and which even when successful ought to disrupt as little of the prior legal and social regime as possible.
The political and legal mechanism to overcome abortion rights has existed for the same 36 years as has Roe vs. Wade, including turnover of all 9 seats on the Supreme Court (two seats having turned over twice, counting Souter - Sotomayor). If the American people actually opposed abortion to any meaningful extent, abortion would be illegal now. It so happens that there is a sizable constituency that talks about disliking abortion, but the fraction who acts in reliance on that talk is much smaller. Even with 55 Republican Senators, Sam Alito had to pretend to be neutral on Roe. Sotomayor sure doesn't have to do so, any more than Ginsberg did 16 years ago.
And even if you want to pursue the revolutionary analogy further, the Founders conspicuously organized, and published a manifesto declaring the legal and moral basis why they were no longer bound by British law. Where is the radical pro-life movement's equivalent, with its signatories publicly identified -- ready to hang together or hang separately?
The founders than proceeded to defend that manifesto by way of revolution in accordance with the law of war -- which certainly did not involve killing civilian British administrators, no manner how actively engaged in carrying out noxious colonial polities.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson