Replies

Dang, Doug! I didn't have a quibble with a word you said until the very last...

...I shall not get into the abortion debate, except to say that I am in general agreement. However, I find those arguments misplaced here. And, if anyone has not yet realized why, they should return to the top and read this again.

I certainly understand why you think the abortion debate is misplaced in this thread; however, for the very same reason I believe it to be germane. Here's why:

Roe vs. Wade and subsequent supporting decisions from the USSC, as wrongly as they were decided, did make abortion a de facto federal matter, if not de jure. Those sophists in long, black robes turned what was (and still is, by any legal logic) a State issue into a Federal issue by finding a non-existent "right to privacy" in the US Constitution.

There are many reasons to oppose abortion more important than its patent illegallity, all based on morality and ethics, but because the USSC put abortion into the Constitution, the Republican Liberty Caucus [IMO] should have some concern about taking it out, don't you think?

And Jim, thanks for offering this discussion.

There are many reasons to oppose abortion more important than its patent illegallity, all based on morality and ethics, but because the USSC put abortion into the Constitution, the Republican Liberty Caucus [IMO] should have some concern about taking it out, don't you think?

Generally speaking, yes. However, I fail to see how RLC -- as a club -- can do that. True, many of us would like to do it. But I see no means, method or opportunity here. Part of that will come after educating more people.

And, as part of the whole of that issue, I propose that we work towards making government schools stop teaching deviancy as acceptable behavior to our children. That is something that is doable within the next couple years and most definitely points to the core of the problem.

Meanwhile . . . so many issues, so little time. . . . .

The word "abortion" is not in the Constitution, but the Constitution is dependent upon an affirmation of the "right to life." The right to life is a federal issue and always has been, whatever courts have said. Government that does not grant the People's declared right to life clearly denies all other rights to those killed.

An assertion of rights and liberties, while neglecting the right and liberty for an innocent human being to live, indicates a philosophy that chooses to interpret the Constitution not holistically, but by the filter of personal liberties placed above mutual responsibility to our self-evident truths and to each other; a shift from American liberty toward baseless license.

Placing liberty above mutual responsibility also effectively begins to shift American government's functions away from those of a free republic accountable to Nature's God and in the direction of a tribunal of both personal liberties and personal license, whatever this tribunal's structure.