Would you support military action in the US to end abortion?

[Verisimilitude]

The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him."

Nuremberg Principal.

You claim that our Troops in Iraq are involved in an immoral and unjist war. Given the Nuremberg principle doesnt that make them , in you eyes, war criminals?

What I actually claimed is the President and Congress involved the military in an immoral and unjust war since they are the legitmate authority to direct them, as the US military is not like other nations military in that they do not act on their own. Congress passed its legitimate authority to the President, and the President gave the unjust orders. No, the soldiers/Marines are not war criminals. The troops are not akin to abortionists and do not purposely kill innocent Iraqis like abortionists do innocent children in the womb. I have said as much all along. They may be as confused as you are regarding the law. Clear enough?

Having said that I do think Iraq is unjust and immoral. I thought Viet Nam was unjust and immoral. I think Gulf 1, our actions in the Balkans in the 90’s was unjust and immoral. I think our involvment with Iran in the early 50’s was unjust and immoral, as our actions in Korea were unjust and immoral. I assume you think all of those conflicts are both just and moral since to say otherwise as I have with Iraq makes those who fought in them unjust and immoral people.

Do you call all of those actions just and moral because if you do why do you not support using force to end abortion?
Is killing a abortion doctor on purpose more or less just and moral than killing a innocent in Iraq by accident?
Are you so afraid of terrorists that killing 90,000 ‘accidently’ in Iraq gives you a clear conscience for their deaths?

Do you prefer the UN to Congress to set our foreign policy?

Does legal war and US law (Article 1, Section 8) mean anything to you, or is it outdated with the times?

Does SCOTUS have authority to make law like Roe, and just because it did make law are you bound to follow it?

 

[Verisimilitude]

Yes you did.
Right here:

Note the quotation marks on the word legal. Both ‘laws’, abortion and the Iraq war are unjust. Unless you think they are valid, I do not.

 

[Verisimilitude]

How do you arrive at this conclusion?
The one and only time the question has been directly aked in this thread, I did not answer.

Not that my service (or lack thereof) matters to the discussion at hand; but the assumption that you know based upon nothing explains much of what I am reading in this thread.

Word games seems to be your way to debate. It was a simple yes or no, unlike your loaded, ‘Is it your intent to equate the death of the innocent unborn with accidental death.?’
Our military’s intent is to kill ‘bad’ people in Iraq. They should not be building schools or manning checkpoints on streets or borders in Iraq. Our reason to be there is not legitimate so when we do a poor job of limiting the deaths to only ‘bad’ people and then call it only an accident is not very just or moral in my opinion. A legal declaration of war would give it legitimacy, but that point is long past. If a legal declaration was sought it would have failed. It was proposed but Congress refused to bring it up for a vote instead they gave their authority to the Executive branch- again. This is neither legal, moral, or just. Is it as bad as the murder of children from abortion? Maybe not, but that leads to the point of the thread. If abortion is the great intrinsic evil that it is, killing millions a year in the US alone; I don’t see how you can say it is ok to use force in Iraq to save Iraqis, but not in America for babies without being a hypocrite. Unless you admit irrational fear of terrorists…or ignorance.

 

[vz71]

You have already equivocated our soldiers with those that murder the unborn.

No, you accuse me of that but I have never said that.

Yes you did.
Right here:

I equate our ‘legal’ military actions in Iraq much like the ‘legal’ actions of abortionists. Though the abortionist purposely kills an innocent unlike the soldier in most cases, they both do so with the ‘authority’ of law.

Note the quotation marks on the word legal. Both ‘laws’, abortion and the Iraq war are unjust. Unless you think they are valid, I do not.

Well at least you are no longer denying you equate the murderers of the innocent unborn with our military.

Perhaps now we can move on.

Next question:
Since we know you believe the military are unborn baby murderers, do you also believe abortion and accidental death to be the same thing?

 

[vz71]

Word games seems to be your way to debate. It was a simple yes or no, unlike your loaded, ‘Is it your intent to equate the death of the innocent unborn with accidental death.?’

No word games at all. Simply a note that you are making leaps of logic where there is no supporting fact at all.
Blind conjecture.

And my question was not loaded at all. It is, in fact, a simple yes or no. The fact that you cannot answer it in simple yes or no terms tells me a great deal.

 

[Steve40]

I am still looking at this Iraq war comparison being drawn out for us.

Troops = abortionists…

Absolutely, abortionists are the soldiers of Satan. You could not kill close to 50 million children without being very systematic and mechanized in your killing. They have launched a multi-front war which has devastated humanity world wide. An attack on the child in the womb is a stealth attack upon all of us. It is military brilliance. Their leader the Devil himself, is brilliant and determined to hate and kill.

We would do well to learn from the Baby Killers persistence and discipline.

 

[Verisimilitude]

Well at least you are no longer denying you equate the murderers of the innocent unborn with our military.

Is abortion legal?

 

[Lief_Erikson]

Here’s why we can’t use military action to end abortion:

We have an apostolic faith.

Jesus, Peter and Paul all taught submission to authority- even the Roman Empire. The Christians of the Early Church were the most innocent people in the world, and they were treated more cruelly than pretty much any other group has been treated. They had more cause to rebel than anyone. Instead, they followed Jesus.

So we must emulate them. We cannot rebel, however provoked, even if absolute tyranny is murdering the civilians of the land. And to a strong degree, that’s happening right now in the US.

If I believed in the right to rebel, that humans have the right to overthrow the representatives of God that he has established over them when they abuse their power, then I would believe we were morally obligated to use military action to end abortion.

Ending abortion through force in the US would be rebellion and thus counter to the Tradition and Scripture of the Church.

On the other hand, remaining in Iraq until they have a stable government is a very laudable endeavor. I’m not saying we had a right to invade in the first place, but staying there to try to improve the country and the lives of the people rather than handing them over to terrorists to be butchered is good. And the Church, while it opposed the start of the war, has not said anything against our remaining there to improve the country after the war had already taken place.

 

[Lief_Erikson]

Oh, but if abortion was made illegal in the country, law enforcement should certainly enforce that law and punish abortionists as murderers. That’s certainly true.

 

[Steve40]

Here’s why we can’t use military action to end abortion:

We have an apostolic faith.

Jesus, Peter and Paul all taught submission to authority- even the Roman Empire. The Christians of the Early Church were the most innocent people in the world, and they were treated more cruelly than pretty much any other group has been treated. They had more cause to rebel than anyone. Instead, they followed Jesus.

So we must emulate them. We cannot rebel, however provoked, even if absolute tyranny is murdering the civilians of the land. And to a strong degree, that’s happening right now in the US.

If I believed in the right to rebel, that humans have the right to overthrow the representatives of God that he has established over them when they abuse their power, then I would believe we were morally obligated to use military action to end abortion.

Ending abortion through force in the US would be rebellion and thus counter to the Tradition and Scripture of the Church.

On the other hand, remaining in Iraq until they have a stable government is a very laudable endeavor. I’m not saying we had a right to invade in the first place, but staying there to try to improve the country and the lives of the people rather than handing them over to terrorists to be butchered is good. And the Church, while it opposed the start of the war, has not said anything against our remaining there to improve the country after the war had already taken place.

All authority comes from God and when Constantine ended the Christian persecutions in the 4th century he acted with the authority of God. The same is true today. If a military leader rises up in the totalitarian country that we are creating and devastates those who would kill children within the womb, I believe they would be carrying out the Will of the Father with military might.

As for Iraq, the day we leave Iraq is the day they become little Iran. If we truly don’t want to have to re-fight the crusades, although many would say it never ended, we would never leave Iraq. Iraq needs to be opened up for Christian evangelization. Unfortunately, our country is no longer Christian.

 

[Verisimilitude]

If I believed in the right to rebel, that humans have the right to overthrow the representatives of God that he has established over them when they abuse their power, then I would believe we were morally obligated to use military action to end abortion.

Ending abortion through force in the US would be rebellion and thus counter to the Tradition and Scripture of the Church.

Americans are unique because we do have the legal right:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

I don’t suggest we use the military to end abortion or overthrow the government. I suggest we stop voting in evil at a minimum and maybe rebel a maximum.

The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions, that I wish it to be always kept alive. It will often be exercised when wrong, but better so than not to be exercised at all. I like a little rebellion now and then.~Thomas Jefferson

God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. … And what country can preserve its liberties, if it’s rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure.~Thomas Jefferson

 

[Lief_Erikson]

Verisimilitude, that’s a right given us by man, not by God. Just like abortion or sex outside of wedlock, other rights from man, we may have a kind of legal permission to do it, but no moral right to do it.

Jesus, the apostles and the Early Church rejected it, so we should reject it too.

All authority comes from God and when Constantine ended the Christian persecutions in the 4th century he acted with the authority of God. The same is true today. If a military leader rises up in the totalitarian country that we are creating and devastates those who would kill children within the womb, I believe they would be carrying out the Will of the Father with military might.

If the military leader gained power in a legal manner, his power might be valid. If he uses illegal means to gain power, he has no right to it, for the Lord teaches us not to rebel.

If the military leader legally gained power within the US and then used law enforcement to punish those that commit abortion, I agree with you that that is just.

As for Iraq, the day we leave Iraq is the day they become little Iran. If we truly don’t want to have to re-fight the crusades, although many would say it never ended, we would never leave Iraq. Iraq needs to be opened up for Christian evangelization. Unfortunately, our country is no longer Christian.

Agreed.

 

[Verisimilitude]

That’s a right given us by man, not by God. Just like abortion or sex outside of wedlock, other rights from man, we may have a kind of legal permission to do it, but no moral right to do it.

Jesus, the apostles and the Early Church rejected it, so we should reject it too.

St. Paul used his Roman citizenship to his advantage. If Rome had a law like ours, do you think he might have said we were free to excercise that right if it met the same conditions of what we accept as the Just War criteria that is supported by the Church?

 

[Lief_Erikson]

St. Paul used his Roman citizenship to his advantage.

Sure, because doing so did not contradict the teachings of the Lord. He said nothing against using Roman citizenship. He (and Peter and Paul) did say something against rebellion.

If Rome had a law like ours, do you think he might have said we were free to excercise that right if it met the same conditions of what we accept as the Just War criteria that is supported by the Church?

It’s impossible for rebellion to ever fall under the Just War criteria.

One of the criteria of the Just War Doctrine is:
“Only duly constituted public authorities may wage war.”

 

[Verisimilitude]

Sure, because doing so did not contradict the teachings of the Lord. He said nothing against using Roman citizenship. He (and Peter and Paul) did say something against rebellion.

It’s impossible for rebellion to ever fall under the Just War criteria.

One of the criteria of the Just War Doctrine is:
“Only duly constituted public authorities may wage war.”

Do you think the American Revolution doesn’t meet the Just War criteria? I think it does. It was rebellion against Britian who were the duly constituted public authorities in the Colonies.

 

[Steve40]

Is abortion legal?

No. Abortion is unconstitutional and therefore not legal. The government does not have the legal right to take away God given rights. Since the government did not give the right to live the government can not take that right away. Since the right to live is not under the government’s authority the government can not even define when the right begins or when the right ends. Existence is the only valid criteria to judge one’s right to life.

In God We Trust. Belief in God is US government policy because our country is founded upon the understanding that there are certain rights that come from God and not from the government. Life is one of those rights. The US Supreme Court over stepped their authority as understood from the founding or our nation and the laws of our nation. Abortion is illegal.

 

[Al_Masetti]

It would be a misuse of the military to use it against US citizens.
Also, abortion is currently the law of the land. What should we do besides make abortion illegal and then prosecute those that continue the (then illegal) practice.

A judge in NJ some years ago referred to abortion as a “legal execution”.

 

[Verisimilitude]

No. Abortion is unconstitutional and therefore not legal. The government does not have the legal right to take away God given rights. Since the government did not give the right to live the government can not take that right away. Since the right to live is not under the government’s authority the government can not even define when the right begins or when the right ends. Existence is the only valid criteria to judge one’s right to life.

I agree. Very good answer. I wonder if the one I posed it to will think the same?

In God We Trust. Belief in God is US government policy because our country is founded upon the understanding that there are certain rights that come from God and not from the government. Life is one of those rights. The US Supreme Court over stepped their authority as understood from the founding or our nation and the laws of our nation. Abortion is illegal.

I don’t think belief in God is policy as much as the Founders acknowlege Life and Liberty do not come from men and governments. The US Supreme Court is the Judicial branch and forbidden to make law which is reserved to the Legislative branch. Roe v Wade is unconstitutional and abortion is immoral.

 

[RobHom]

I will answer the OP’s primary question: No, I would not support any action to use the Armed Forces of this country to function as a “police force”. First and foremost…it is not the duty of the US Military to “police” the US. It is a “Soldier’s” duty to uphold and protect the Constitution against all invaders foreign and domestic, but moreover a Soldier’s duty does not include being a cop, unless he or she is “Military Police”.

Further, such an action would be a direct violation of the “Posse Comitatus Act” of 1878. Here is a “layman’s description” of the Act, its purposes, background, et al. It was written by a Judge Advocate General Lawyer who is a Major in the US Army Reserve. The bottom line is that the Act was legislated to prevent the use of US Forces from being used to “enforce the laws”. In other words, it would be “un-Constitutional” to do so.
homelandsecurity.org/journal/articles/Trebilcock.htm

Whether you agree or not, I don’t think some of you might understand the mentality of the soldier. We were trained to obey “legal & moral orders” given by duly appointed superiors. You cannot force a soldier to obey an order that is not legal. Nor can you force a soldier to obey an order that is immoral.

The only way to resolve the abortion issue is to legislate its end. I despise abortion. But I have a question: If so many Americans are against it…why haven’t there been petitions drawn and signed to force a Constitutional Referendum?

 

[Lief_Erikson]

Do you think the American Revolution doesn’t meet the Just War criteria? I think it does. It was rebellion against Britian who were the duly constituted public authorities in the Colonies.

Exactly, and therefore it doesn’t meet the Just War criteria. The revolutionaries were rebels, not duly constituted public authorities. The Just War’s requirement that only duly constituted public authorities can declare war automatically eliminates any claim to moral validity that anyone supporting violent rebellion might make.

Also, even if we left the Just War Doctrine aside, compare the reasons for war that the American colonists had with the reasons for war that the Early Church had. The Early Church under Roman rule had FAR better justification for war than the colonists, whose motivations tended to be the desires for more money and more rights. The Early Church, on the other hand, accepted that its members be tortured to death by an unjust government rather than rebel. They had a better justification for war than anyone has ever had, yet it refused to rebel. Because we are Christians before we are Americans, theirs is the example we should be trying to follow.