Amendment 62 Talking Points Pt. 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jefferson

Jefferson

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Amendment 62 Talking Points Pt. 2

This is the show from Thursday June 3rd, 2010.

SUMMARY:

* This is Not Your Grandma's Pro-Life Flyer: Part II: Bob Enyart looks at the Amendment 62 Talking Points flyer. Wow! Do you realize this: Personhood will do more than any other effort to derail the godless left that is destroying America! Personhood will do far more for "conservatism" than anything that the conservatives are advocating. If you agree that the Talking Points flyer is a truly amazing brochure and that it will persuade thousands to help fight to end child killing, then please help us print 50,000 copies in order to get a 33% discount as compared to the price of a few thousand! This will be perhaps the best use of $3,000 in the history of the battle to stop abortion. Can you help? Can you fund this? If so, either call CRTL at 303-753-9394, or send a check to CRTL Issues Committee, 1535 Grant Street #303, Denver, CO 80203 or just click and give online! And remember, please check out the tri-fold Talking Points flyer!

* A New BEL Resource Announced: Christianity 101, an introduction to Christianity DVD series by Bob Enyart has been taped and is now almost out of post production! Look forward to this fun and informative series becoming available soon, at a website near you...

Today's Resource: The Bible tells us to forgive, but does the Bible teach that we should always forgive? Can forgiveness actually harm someone? You might enjoy this 3-part BEL series on forgiveness, Bible style. The Forgiveness series is now available from our KGOV Store on MP3-CD, by MP3 download, and even in video on DVD!
 
Jefferson

Jefferson

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
chrysostom said:
what are you going to do when the U.S. Supreme court rules it unconstitutional?
Click to expand...
The Supreme Court to this very day has never overturned the Dredd Scott decision. So why is slavery illegal today?
 
The Graphite

The Graphite

New member
chrysostom said:
Jefferson said:
The Supreme Court to this very day has never overturned the Dredd Scott decision. So why is slavery illegal today?
Click to expand...
is that supposed to be logic?
Click to expand...

Not only has the Supreme Court never overturned Dred Scott, but it has continued to cite it in dozens of decisions since slavery was legalized... yes, even in recent years. A total of 56 times it's been cited in other court rulings, and as recently as 2007 and 2008.

If you think overturning Roe v Wade is the goal, you have the wrong goal. Overturning Roe would be a good thing, in and of itself, but it is not the goal, and overturning it would would not criminalize abortion anywhere in the U.S.

In respect to the individual justices involved, overturning it would be a moral thing to do. Strategically for the pro-life movement, however, it would be an amoral thing, and would serve to only pass the buck from one court to numerous courts across all 50 states, changing our effort from one fight to 50 fights. Even setting aside the moral aspect of the issue, is that even productive? Changing one battle into 50 battles?

The personhood movement has one ultimate battle - recognize the personhood of the unborn legally and in the eyes of the public, thus completely undercutting even the relevance of Roe v Wade. The answer was, in part, stated right there in the text of the Roe decision -- if the personhood of the unborn is established, the case for legal abortion "collapses." At which point, why would you even need to overturn Roe? If you legally recognize the unborn as persons, and Roe states that if the unborn child is a person, he/she is protected with a right to life by the Constitution... then the decision stands.

Thus, you actually use the decision against itself.

Roe is not the goal. Blacks are persons, and have a right to life, liberty and property just like any person, and we didn't need to overturn Dred in order for that to come about. Unborn children are persons and have a right to life and liberty referenced already by the 5th and 14th amendments of the federal Constitution, and we do not need to overturn Roe v Wade in order to protect the unborn under love and under law.

So, in answer to your question... yes, that is logic.
 
chrysostom

chrysostom

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
so where is the movement to make slavery legal again?

it is easier to change those who are interpreting the constitution than it is to change the constitution

how does a state constitution trump the U.S. constitution?
 
The Graphite

The Graphite

New member
chrysostom said:
so where is the movement to make slavery legal again?

it is easier to change those who are interpreting the constitution than it is to change the constitution

how does a state constitution trump the U.S. constitution?
Click to expand...
What, in the name of all that is holy, makes you think that the intention of a state-level personhood amendment is created with the intention of "trumping" the U.S. Constitution??? Where do you come up with these bizarre ideas?

Chrys, it's not intended to trump the U.S. Constitution. It's intended to honor it! Uphold it! Agree with it! Hello? Anybody home?

You say it is "easier to change those who are interpreting the Constitution than it is to change the Constitution." Exactly! How can you not see that this is the point? The Constitution is fine the way it is, in regards to this issue! Not one but two sections of the Constitution recognize the right to life and liberty! You think we want to contradict that, or "trump" that? Are you nuts?

If by "trump" you mean "to trumpet it from the highest mountaintops," then by all means! Trumpet that message in every state, in every county, in every city, in every neighborhood, in every home!

Roe says if the unborn child is a person, then abortion must be illegal across the board, in all states, because the right to life would take precedence. Why overturn it? Recognize that part of the decision and declare the personhood of the unborn. And then, according to Roe, the case for legal abortion will collapse, even according to the wicked, heinous Republican who wrote it.

Republicans gave us legal abortion at virtually every step of the way, from the very beginning. And you place your faith in Republicans to save us from it. What a foolish, foolish little man you are.
 
chrysostom

chrysostom

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
here is the logic

the U.S. constitution rules

you either change it or those who are interpreting it

do I have to point out to you what it takes to do either?
 
The Graphite

The Graphite

New member
chrysostom said:
here is the logic

the U.S. constitution rules

you either change it or those who are interpreting it

do I have to point out to you what it takes to do either?
Click to expand...
You're not even paying attention to a single word I wrote, are you? :dunce:

The Lord rules. The Constitution is right insofar as it agrees with God's rules. The Constitution is right regarding the right to life. WE DON'T WANT TO CHANGE THAT.

What does it take to change what how people interpret the right to life of the unborn in the Constitution? Why don't you ask the people who ran the campaign for the first personhood amendment here in Colorado? In a matter of months and with only a shoestring budget, they DOUBLED the number of people in Colorado who advocate banning abortion across the board by way of recognizing the right to life of the unborn in the Constitution. But the war is not won overnight. So, back into the fray we go, until it is done.

As for Roe, yet again I ask, why overturn it? You overturn it, you turn one battle into 50 battles on 50 fronts. OR.... you ask the court to uphold what it says regarding the personhood of the unborn, because if the unborn is recognized as a person, the case for legal abortion collapses.

That is according to the pro-abortion Republican judge who wrote the decision in the first place, you nitwit reprobate. Do we want to overturn that? No!

Dred was never overturned. We never had to overturn it. Roe will likely never be overturned, and it doesn't need to be, either. Pay attention. There are none so blind as those who will not see.
 
The Graphite

The Graphite

New member
chrysostom said:
so are you saying the state constitution can overrule the U.S. one?
Click to expand...
You are absolutely unbelievable.

Spreek je Engels?
Sprechen Sie Englisch?
¿Hablas inglés?
Eigo o hanashimasu ka?
An féidir Béarla a labhairt leat?
Koj has lug Aas-kiv puas tau?
Ni huì jiang ying yu ma?
Ukhuluma isiNgisi?
Sé o gbó ede Gèésì?
Mürük´'apag'a?

... Naluagmiuraalavich? :confused:


How many times do I have to say that WE DO NOT SEEK TO HAVE A STATE CONSTITUTION OVERRULE THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION?

Perhaps one more time?

WE DO NOT SEEK TO HAVE A STATE CONSTITUTION OVERRULE THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION.
WE AGREE WITH THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION ON THIS MATTER.
WE WANT THE STATE CONSTITUTION TO ACKNOWLEDGE AND AGREE WITH THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION,
AND INTEND TO UPHOLD THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION ON THIS ISSUE.
NOT BECAUSE THE CONSTITUTION IS THE ULTIMATE AUTHORITY BUT BECAUSE IT AGREES WITH THE ULTIMATE AUTHORITY WHICH IS THE LORD.

I am so done with you, you willfully ignorant fool.
 
chrysostom

chrysostom

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
The Graphite said:
You are absolutely unbelievable.

Spreek je Engels?
Sprechen Sie Englisch?
¿Hablas inglés?
Eigo o hanashimasu ka?
An féidir Béarla a labhairt leat?
Koj has lug Aas-kiv puas tau?
Ni huì jiang ying yu ma?
Ukhuluma isiNgisi?
Sé o gbó ede Gèésì?
Mürük´'apag'a?

... Naluagmiuraalavich? :confused:


How many times do I have to say that WE DO NOT SEEK TO HAVE A STATE CONSTITUTION OVERRULE THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION?

Perhaps one more time?

WE DO NOT SEEK TO HAVE A STATE CONSTITUTION OVERRULE THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION.
WE AGREE WITH THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION ON THIS MATTER.
WE WANT THE STATE CONSTITUTION TO ACKNOWLEDGE AND AGREE WITH THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION,
AND INTEND TO UPHOLD THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION ON THIS ISSUE.
NOT BECAUSE THE CONSTITUTION IS THE ULTIMATE AUTHORITY BUT BECAUSE IT AGREES WITH THE ULTIMATE AUTHORITY WHICH IS THE LORD.

I am so done with you, you willfully ignorant fool.
Click to expand...

do you agree that the U.S. constitution overrules the state constitution
and
the U.S. Supreme court decides what the U.S. constitution says?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top