The Wonderful Christian Message of Wonderfully Christian South Dakota

[PureX]

I am contending you are wrong. Abortion is legal because it was DEEMED A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTBY THE SUPREME COURT.

The Constitution does not exist in a vacuum. It is being interpreted in light of all that we know about the intentions of the founders. And much of what we know about their intentions comes from their declared reasons for founding the nation in the first place - from the Declaration of Independance.

 

[kevmicsmi]

The Constitution does not exist in a vacuum. It is being interpreted in light of all that we know about the intentions of the founders. And much of what we know about their intentions comes from their declared reasons for founding the nation in the first place - from the Declaration of Independance.

:biglaugh: and you think they "intended" for abortion on demand? :biglaugh: unbelievable

 

[Mister Emu]

Therefor, in matters involving individual rights and freedom (such as in the right to abortion debate), we do not resolve the issue by bowing to the will of the majority. Instead, we do so by following the founding principals of our nation's laws, as expressed in the founding documents: the principal of equal freedom, equal rights, and equal protection to all citizens

Your grasp of the history of our nation is flawed...

What decided African-Americans had the right to be free from slavery? The expressed will of the majority.
What decided Women had the right to vote? The expressed will of the majority.

Every single right Americans retain, EXCEPT ONE, has been granted through the amendment process...

Can you guess which one doesn't belong?

Following the founding principles of this Nation includes using the amendment process to attain rights.

Also on abortion...

While I do believe abortion is horrendous... that is not my legal arguement... my arguement is that human life that does not have the ability to decide for itself should automatically be afforded basic rights...

 

[Mister Emu]

:biglaugh: and you think they "intended" for abortion on demand? :biglaugh: unbelievable

Exactly... Hell they didn't even intent for the rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness to include anyone other than white landowing males.

 

[PureX]

and you think they "intended" for abortion on demand? unbelievable

The suprime court justices have decided that the intent of the founders of this nation was that all citizens would be equally free and equally protected under the law. That means that the will of the majority can not over-rule the rights of an individual or minority. They have ruled that a woman's right to decide what will happen inside her own body is one of the rights that is guaranteeed to her by the original intention of the nation's founders, and as such, the will of a majority cannot userp that right. That means that elected representatives don't have the right to supercede a woman's individual right to determine what will happen inside her own body.

 

[Mister Emu]

They have ruled that a woman's right to decide what will happen inside her own body is one of the rights that is guaranteeed to her by the original intention of the nation's founders, and as such, the will of a majority cannot userp that right. That means that elected representatives don't have the right to supercede a woman's individual right to determine what will happen inside her own body

Here is the problem with Court descisions deciding rights... they can be overturned... something that is a right should not be able to be overturned except by massive popular support...

Hopefully the SC will overturn the horrible unconstitutional descision of Roe v. Wade...

As a matter of fact however if enough pressure were put on our elected representatives a constitutional amendment granting unborn offspring the right to life would thrawrt the SC desicsion.

 

[kevmicsmi]

The suprime court justices have decided that the intent of the founders of this nation was that all citizens would be equally free and equally protected under the law. That means that the will of the majority can not over-rule the rights of an individual or minority. They have ruled that a woman's right to decide what will happen inside her own body is one of the rights that is guaranteeed to her by the original intention of the nation's founders, and as such, the will of a majority cannot userp that right. That means that elected representatives don't have the right to supercede a woman's individual right to determine what will happen inside her own body.

Why dont women have the right to whore then? That is something happening ewith their own body, why dont they have the right to smoke crack? Happening with their own body. Or does the SC just grant "rights" that they deem necessary?

 

[PureX]

Your grasp of the history of our nation is flawed...

What decided African-Americans had the right to be free from slavery? The expressed will of the majority.
What decided Women had the right to vote? The expressed will of the majority.

Every single right Americans retain, EXCEPT ONE, has been granted through the amendment process...

Can you guess which one doesn't belong?

Following the founding principles of this Nation includes using the amendment process to attain rights.

The founders were blinded by their own ignorance and prejudice, just as you and I are today. But as time has passed, we have slowly moved past many of their prejudices, and now must work at moving past our own.

As we move past each instance of our own ignorance and prejudice, we amend the Constitution to further reflect and artulate our enlightened understanding.

Also on abortion...

While I do believe abortion is horrendous... that is not my legal arguement... my arguement is that human life that does not have the ability to decide for itself should automatically be afforded basic rights...

But what is "human life"? We don't all agree on this. Who is going to define this for us?

 

[kevmicsmi]

The founders were blinded by their own ignorance and prejudice, just as you and I are. But as time has passed, we have slowly moved past many of their prejudices, and now must work at moving past our own.

As we move past each instance of our own ignorance and prejudice, we amend the Constitution to reflect our enlightened understanding.

You said it, WE AMMEND THE CONSTITUTION. So when did we pass the abortion amendment?

 

[Mister Emu]

The founders were blinded by their own ignorance and prejudice, just as you and I are. But as time has passed, we have slowly moved past many of their prejudices, and now must work at moving past our own.

As we move past each instance of our own ignorance and prejudice, we amend the Constitution to reflect our enlightened understanding

I agree 100% when society moves past a prejudice we AMEND the constitution...

But what is "human life"? We don't all agree on this. Who is going to define this for us?

I like biology. Purely empirical, no philosophy or ideology involved.

 

[dawny0826]

But in America, fundamental rights issues such as abortion are not decided by popular opinion (voting). They are decided by the courts interpreting the fundamental ideals of the nation as they have been expressed in the founding documents. The courts have done so, and have decided that abortion should be an available option to women.

Very well.

So this isn't about voting, it's about voting for politicians who claim that they will ignore and even destroy the ideals and process of American government just so they can force everyone else to comply with their own idea of what's right and wrong regarding abortion.

I'm not following you.

Because Christians and other anti-abortion supporters do not respect the equal right of their fellow citizens to make their own decisions regarding this issue, they have been willfully electing politicians who likewise have no respect for the rights and freedoms of the people they are supposed to be representing. This is why we have the worst administration in U.S. history running the country, right now, and this is why they're doing such a terrible job at it. The president himself has no real concept of, nor respect for the fundamental rights and freedom of every citizen and why these need to be protected above all else.

First of all...I disagree that we currently have the WORST administration in U.S. history running the country. So, I don't think you and I are going to get very far with this...unless you want to take a jog with me. (Around in circles. )

There is plenty of bias in the media coming from both sides. The key is to eliminate the bias in yourself, so that you can begin to recognize it in the media. I'm always amazed that the people who watch Fox "News" - the most openly biased media outlet on TV - actually believe it's "fair and balanced". They believe this because their own bias are being echoed.

I think I can safely say that the majority of bias within the media is LIBERAL.

I think it's natural for an individual to navigate towards a media outlet which reflects their own bias.

For the record...I refer to CNN as much as I do Fox. It's hard to discern the BS from truth from both.

I'm just pointing out that on this issue, the conservative position is pro-choice. The anti-abortion position is now activists position.

A conservative stance is also defined as a "traditional" stance. I would consider the anti-abortionist to hold more of a "traditional" approach.

What do you mean by "standing up for" your position? Do you mean advocating it through free speech? Or do you mean by forcing other people to comply with it regardless of their desires, beliefs, or equal rights as human beings?

Advocating through free speech is a part of it. As well as supporting organizations that are pro-family. I attend a church that would offer assistance to pregnant women faced with the decision to possibly abort. I also stand behind politicians who are anti-abortion.

Your opinions are not offensive to anyone.They are sincere and reasonable. It's your actions that I am interested in. Are you willing to subvert the founding principals of our nation of equal freedom, equal rights, and equal justice for all your fellow citizens just so that you can force everyone else to comply with your opinion about abortion being murder?

I'm willing to do whatever I can in my current station in life to be a voice for the unborn...period. That's my stance.

See, I welcome your opinion, and I will fight to the death for your right to express your opinions openly. What worries me is that a lot of anti-abortionists are now happily and willingly helping to dismantle essential protections of and from our government just so they can force their beliefs into law and thereby force everyone else to comply with them. My argument is not with the anti-abortion position. It's with the desire to force this position on everyone else at any cost.

I welcome the opinions of others as well...or else I wouldn't be here.

I'm simply living my life...standing firm on what I feel passionate about.

Who am I if I live a lie to appease others?

What do you propose I do? Sell out...lay down my right as an American to stand on my own personal religious/moral/social beliefs...so that others can do something that myself and many other Americans do not approve of.

Take the war for instance...for those in opposition to it...should they stop protesting...and stop bashing Bush...to appease those that DO support the war effort and Bush?

I don't see much of a difference. Because, if I'm supposed to sell out for the sake of protecting the rights of women who want to do something that stands against everything I personally stand for...I feel that MY personal rights are being infringed upon.

I've already stated...if I'm intolerant...if I'm a bigot because of my views on abortion...I can accept those labels.

 

[PureX]

You said it, WE AMMEND THE CONSTITUTION. So when did we pass the abortion amendment?

Amending the Constitution is not writing a law. The Constitution is not a set of laws. When politicians vote to amend the Constitution they are not writing law.

You seem to be trying to imply that because amendments are voted on, and therefor represent the will of the majority (theoretically), that this means that we have majority rule. But this isn't exactly true. The Constitution is not law, it's a guide for deciding on the validity of a law, and for interpreting the application of existing laws.

 

[kevmicsmi]

Amending the Constitution is not writing a law. The Constitution is not a set of laws. When politicians vote to amend the Constitution they are not writing law.

You seem to be trying to imply that because amendments are voted on, and therefor represent the will of the majority (theoretically), that this means that we have majority rule. But this isn't exactly true. The Constitution is not law, it's a guide for deciding on the validity of a law, and for interpreting the application of existing laws.

Why do you keep running from your own statements You said...

As we move past each instance of our own ignorance and prejudice, we amend the Constitution to further reflect and artulate our enlightened understanding.

I NEVER SAID WE HAVE AN ABSOLUTE DEMOCRACY! I ask again, basing this on your statement above, when did we ammend the constitution making abortion a right?

 

[dawny0826]

And still you speak/write about "just use birth control" Hmmmmm

You're selectively choosing what to read from my posts. I would be more than happy to provide you with links on everything I've posted pertaining to abortion. I've made myself perfectly clear.

I'm a Christian. My stance is that the unwed woman who isn't ready for a child...should abstain from sex. If a woman insists on having sex and isn't ready for a baby...she should consult her OBGYN to obtain the most effective birth control possible for herself and then encourage her partner to use protection. I have also posted in this very thread that I feel a woman SHOULD be aware of her personal ovulatory patterns. Charting is a very simple and informative process that any woman can do to educate herself about her own body...IF she takes the initiative and responsibility to do so.

What if you are a married couple, well to do and just don't want children. You use birth control, maybe even sterilization and suddenly you are the 1%? It happens. Here's that question again: Are you saying people shouldn't have sex unless they intend to pro-create?

There are some days, where my honest answer to that question is yes.

I think that people should take responsibility for their actions. I don't think that an "oops" or freak accident with contraception warrants the DEATH of an innocent.

That is ONE thing women should know about their bodies. Among many others. Who should teach them? Their parents? No one taught that generation? Should all these women wake up tomorrow and instinctively know theyshould go educate themselves about their bodies and sex and birth control? YOu mentioned the gov't doesn't have a responsibility to educate women but you seem to think they have a right to make decisions about their bodies for them. Maybe thats it. The gov't doesn't need to educate anyone - they'll make all the decisions!

You're going to misread whatever I post...because of our clashing views.

I feel that sexual education should start within the home. It should be reiterated within the schools...churches...communities...OB clinics. Truthfully...not all conservatives feel as I do. I think education is very important. I think sex SHOULD be talked about....especially with youths...openly and honestly. Religion aside...I think abstinence is one heck of a good concept to try to push within our nation's schools and communities.

Sex can result in pregnancy. If you don't want a baby and aren't ready for the responsibilities of having a child...don't have sex.

If you MUST have sex...use your common sense. It's not rocket science.

Lucky you. I wonder if most of rural america not to mention innercity young women have such an opportunity. Or even a level of education where they could even be aware that such things exist!

I sat in school with people of all cultural backgrounds and of different economic classes...we sat in the SAME sex education classes...from elementary school...through high school...we went to the same counselors...we took the same tests...watched the same videos...we were given the SAME opportunity to learn...even if we had NEVER received ANY sexual education within our homes.

To use economic class and social class as an excuse for one's actions is a cop out and sad shame.

We're all entitled to an opinion here, it's a debate board.

Yes. We are.

I see. Thats not pro-life. It's pro-some-life aka Anti-abortion. I'm not pro abortion. I'd like to see abortions be safe, legal and RARE. I wouldn't have an abortion. But I'm pro-choice because I don't walk in anyone elses shoes and I respect their rights to make their own choices.

I doubt you'll see abortions become "rare"...if they are legal and readily available.

Keep in mind that almost of the women who make up the largest group who receive abortions will have more than ONE abortion.

Do you think MEN have the right to play god then? You mentioned you don't oppose self defense or even death penalty. How is that not playing god?

When did I say that I support the death penalty? Quote me.

You can think abortion is wrong, or that they've moved to make it criminal in SD but it isn't criminal here. It's perfectly legal.

And I'm sure that's a reassuring to many.

Then I urge you to educate yourself about the statistics of legal vs. illegal abortion instance from a site that you approve of.

Sure thing...it's not going to change how I feel, though. I don't care if it's legal or illegal. I oppose it either way.

If you ever find yourself unintentionally pregnant then I'm glad the choice you like is avialable to you.

I'm married. A third baby would be a blessing.

If I was raped...I would immediately seek medical care. I would demand the morning after pill. If the morning after pill was not effective...I would carry by baby (God willing). If I absolutely could not deal with raising my child for whatever reason...I would seek adoption as an alternative.

However, knowing myself...I don't think I could ever give away my child.

Run in circles on what?

We're repeating ourselves. Hence...circles.

Well it hasn't been since post 1 in this thread.

So, you were reading them, then?

 

[Mister Emu]

Amending the Constitution is not writing a law. The Constitution is not a set of laws. When politicians vote to amend the Constitution they are not writing law.

You seem to be trying to imply that because amendments are voted on, and therefor represent the will of the majority (theoretically), that this means that we have majority rule. But this isn't exactly true. The Constitution is not law, it's a guide for deciding on the validity of a law, and for interpreting the application of existing laws.

You are wrong... the Constitution is the supreme law of the land... when our elected officials amend the constitution it is the highest form of legislating they can do.

 

[PureX]

For the record...I refer to CNN as much as I do Fox. It's hard to discern the BS from truth from both.

I suggest watching World News from the BBC and the Lehrer News Hour. Also, Frontline offers the most in-depth and unbiased news documentaries on the air.

Advocating through free speech is a part of it. As well as supporting organizations that are pro-family. I attend a church that would offer assistance to pregnant women faced with the decision to possibly abort. I also stand behind politicians who are anti-abortion.

Why this last part? What do you hope to gain by supporting politicians who agree with your opinion on abortion? Do you realize that they can't vote to ban abortion (well, they can, but their vote will be overturned by the courts)?

I'm willing to do whatever I can in my current station in life to be a voice for the unborn...period. That's my stance.

Does this mean that you are willing to deny your fellow citizens the right to make up their own minds and to choose for themselves regarding abortion? I so, then don't they then have the same right to ignore your opinions, and deny you the right to live as you believe is right, if they are able? Do you believe that this is what human society must come down to: a battle of self-centered righteousness; with everyone trying to force everyone else to comply with their own opinions and beliefs?

What do you propose I do? Sell out...lay down my right as an American to stand on my own personal religious/moral/social beliefs...so that others can do something that myself and many other Americans do not approve of.

What does your or anyone else's approval have to do with anything? Why do you think it's your place to approve or disapprove the thoughts or behaviors of other people? Who gave you this task? Who gave you this right? Why do you assume that other people have to answer to you for their thoughts and behaviors?

Take the war for instance...for those in opposition to it...should they stop protesting...and stop bashing Bush...to appease those that DO support the war effort and Bush?

There is a huge difference between expressing an opinion, and trying to force other people to comply with your opinions.

I don't see much of a difference. Because, if I'm supposed to sell out for the sake of protecting the rights of women who want to do something that stands against everything I personally stand for...I feel that MY personal rights are being infringed upon.

But your rights are not being infringed upon in any way. You are not being forced to do anything that you believe is wrong. Your "feeling" in this instance is unfounded and irrational. Yet you do wish to infringe upon the rights of other people to decide for themselves what is right for them. So while you're feeling oppressed, even though you aren't really being oppressed at all, you are trying to oppress others.

Do you think this is rational? Do you think this is right?

 

[Mister Emu]

But your rights are not being infringed upon in any way. You are not being forced to do anything that you believe is wrong. Your "feeling" in this instance is unfounded and irrational. Yet you do wish to infringe upon the rights of other people to decide for themselves what is right for them. So while you're feeling oppressed, even though you aren't really being oppressed at all, you are trying to oppress others

When the 'right' I am infringing upon is the 'right' to kill unborn instances of human life, I do believe it is my obligation to fight it... I do beleive it is rational to apply the right to life to unborn children...

 

[PureX]

You are wrong... the Constitution is the supreme law of the land...

No, you're wrong. The Constitution is not law at all. It's an expression of the ideal principals upon which our laws are based. There is a difference.

 

[kevmicsmi]

I suggest watching World News from the BBC and the Lehrer News Hour. Also, Frontline offers the most in-depth and unbiased news documentaries on the air.

:biglaugh: You are joking, right? The BBC is not only liberal, they are leftist liberal. I trust nothing from them to be free of bias Frontline is very interesting I would agree, but Lehrer is mainstream liberal leaning, just like fox is mainstream conservative leaning.

 

[kevmicsmi]

No, you're wrong. The Constitution is not law at all. It's an expression of the ideal principals upon which our laws are based. There is a difference.

It is not an easter egg hunt though, you cant just find "rights" in the constitution that have been hidden for hundreds of years unless you Ammend the Constitution.