AuH20
06-11-2015, 12:58 PM
It's a shame he never made it in North Carolina. IMHO he would have been a better senator than Rand, which is high praise.
http://www.mikechurch.com/liberty-institute/liberty/dr-greg-brannon-no-liberty-is-possible-without-right-to-life/
During the mid 1930s, the German government passed a law that considered Jewish people to be “sub-humans”. Therefore, they lost their ‘personhood’ within society at large. We all know what occurred after that…the Holocaust. In German, the word “untermensh” means “under man or sub-human”. This term was applied by the Nazi government to persons they deemed inferior such as the Jewish, Romanians, and Slavs. Untermensh became the law of the land. The Nuremberg Race Laws of 1935 was introduced into law in Germany. The people that they felt were subhuman, were no longer afforded the rights of the citizens. The law was a direct result of the government replacing our Creator in the hearts & minds of the German citizenry.
The word ‘fetus’ actually means, “Viviparous” or “from life”. In Roman law, the term could be used to describe a child up to the age of adulthood. By changing the meaning of this word from being a person, to not being a person, detracts from what the word was initially meant to describe. When we change the meaning of a word to fit our needs, the results can and most times are, deadly to the most innocent among us.
The Declaration of Independence does not only declare to England that the thirteen original States should be free, but that all men are free. Although our government is secular, out founders based this country on Judeo Christian beliefs. The core belief is that all men are created equal. Our government’s only role is to protect the individual from the collective, so that each one of us has the opportunity to reach his or her highest potential.
Prior to the decision of Roe v. Wade, was the Griswold case in Connecticut in 1966. This case, which went to the Supreme Court, discussed the issue of birth control. Where in the Constitution is there any mention of birth control-it isn't! In Roe v. Wade the court looked at that case and reviewed the First, Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments to find what’s called ‘penumbra’, and interpreted this to mean that a person’s privacy can lead them to take an innocent life. The vote was seven to two. Surprisingly to many, five of the justices who voted for legalization of abortion were Republicans! Paraphrasing Justice Byron White’s dissent, he stated that the Supreme Court should have never heard this case, as it has no Constitutional standing. This flies in the face of the notion that we must vote for any Republican president, then hope and pray that we have five people on the Supreme Court that will reverse this decision. Our founders did not give us a Constitution that binds us to men’s wishes. They did just the opposite. What we are now witnessing in the Supreme Court and with other progressives is the rule of men. As John Adams said, “We are not a nation of men, we are a nation of laws”. It is either the rule or man or the rule of law, and our founding fathers built a nation that was based on God’s natural law.
How does abortion have anything to do with slavery in American history? In 1850, The Fugitive Slave Law was passed which stated that any Caucasian could claim any black human being as a fugitive slave and take them back for bounty. Joshua Glover was a slave from Missouri who escaped to Wisconsin and said he wasn’t leaving. The Wisconsin legislature and the Wisconsin Supreme Court said he was a human being, therefore free. The United States Supreme Court unanimously said that he (the property) must be returned to “his owner”. In other words, in the decision of the Supreme Court, the Federal Government is superior to the states. The State of Wisconsin said 'no', claiming states rights were superior, which an example of nullification. This led to the famous case of Ableman Booth in 1859. In this case, (which was unanimously decided by the U.S. Supreme Court), the U.S. Court decided that it was superior to the State Court. This is a clear example of ‘usurpation’ of power by the Federal government over State sovereignty. There are no amendments that give the Supreme Court power to legislate and make law from the bench. The Supreme Court is bound to its duties as stated in the Constitution. A law is not a law if it’s unconstitutional and if it’s not based on God’s natural law. A human being -infant or slave is NEVER private property. Therefore all men (and women) regardless of age, color of skin or creed are created free.
In 1866 Congress passed a law called the Civil Rights Act of 1866. It said that we are recognizing that ALL men are of God’s creation. All men have life, liberty and property. Then in 1868, these became the words of the Fourteenth Amendment. To paraphrase Justice Miller in 1873: if you ever use the Fourteenth Amendment for any other reason, to manipulate for other causes then we detract and degrade what it was intended for: to recognize that ALL human beings are made in God’s image.
Let's examine the science of DNA. After conception, there is cardiac activity at day 18, with a closed circuit system pumping heart by day 21.We know there is neural activity on the spinal cord approximately day twenty. We know that every organ is developed by week nine and simply grows from that point forward. Again our life fingerprint begins at conception. Let’s err on the side of innocence. There was a sanctity of life bill in 1996 by Congressman Stockman from Texas that had no support. In 2007, Congressman Paul had a sanctity of life bill which had no support. In 2013 Congressman Broun from Georgia had a sanctity of life bill which had no support. So we can confidently say that the Federal government is not going to protect the unborn. Nevertheless, State legislatures must hold the federal government accountable to Article I Section 8. Period. This is not a social issue. This is a moral issue that has a constitutional answer. The Fifth Amendment states that no life will be taken without due process. How about the baby in the womb? Who is speaking for them? Who is speaking for them?
Peter Singer is a bioethics professor at Princeton, an atheist who believes in abortion, admits that life begins at conception but continues, 'who cares’ if it isn’t beneficial to society? That’s Plato’s definition of society, not ours. By changing the meaning of persons, fetuses, humans, we have followed a path to this destruction. Today’s science is clear. I have never had a woman come into my OB/GYN and say, “Let me see my fetus" during an ultra sound visit. They always say, “Can we me see my baby?" Or as my wife used to say when she was pregnant, " Can we visit our baby?"
Patrick Henry, George Mason and others warned us about corrupt men giving implied powers to the Constitution. The ratification notes are key to this. The sovereign the states did not grant the federal government to have unanimous power. James Iredell of North Carolina wrote in March 1788, “If Congress, under pretense of exercising the power delegated to them, should, in fact, by the exercise of any other power, usurp upon the rights of the different Legislatures, or any private citizens, the people will be exactly in the same situation as if there had been an express provision against such power…It would be an act of tyranny.” James Wilson suggested that that the Necessary and Proper Clause, “‘gives no more or other powers’ than those enumerated in Article I Section 8.” George Nicholas stated in the Virginia Ratifying Convention that, “The clause which was affectedly called the sweeping clause contained no new grant of power…if it had been added at the end of every one of the enumerated powers, instead of being inserted at the end of all, it would have been obvious to anyone that it was no augmentation of power…As it would grant no new power if inserted at the end of each clause, it could not when subjoined to the whole.” Archibald McClain of North Carolina said, “If Congress should make a law beyond the powers and the spirit of the Constitution, should we not say to Congress, ‘You have no authority to make this law. There are limits beyond which you cannot go. You cannot exceed the power prescribed by the Constitution. You are amenable to us for your conduct. This act is unconstitutional. We will disregard it, and punish you for the attempt.’” The clear answer is in Article VI, clause 2 of the Constitution that states that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land and pursuance thereof. These great men still speak truth from beyond the tomb.
http://www.mikechurch.com/liberty-institute/liberty/dr-greg-brannon-no-liberty-is-possible-without-right-to-life/
During the mid 1930s, the German government passed a law that considered Jewish people to be “sub-humans”. Therefore, they lost their ‘personhood’ within society at large. We all know what occurred after that…the Holocaust. In German, the word “untermensh” means “under man or sub-human”. This term was applied by the Nazi government to persons they deemed inferior such as the Jewish, Romanians, and Slavs. Untermensh became the law of the land. The Nuremberg Race Laws of 1935 was introduced into law in Germany. The people that they felt were subhuman, were no longer afforded the rights of the citizens. The law was a direct result of the government replacing our Creator in the hearts & minds of the German citizenry.
The word ‘fetus’ actually means, “Viviparous” or “from life”. In Roman law, the term could be used to describe a child up to the age of adulthood. By changing the meaning of this word from being a person, to not being a person, detracts from what the word was initially meant to describe. When we change the meaning of a word to fit our needs, the results can and most times are, deadly to the most innocent among us.
The Declaration of Independence does not only declare to England that the thirteen original States should be free, but that all men are free. Although our government is secular, out founders based this country on Judeo Christian beliefs. The core belief is that all men are created equal. Our government’s only role is to protect the individual from the collective, so that each one of us has the opportunity to reach his or her highest potential.
Prior to the decision of Roe v. Wade, was the Griswold case in Connecticut in 1966. This case, which went to the Supreme Court, discussed the issue of birth control. Where in the Constitution is there any mention of birth control-it isn't! In Roe v. Wade the court looked at that case and reviewed the First, Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments to find what’s called ‘penumbra’, and interpreted this to mean that a person’s privacy can lead them to take an innocent life. The vote was seven to two. Surprisingly to many, five of the justices who voted for legalization of abortion were Republicans! Paraphrasing Justice Byron White’s dissent, he stated that the Supreme Court should have never heard this case, as it has no Constitutional standing. This flies in the face of the notion that we must vote for any Republican president, then hope and pray that we have five people on the Supreme Court that will reverse this decision. Our founders did not give us a Constitution that binds us to men’s wishes. They did just the opposite. What we are now witnessing in the Supreme Court and with other progressives is the rule of men. As John Adams said, “We are not a nation of men, we are a nation of laws”. It is either the rule or man or the rule of law, and our founding fathers built a nation that was based on God’s natural law.
How does abortion have anything to do with slavery in American history? In 1850, The Fugitive Slave Law was passed which stated that any Caucasian could claim any black human being as a fugitive slave and take them back for bounty. Joshua Glover was a slave from Missouri who escaped to Wisconsin and said he wasn’t leaving. The Wisconsin legislature and the Wisconsin Supreme Court said he was a human being, therefore free. The United States Supreme Court unanimously said that he (the property) must be returned to “his owner”. In other words, in the decision of the Supreme Court, the Federal Government is superior to the states. The State of Wisconsin said 'no', claiming states rights were superior, which an example of nullification. This led to the famous case of Ableman Booth in 1859. In this case, (which was unanimously decided by the U.S. Supreme Court), the U.S. Court decided that it was superior to the State Court. This is a clear example of ‘usurpation’ of power by the Federal government over State sovereignty. There are no amendments that give the Supreme Court power to legislate and make law from the bench. The Supreme Court is bound to its duties as stated in the Constitution. A law is not a law if it’s unconstitutional and if it’s not based on God’s natural law. A human being -infant or slave is NEVER private property. Therefore all men (and women) regardless of age, color of skin or creed are created free.
In 1866 Congress passed a law called the Civil Rights Act of 1866. It said that we are recognizing that ALL men are of God’s creation. All men have life, liberty and property. Then in 1868, these became the words of the Fourteenth Amendment. To paraphrase Justice Miller in 1873: if you ever use the Fourteenth Amendment for any other reason, to manipulate for other causes then we detract and degrade what it was intended for: to recognize that ALL human beings are made in God’s image.
Let's examine the science of DNA. After conception, there is cardiac activity at day 18, with a closed circuit system pumping heart by day 21.We know there is neural activity on the spinal cord approximately day twenty. We know that every organ is developed by week nine and simply grows from that point forward. Again our life fingerprint begins at conception. Let’s err on the side of innocence. There was a sanctity of life bill in 1996 by Congressman Stockman from Texas that had no support. In 2007, Congressman Paul had a sanctity of life bill which had no support. In 2013 Congressman Broun from Georgia had a sanctity of life bill which had no support. So we can confidently say that the Federal government is not going to protect the unborn. Nevertheless, State legislatures must hold the federal government accountable to Article I Section 8. Period. This is not a social issue. This is a moral issue that has a constitutional answer. The Fifth Amendment states that no life will be taken without due process. How about the baby in the womb? Who is speaking for them? Who is speaking for them?
Peter Singer is a bioethics professor at Princeton, an atheist who believes in abortion, admits that life begins at conception but continues, 'who cares’ if it isn’t beneficial to society? That’s Plato’s definition of society, not ours. By changing the meaning of persons, fetuses, humans, we have followed a path to this destruction. Today’s science is clear. I have never had a woman come into my OB/GYN and say, “Let me see my fetus" during an ultra sound visit. They always say, “Can we me see my baby?" Or as my wife used to say when she was pregnant, " Can we visit our baby?"
Patrick Henry, George Mason and others warned us about corrupt men giving implied powers to the Constitution. The ratification notes are key to this. The sovereign the states did not grant the federal government to have unanimous power. James Iredell of North Carolina wrote in March 1788, “If Congress, under pretense of exercising the power delegated to them, should, in fact, by the exercise of any other power, usurp upon the rights of the different Legislatures, or any private citizens, the people will be exactly in the same situation as if there had been an express provision against such power…It would be an act of tyranny.” James Wilson suggested that that the Necessary and Proper Clause, “‘gives no more or other powers’ than those enumerated in Article I Section 8.” George Nicholas stated in the Virginia Ratifying Convention that, “The clause which was affectedly called the sweeping clause contained no new grant of power…if it had been added at the end of every one of the enumerated powers, instead of being inserted at the end of all, it would have been obvious to anyone that it was no augmentation of power…As it would grant no new power if inserted at the end of each clause, it could not when subjoined to the whole.” Archibald McClain of North Carolina said, “If Congress should make a law beyond the powers and the spirit of the Constitution, should we not say to Congress, ‘You have no authority to make this law. There are limits beyond which you cannot go. You cannot exceed the power prescribed by the Constitution. You are amenable to us for your conduct. This act is unconstitutional. We will disregard it, and punish you for the attempt.’” The clear answer is in Article VI, clause 2 of the Constitution that states that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land and pursuance thereof. These great men still speak truth from beyond the tomb.