A Way to Stop Abortion

It's not a Constitutional Amendment, and it's not waiting for another opening on the Supreme Court so that a strict-constructionist can get appointed to overturn Roe vs. Wade. Phyllis Schlafly wrote about it in her book "The Supremacists" and there is actually a bill in Congress that was introduced that utilizes her strategy.

What is it? Have Congress pass a law that takes away the ability of the federal courts to rule on state laws that protect life. HR300 is also called the "We the People Act":

We the People Act - Prohibits the Supreme Court and each federal court from adjudicating any claim or relying on judicial decisions involving: (1) state or local laws, regulations, or policies concerning the free exercise or establishment of religion; (2) the right of privacy, including issues of sexual practices, orientation, or reproduction; or (3) the right to marry without regard to sex or sexual orientation where based upon equal protection of the laws.

Allows the Supreme Court and the federal courts to determine the constitutionality of federal statutes, administrative rules, or procedures in considering cases arising under the Constitution. Prohibits the Supreme Court and the federal courts from issuing any ruling that appropriates or expends money, imposes taxes, or otherwise interferes with the legislative functions or administrative discretion of the states.

Wow, take away subject matter jurisdiction and leave it to the states to decide. How come this has gotten no press at all? Probably because it would never pass in Congress. The reason why Congress would never pass legislation like this is because it would take away power at the federal level and return it to the states. Government has a hard time letting go once it gets a grip, whether it's our dollars or our civil liberties. Yuck.

Five Degrees of Moderate

Not quite siren worthy according to Drudge but a big deal to the "Values Voters" whom Huckabee has been gaining endorsements and momentum. Pilfered from the WSJ:

Phyllis Schlafly, president of the national Eagle Forum, is even more blunt. "He (Huckabee) destroyed the conservative movement in Arkansas, and left the Republican Party a shambles," she says. "Yet some of the same evangelicals who sold us on George W. Bush as a 'compassionate conservative' are now trying to sell us on Mike Huckabee."

Reaction from the Value Voters Debate

A couple of weeks ago, there was a GOP debate (more of a Q and A really) that had questions from the leaders of the "Values Voters". The distinguished questioners included Phyllis Schlafly (I'm a big fan of hers), and Joseph Farah (editor in chief of worldnetdaily.com). Worldnetdaily.com has literally been a daily stop for over a decade on my tour of websites that I frequent to get my fix since I'm an information junkie. You can watch the whole thing online here.

Janet Folger was also one of the panelists and has written her reaction and endorsement for President here. Here is what she said about Dr. Paul:

Here's what I saw: While he's been a courageous defender of the Constitution, Ron Paul had too many wrong answers at the Values Voter Debate to receive our support. Save your angry e-mails until you've seen the video of his podium lit "red" with "no votes" while everyone else voted "yes" to questions about whether they would protect disabled patients like Terri Schiavo from a starvation death, agree to prosecute all violators of the federal obscenity law, and support a trade policy with China contingent on improved human rights and quality standards.

Joe Glover of the Family Policy Network clarified it further when he asked Paul: "Many libertarians oppose laws against same-sex marriage, prostitution, and illegal drugs. Do you share this view?" Go watch it for yourself at http://www.valuesvoterdebate.com/. His answer was "yes," he's a libertarian and doesn't think the government has any business protecting marriage and human life. It was Thomas Jefferson who best outlined the role of government when he said, "The care of human life and not its destruction is the first and only legitimate object of good government." Mr. Paul, to protect human life is the only reason government exists – even if that human life is disabled and unable to ask for food and water themselves.

Same sex marriage, prostitution, abortion, illegal drugs. These are all issues that are of obvious importance to social conservatives (otherwise questions on these issues wouldn't have been asked multiple times). But what this much neglected wing of the GOP fails to recognize is that the tool with which they want to impose their values on others is the same tool that can and has been used against them by people who have different viewpoints.

Abortion is the classic case. By Supreme Court fiat, abortion was made legal across the country. Did individual states get to make the decision on their own by voting on it? Not at all. Is it the place of the individual states to make choices on life or death issues? Yes, states decide whether or not they can impose the death penalty. Why not abortion? What Roe vs. Wade did was take away the right and power of individual states to decide whether they wanted to kill babies or not. It sounds crude but it's true. How many innocents have died because of that usurpation of states rights by the federal government? Millions.

What Ron Paul advocates is returning the power of making the decision on whether abortion is legal or not to the states. Let them make the choice for themselves.

The "values voters" raise so many important issues. I'm going continue this in another post.