Pro-Choice Justice Antonin Scalia

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jefferson

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Pro-Choice Justice Antonin Scalia

This is the show from Friday March 21st, 2008.

BEST QUOTE OF THE SHOW:
I think if Steven Ertelt, [of LifeNews.com] as an investigative reporter, I think if he broke in at an abortion clinic and found Antonin Scalia himself performing an abortion, red handed with blood on him, I think he'd say, "Oh, he's a prolife justice. He's just doing research."

SUMMARY:

* Pro-Choice Antonin Scalia: The long-time claimed hero of the pro-life industry, Antonin Scalia, is a pro-abortion justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. Reported by the Columbia Tribune: "The reality is the Constitution doesn't address the subject at all," Scalia said of abortion. "It is one of the many subjects not in the Constitution which is therefore left to democracy. If you want the right to an abortion, persuade your fellow citizens it's a good idea and pass a law. If you feel the other way, repeal the law."

Those in pro-life leadership who want to retain their position and influence have promoted such pro-choice politicians and judges as pro-life to create a façade of success. But the house of cards is crashing down as American RTL and other principled pro-life organizations expose the immorality and pro-choice positions of a legion of pro-abort conservative Republicans.

* Farah Corrects, Ertelt Defends, Pro-choice Scalia: In Human Events, Joseph Farah corrected Antonin Scalia, showing how the Constitution in the 5th and 14th amendments protect the life and liberty of all innocent people, which includes the unborn, and that therefore it is completely false to state that the constitution would allow states to authorize the killing of innocent children. Steven Ertelt, in the first comment following Farah's article on Human Events website, defended Scalia's despicable pro-choice legal theory. Ertelt, a National RTL affiliate member, stated, "I think Farrah is taking his words out of context. Scalia was simply saying that no RIGHT to abortion is in the Constitution"

As to the personhood of the child, and the murder of the innocent, consider what Justice Antonin Scalia said on Feb. 4, 2002 at a Pew Forum on religion, politics, and the death penalty. "[T]he only one of my religious views that has anything to do with my job as a judge is the seventh commandment - thou shalt not lie. ... I will strike down Roe v. Wade, but I will also strike down a law that is the opposite of Roe v. Wade. ... One [side] wants no state to be able to prohibit abortion and the other one wants every state to have to prohibit abortion, and they're both wrong..." All Christians should grieve at this. That is not pro-life, it is pro-choice, by process. Scalia, a hero of the pro-life community, hereby grotesquely rejects God's enduring command, Do Not Murder, as the most fundamental of all legal principles. What is the good of not lying, if you then honestly rule to kill the innocent? Our pro-life and Christian leaders have turned the wicked humanist values of moral relativism and legal positivism into the greatest obligation of government. And many conservative judges, who grew up with an inclination toward Judeo-Christian morality and absolutes, could have developed into heroes of life, but instead, they utterly destroy the ultimate legal defense of the unborn, which is not based upon following an arbitrary, man-made, legal process, but only upon personhood and the God-given right to life.

Post-show Note: Please help get signatures or join Bob in welcoming Judie Brown to Colorado at evening $100-a-plate fundraisers on April 4 & 5, or just donate directly to the non-deductible Colorado RTL Issue Committee to help get Personhood on the ballot in November! Just call Donna at 303 753-9394! Our deadline for 76,000 signatures is May 13th! We're at 41,000 and going strong! We need your help! Please, help!

* Barak Obama the counterfeit Alan Keyes: by BEL friend Tom Hoefling!

Today's Resource: Watch Terry's Call on DVD as Bob quickly unravels Terry's red herring claim, that homosexuals are living godly lives. In a series of heart touching phone calls, Terry is lead to the Lord and repentance, shortly before his death from AIDS. (And notice the meaning of all the graphic elements in the artwork on the label of the DVD!)
 

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
Is anyone ever pro-life enough for you guys?

P.S. What Scalia said was right on the money, by the way.
 

Jefferson

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Is anyone ever pro-life enough for you guys?

P.S. What Scalia said was right on the money, by the way.
The constitution also doesn't say anything about rape either. Conclusion: Scalia is an idiot.
 

Prolifeguyswife

New member
Is anyone ever pro-life enough for you guys?

P.S. What Scalia said was right on the money, by the way.

According to Justice Blackmun, who decided Roe v. Wade, Scalia is wrong:
"[If the] suggestion of personhood [for the unborn] is established, the [abortion rights] case, of course, collapses, for the fetus' right to life is then guaranteed specifically by the [14th] Amendment."
 

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
The constitution also doesn't say anything about rape either. Conclusion: Scalia is an idiot.

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiight. A Supreme Court justice is an idiot, Jefferson. Uh-huh. This kind of contempt for intellectualism is not surprising coming from someone like you.
 

Prolifeguyswife

New member
Riiiiiiiiiiiiiight. A Supreme Court justice is an idiot, Jefferson. Uh-huh. This kind of contempt for intellectualism is not surprising coming from someone like you.

Supreme Court Justices are not gods, and have certainly made idiotic decisions. As I posted above, Scalia made a mistake. He is not intellectually infallible.
 

MrRadish

New member
I've just read the 14th Amendment. It does not specifically mention the unborn, and the main premise of the pro-choice debate is based on the idea that a foetus is not a person If foeti are not people then they do not have the rights afforded to a person. Legally, they are not currently classed as people* whether or not you think they should be. Therefore this so-called 'correction' of Scalia is not a correction at all, it's merely overriding the current law in favour of personal opinion on an as-yet undecided matter.

As far as I can see, anyway. Correct me if I'm wrong.

*Edit: in the states that didn't sign the 1978 American Convention on Human Rights.
 

Jefferson

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
I've just read the 14th Amendment. It does not specifically mention the unborn, and the main premise of the pro-choice debate is based on the idea that a foetus is not a person If foeti are not people then they do not have the rights afforded to a person. Legally, they are not currently classed as people* whether or not you think they should be.
It doesn't say Jews are people either.
 

elected4ever

New member
Supreme Court Justices are not gods, and have certainly made idiotic decisions. As I posted above, Scalia made a mistake. He is not intellectually infallible.
Scalia made no mistake. he was right-on. Farah is dead wrong. The 14th amendment only protects the right to life of the born, not the unborn. The right to life of the unborn is at the discretion of the mother who is born. Anyone who takes the life of the unborn without the consent of the mother is subject to criminal prosecution as the law provides. Until you people get your head out of the sand you will never win this battle.

The only way to secure the right to life for the unborn is by constitutional amendment. What the Bible says and what your opinion is notwithstanding. I support such an amendment. Do you? Of course you realise that there is no protection for abortions for the cause of rape or incest under such an amendment. All life would be protected by constitutional law which is the objective isn't it?:juggle:
 

MrRadish

New member
It doesn't say Jews are people either.

(MrRadish auto-win due to breach of Godwin's law! :first:)

On the contrary, Jews have been born and so, along with the fact that they are genetically human, are assumed to have rights. States that have not signed the American Convention on Human Rights state that one's status and rights as a person begin at birth. Therefore, Jews do fulfil the criteria, as they are human, and have been born, whereas foeti and non-human animals don't because they are human but not born and born but not human, respectively.
 

Lighthouse

The Dark Knight
Gold Subscriber
Hall of Fame
Pro-Choice Justice Antonin Scalia

This is the show from Friday March 21st, 2008.

BEST QUOTE OF THE SHOW:
I think if Steven Ertelt, [of LifeNews.com] as an investigative reporter, I think if he broke in at an abortion clinic and found Antonin Scalia himself performing an abortion, red handed with blood on him, I think he'd say, "Oh, he's a prolife justice. He's just doing research."[/quote][/quote]
:rotfl:

I doesn't say that Jefferson is a person either.
That was Jefferson's point.

P.S.
It also said blacks were only ⅓ of a person.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top