“Roe was egregiously wrong from the start,” Alito writes. The entire draft opinion can be read below:
(www.scribd.com)
🏆 WINS OF THE DAY 🏆
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (243)
sorted by:
No, it's not a states right issue, just like slavery was never truly a "states rights" issue because such criminal act is a crime against nature, a violation of the most basic natural rights to liberty and property in one's one being and existence. No amount of people, at any level, get to vote to deny any one else these basic God-given rights.
That is why the basic right of LIFE is protected for ALL people, including the unborn PERSON, by the Constitution under the 14th Amendment and 5th Amendment.
The evil people,of Seattle, even if a majority within that region, have NO right to vote to permit evil upon other citizens of the United States.
As Lincoln so aptly put it, "'a house divided against itself cannot stand' [...] It will become all one thing, ot all the other."
It's no accident that the preamble to the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, claims that the right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness", is the foundation for all our rights, with life being the utmost right; all other rights are not possible without life.
It is up to the people to decide that collectively. Do you believe in the death penalty? That requires a suspension of rights, which can easily be twisted -- and does -- in favor of the leftists, and that gets us in this situation.
At least if you leave it to the states to sort out at an individual level, you never have to deal with the looming pressure of another state influencing yours.
So now, if abortion is further cemented with this ruling due to pressures from the resident and his Gestapo and guerilla whores known as AntiFA, then all states have to adhere to it.
That is why it's an issue for the states to decide. Not every ruling will go the way of freedom or morality in this government. They don't give a shit about you, or me, or our feelings.
But at least if it were a state's rights issue, they couldn't be compelled by the federal government to do it.
No, it's not up to the people to collectively do as such... this country is NOT a democracy. Please take that neocon collectivist shit elsewhere. The USA is a constitutional republic founded on the rule of law. Said law protects the rights of the unborn persons whose only "crime" is their mere existence.
Capital punishment has nothing to do with this argument. Murderers are criminals. Unborn children are not. Stay on topic.
The federal government must enforce the law (including Public Law 108-212) and the Constitution, no matter whatever states might wish to disregard said law and Constitution.
Where in the constitution does it say that criminality suspends the right to life? His argument is directly related, if not more paramount, considering the conscious nature of the person being murdered.
A murderer suspends his right to life when he takes someone else's life as in accordance with natural law. It's that fucking simple.
A child in the womb cannot commit a murder, unlike an adult outside of the womb. A murderer commits a crime. An unborn child has committed no crime. Comparison is logically fallacious.
But to answer your "where in the Constitution" question, as if any crayon eating retard shouldn't already comprehend basic natural law....
"[no person shall] be deprived of LIFE, liberty, or property, without due process of law."
If due process IS followed, a person duly convicted of a crime CAN be deprived of property (fine), liberty (prison) or life (execution) as punishment.
Get out shill.
Is first-degree murder being illegal a state's rights issue and up to the people to collectively decide?