We Have a New Home! Please Click Below to Go to the New Freedom’s Lighthouse!


Blog Archive

Wednesday, December 9, 2009

Democrat Sen. Dianne Feinstein Says it is "Morally Correct" to Force Pro-Life Taxpayers to Pay for Abortion - Video 12/9/09

Here is video of Democrat Sen. Dianne Feinstein it is "morally correct" for pro-life taxpayers to be forced to pay for abortions. She said people are asked to pay for many things they don't agree with, and abortion should be no exception.

That's easy for someone who does not value the life of the unborn to say. But if you believe the unborn are living human beings, you don't want to pay for the destruction of an innocent human life. There's nothing "moral" or "correct" about it.


B. Johnson,  December 9, 2009 at 1:56 PM  

Although this issue goes far beyond opinion, Thomas Jefferson warned about morally bankrupt people like Sen. Feinstein.

"To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves and abhors, is sinful and tyrannical." --Thomas Jefferson: Bill for Religious Freedom, 1779. Papers 2:545

Here is why the USSC's legalization of abortion was a major constitutional scandal, IMO.

To begin with, given that the federal Constitution is silent about abortion, the 10th A. automatically reserves government power to regulate abortion to the states, not the federal government. So the USSC was wrong to ignore state sovereignty in Roe v. Wade.

Next, the problem with the USSC using its "magic glasses" to find abortion rights in the "wild card" 9th Amendment, applying them to the states via the 14th Amendment is the following. John Bingham, the main author of Sec. 1 of the 14th Amendment, had clarified that the 14th A. applied only constitutionally enumerated privileges and immunities to the states. See for yourself.

"Mr. Speaker, this House may safely follow the example of the makers of the Constitution and the builders of the Republic, by passing laws for enforcing all the privileges and immunities of the United States as guaranteed by the amended Constitution and expressly enumerated in the Constitution." --John Bingham, Congressional Globe (1871)

So based on Bingham's words, the only way that the USSC could have applied abortion rights to the states through the 14th A., IMO, is if the states had amended the Constitution prior to Roe v. Wade to expressly protect abortion rights.

In fact, in stark contrast to the USSC finding abortion rights in the 9th A., note that when Bingham officially clarified the scope and purpose of the 14th A. for the HoR, he read only the first eight amendments as examples of statutes containing rights which the 14th applied to the states, ignoring the 9th Amendment altogether.

So the USSC's so-called "right" to an abortion is an example of a constitutionally nonexistent right, IMO, scandalously established by the abuse of judicial power, as opposed to by state legislative powers to amend the Constitution like all of our other constitutional rights were established.

Finally, consider that while special-interest justices wrongly usurped 10th A. protected state power to regulate abortion to legalize abortion, the Court chose not to interfere in the Terri Schiavo case, citing the Founder's division of federal and state government powers. So corrupt justices are unwittingly practicing a double-standard with respect to arbitrarily respecting state sovereignty, IMO, as evidenced by so-called abortion rights and Terri.

B. Johnson,  December 9, 2009 at 2:05 PM  

Not only did corrupt justices wrongly ignore the Constitution, 10th A. protected state sovereignty in particular, when they scandalously legalized abortion, but abortion is arguably only the tip of the iceberg with Obamacare problems.

To begin with, the USSC has already decided that Congress has no business sticking its big nose into the medical practice.

“Direct control of medical practice in the states is obviously beyond the power of Congress.” –-Linder v. United States, 1925.

The USSC has also decided that Congress has no power to lay taxes in the name of state power issues.

"Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States." --Chief Justice Marshall, GIBBONS V. OGDEN, 1824.

So not only does corrupt Congress have no constitutional authority to regulate things like abortion and healthcare, but Congress never had the constitutional authority to lay taxes in the name of these things in the first place.

Congress is robbing US citizens!

And if you weren't already aware of this, corrupt DC Democrats are merely carrying on the dirty work of Constitution-ignoring socialist FDR and his New Deal programs by pushing Obamacare. FDR ultimately got his state sovereignty-ignoring programs established because he was able to nominate eight pro-big federal government, outcome-driven justices to the USSC.

Finally, the following words of Thomas Jefferson are appropriate for any official actions of the Oval Office and Congress which approve constitutionally unauthorized Obamacare and abortion funding.

“Where powers are assumed which have not been delegated, a nullification of the act is the rightful remedy.” –-Thomas Jefferson: Draft Kentucky Resolutions, 1798.

Larry S December 9, 2009 at 11:08 PM  

Since the Birfers crashed and burned in their quest for the Holy Grail, is this the latest rightwingnut fad: The (Ultra)Strict 10th Amendment Constructionist?

Proving, once again, that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

  © Blogger templates Newspaper III by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP