|
americanfreepress.org� in association with the Liberty Project� presents |
|
associalisticpress.com� Rant May 23 2003 |
|
Back to the ap | The ap archives | Contact the ap | ap Retractions | tha malcontent |
|
a malcontent rant� 05.23.2003
Abortion Rights Vs Gun Rights... A Rant.
By
tha malcontent
(Direct
Descendent of the Founding Fathers! - tha malcontent)
(ap) - Somehow, Liberals can find individual "Abortions Rights" in the Constitution, but they can't seem to find individual "Gun Rights" specifically, or even generally in most cases.
Here is my submission for individual "Gun Rights" in the Constitution as simple as I can put it:
The First and the Second Amendments to the Constitution, and the opening volley of the Bill of Rights as Authored by James Madison, for reference:
Amendment I: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Amendment II: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
The Left ignorantly claims that because of the punctuation in the Second Amendment, that only the "Militia" has a right to keep and bear Arms, even though, in the First Amendment, "the right of the people" does not come until after the "Free Press" clause. Does this mean that a "Free Press" is not a "right of the people" because Madison did not specifically write, "the right of the people to a Free Press shall not be infringed" when penning the First Amendment?
Of course not.
As the Supreme Court has found, and common sense dictates, "the people", wherever it is found in the Constitution and it's 27 Amendments, has the same meaning, and it is very simply what it says in the binding and sealing of the Bill of Rights in the 10th Amendment: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
Now it's the "Pro-Choice" side's turn to explain their individual "Abortion Rights" to the rest of us in regard to the Constitution and it's 27 Amendments.
I want to know where the "Right" of one person in this society, to take the "unalienable rights" of another to "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness", as Jefferson so eloquently put it in the Declaration of Independence, actually exists in any Founding document.
Abortion ends Life and no one can honestly deny this Fact.
Now explain the individual's "right to Abortion" in regard to the Constitution please.
I am sure it is as easy as it was for me to explain the individual's "Gun Rights".
I submit that "Abortion rights" only exist because a Supreme Court created them.
"Rights" can only be added to the Constitution ONE WAY, and that is to convene a Constitutional Convention and Amend the Constitution, directly and clearly, as was done with the 15th and 19th Amendments in regard to acknowledging the Rights of Blacks (Men) and then Women (All races) to vote.
The Left knows better than to convene a Constitutional Convention on the issue of Abortion. It would never become an Amendment, and they know it, and that's why they had the Court do their dirty work for them!
It's easier to get a simple majority of 9 people (Supreme Court Justices), behind closed doors, to do your Liberal bidding, than it is to get the 535 Members of Congress, the President and the State Legislatures to go 2/3 your way, isn't it?
The Left sure loves the Supreme Court when it votes their way, or adds to the Constitution without the benefit of the Amending process.
But not when it struck down a Lower Court in late 2000 and stopped the inconsistent, and illegal, partial recounting of 4 of 67 counties in Florida... Then, it was wrong, wasn't it Liberals?
There was no modification or addition of "rights" to the Constitution as was the case in Roe Vs Wade, but it was still wrong, huh?
I will await a response and a Constitutional explanation of "Abortion Rights" from any of you who feel able to show me specifically where in that document that they are hiding, because I have yet to find them, and the Supreme Court of 30 years past's "logic" does not hold water with me to this day, and every day that passes it makes less and less sense based on the obvious suffering that developed babies in the womb are suffering due to this obscene practice, that so many on the Left refuse to witness with their own eyes and hearts, but seem to vehemently defend as "moral and right" in the eyes of the Law and the Constitution.
An honest look at Abortion, and an honest look inward, leads to only one conclusion about Abortion...
It's time for people to start being honest and debating this subject out in the open once again.
It is time for the "Free Press" to show "the people" what a Partial Birth Abortion is, after all, tax payers have funded thousands of these procedures, and if all they are is a medical procedure, then the Discovery Channel should have no more problem showing the procedure than they do showing open heart surgery.
Think about it... Honestly.
peace,
tha malcontent
|
|
Don't do what you're polled to do!� |
|
This web site is designed, maintained and edited by tha malcontent...
"what have you done for Liberty today?"
associalisticpress.com� is protected speech pursuant to the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States and is faithfully enforced by tha malcontent via the Second Amendment to that same Constitution. Any reproduction or redistribution of this article will be seen as an awakening of a Patriot in this Great Republic by tha malcontent, and subsequently applauded! (copyrightwing 2000-2003)
associalisticpress.com�
an americanfreepress� organization 2000-2003
The ap� & The afp�
- the Liberty Project� -
|
|
Back to the ap | The ap archives | Contact the ap | ap Retractions | tha malcontent |