V
vern_humphrey
Guest
Let me point out that the Constitution does not explicitly give the courts the power to interpret the Constitution – so that’s “extra-legal,” too.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
F
FightingFat
Guest
Isn’t that your (and my) perspective Vern? It is the truth as far as I’m concerned but the majority of people in our countries disagree don’t they???Abortion is legal in the same way putting Jews in gas chambers was legal in Nazi Germany. And just as moral.
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
The majority of people in this country believe abortion should be regulated – and will vote for laws to do that. And that’s with the little knowledge they have of it.Isn’t that your (and my) perspective Vern? It is the truth as far as I’m concerned but the majority of people in our countries disagree don’t they???
If they could actually see the little bodies, they’d be more concerned.
We have a pregnancy clinic in the next county (and are trying to start one here.) A sonogram of the baby does wonders in changing a woman’s mind about abortion. The woman who runs the machine keeps some on disc – including one at about 12 days, where you see only a tiny pulse. She told the mother that was her baby, and the woman asked “why is it pulsing like that?”
She replied, “That’s its heart beating.” The woman, who originally wanted an abortion decided to keep the baby.
F
FightingFat
Guest
You sound so fully convinced that we will defeat the abortionists! I pray that you are right! What about doctors willing to perform abortions despite being aware of facts like this? How can we convince them?
K
Kaninchen
Guest
It’s within the ‘Rule of Law’ though and can be addressed through the judicial and political system - there’s nothing ‘night and fog’ about it.Let me point out that the Constitution does not explicitly give the courts the power to interpret the Constitution – so that’s “extra-legal,” too.
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
Remember the motto of the Texas Rangers, “No man that’s in the wrong can stand up to a man that’s in the right and keeps a-coming.”You sound so fully convinced that we will defeat the abortionists! I pray that you are right!
You understand we are dealing with serial killers? They kill like serial killers and demonstrate all the psychological traits of serial killers.What about doctors willing to perform abortions despite being aware of facts like this? How can we convince them?
Treat them like serial killers.
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
“Night and Fog” (“nacht und nebel”) relates to metholology, not to the legal basis. Both the power of the court to “interpret” the Constitution and the Final Solution were “assumed powers,” explicitly stated no where.It’s within the ‘Rule of Law’ though and can be addressed through the judicial and political system - there’s nothing ‘night and fog’ about it.
And they both had the same result.
F
FightingFat
Guest
I think philosophically, this point is incredibly important and returns us to the idea of the thread. What would it take to convince those who advocate abortion of the veracity of this statement? What constitutes a human being?You understand we are dealing with serial killers? They kill like serial killers and demonstrate all the psychological traits of serial killers.
Catholics, who retain an idea of potency and act can without hesitation know that what we see in a fertilised egg is a human being with potential to be a doctor, a mother, an astronaut or the next President of the United States of America. But other people argue that what constitutes a human being is more than that potentiality. What constitutes a human being is a level of consciousness that must be developed, an imbueing of experience. A growth.
K
Kaninchen
Guest
Doesn’t deal with the point that it’s possible to challenge your Supreme Court judgments legally and politically - which was not the case with the Reich (where courts weren’t involved at all). The Court may have taken powers that you believe that it ought not to have but it’s open to challenge - it’s not ‘extra-legal’, it’s within the ‘Rule of Law’.“Night and Fog” (“nacht und nebel”) relates to metholology, not to the legal basis. Both the power of the court to “interpret” the Constitution and the Final Solution were “assumed powers,” explicitly stated no where.
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
Who are we trying to convince?I think philosophically, this point is incredibly important and returns us to the idea of the thread. What would it take to convince those who advocate abortion of the veracity of this statement? What constitutes a human being?
The public? If we were able to mount an intensive education campaign, we could convince them easily. Why do you think pro-abortion types are so outraged if someone shows actual pictures of an aborted child?
The abortionist? You can’t change a serial killer by rational argument.
The mother? I recommend two things:
*]Give underage girls standing to sue when they reach the age of majority.
*]Require a 4D sonogram as “informed consent.”
These two measures would allow a blizzard of lawsuits against these grisly killers.
The people who make arguments like that are “true believers.” The people we need to reach are ordinary people – and we can do that, although the mass media seems highly unwilling to help.Catholics, who retain an idea of potency and act can without hesitation know that what we see in a fertilised egg is a human being with potential to be a doctor, a mother, an astronaut or the next President of the United States of America. But other people argue that what constitutes a human being is more than that potentiality. What constitutes a human being is a level of consciousness that must be developed, an imbueing of experience. A growth.
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
Sure – just like the Third Reich, and with the same result. Millions of innocent human beings died on an assembly line basis.Doesn’t deal with the point that it’s possible to challenge your Supreme Court judgments legally and politically - which was not the case with the Reich (where courts weren’t involved at all). The Court may have taken powers that you believe that it ought not to have but it’s open to challenge - it’s not ‘extra-legal’, it’s within the ‘Rule of Law’.
K
Kaninchen
Guest
Only rhetorically, as I’ve been pointing out.Sure – just like the Third Reich,
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
When millions of innocent people are being put to death, that’s more than rhetoric.Only rhetorically, as I’ve been pointing out.
K
Kaninchen
Guest
You had said:When millions of innocent people are being put to death, that’s more than rhetoric.
You were wrong. It doesn’t reflect the way the Reich ‘worked’.Abortion is legal in the same way putting Jews in gas chambers was legal in Nazi Germany.
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
In fact, that’s exactly how the Reich worked – at Wansee, the “elite” met and made the decision. In Row vs Wade, the “elite” met and made the decision. Neither had the explicit power to make such a decision, but both had the real power to do what they wanted.You had said:
You were wrong. It doesn’t reflect the way the Reich ‘worked’.
T
Teflon93
Guest
You’re correct. Anyone interested in the Wansee Conference or any other issues related to the Third Reich or the Holocaust can check out William Shirer’s excellent Rise and Fall of the Third Reich or Martin Gilbert’s Holocaust books.In fact, that’s exactly how the Reich worked – at Wansee, the “elite” met and made the decision. In Row vs Wade, the “elite” met and made the decision. Neither had the explicit power to make such a decision, but both had the real power to do what they wanted.
Even the Nazis realized that what they were planning to do to the Jews had to be hidden from all but the most fanatic Nazis.
In that regard, our abortion culture is much more shameless than the Reich. At least the Reich didn’t presume to make infanticide a secular sacrament.
K
Kaninchen
Guest
I can see the rhetorical advantages to you of claiming that the US is just like the Reich, of course, but, even if I accept your particular interpretation of your Supreme Court’s decision (and having lived in America made me absolutely no expert on the US constitution), there is a profound difference - the Supreme Court itself is under the ‘Rule of Law’, there are legal and political processes where it’s decisions can be addressed.In fact, that’s exactly how the Reich worked – at Wansee, the “elite” met and made the decision. In Row vs Wade, the “elite” met and made the decision. Neither had the explicit power to make such a decision, but both had the real power to do what they wanted.
What decisions did Wansee make, by the way?
T
Teflon93
Guest
Wansee was where the Final Solution was formulated. The Nazis determined to exterminate the Jews entirely.I can see the rhetorical advantages to you of claiming that the US is just like the Reich, of course, but, even if I accept your particular interpretation of your Supreme Court’s decision (and having lived in America made me absolutely no expert on the US constitution), there is a profound difference - the Supreme Court itself is under the ‘Rule of Law’, there are legal and political processes where it’s decisions can be addressed.
What decisions did Wansee make, by the way?
There was a quite excellent HBO movie starring Kenneth Branagh which recreated the conference. Worth checking out.
I don’t think anyone’s saying the US is exactly like the Reich. Our lack of respect for life is a cancer upon our society, however. In another century, we shall be viewed by our descendants as we view slaveowners.
Core to Catholic belief is the sanctity of life. It is one of the many ways in which Catholics are out of step with contemporary American mores.
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
Yet we use many of the Reich’s techniques. For example, we dehumanize the victims – they are “fetuses,” “parasites” just as the Reich labeled Jews “untermenschen.” We hide the crime from our eyes – witness the outrage of the pro-abortioin crowd over showing pictures of aborted children, their resistance to requiring 4D sonograms, and their desire for legalizing abortions to minors without parental knowledge.You’re correct. Anyone interested in the Wansee Conference or any other issues related to the Third Reich or the Holocaust can check out William Shirer’s excellent Rise and Fall of the Third Reich or Martin Gilbert’s Holocaust books.
Even the Nazis realized that what they were planning to do to the Jews had to be hidden from all but the most fanatic Nazis.
In that regard, our abortion culture is much more shameless than the Reich. At least the Reich didn’t presume to make infanticide a secular sacrament.
Just as one could live in a German town and see railway cars full of Jews headed east – and deny later all knowledge of the Holocaust, one can walk the streets of America and never see anything about abortion.
K
Kaninchen
Guest
Somewhat different from abortion in the US then.Even the Nazis realized that what they were planning to do to the Jews had to be hidden from all but the most fanatic Nazis.
Not that I’d exactly agree with your analysis - but that would really need another thread.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.