| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"Melissa" |
| Date: |
18 Jul 2005 04:27:28 PM |
| Object: |
What recourse is there? |
From http://melissasliberty.blogspot.com/ :
Monday, July 18, 2005
What recourse is there?
"Since the protection of individual rights is the only proper
purpose of a government, it is the only proper subject of
legislation: all laws must be based on individual rights and
aimed at their protection." -- Ayn Rand
"…a wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from
injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to
regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and
shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned.
This is the sum of good government." -- Thomas Jefferson (1801)
"Individual rights are not subject to public vote; a majority has
no right to vote away the rights of a minority; the political
function of rights is precisely to protect minorities from
oppression by majorities ( and the smallest minority on earth is
the individual )." - Ayn Rand
It amazes me that the right to life is not recognized in our Bill
of Rights or in the main body of our Constitution.
Eric Rudolph was just sentenced to life in prison for the
bombings he did, and let me start out by saying that I think
those bombings were wrong, but he was trying to do something that
the government failed to do, protect human life, and he no doubt
felt that there was no recourse left. What did the government
fail to do? protect human life. There is no higher value to us as
humans, than our own lives.
"When you take away a man's life, you take away everything he
has, and everything he's ever going to have." -- from the movie
The Unforgiven, starring Clint Eastwood.
http://www.acpeds.org/index.cgi?CONTEXT=art&cat=10007&art=53
&BISKIT=3253433213
"Life Issues
When Human Life Begins
ABSTRACT. The American College of Pediatricians concurs with the
body of scientific evidence that human life begins at
conception—fertilization. This definition has been expounded
since prior to Roe v. Wade, but was not made available to the US
Supreme Court in 1973. Scientific and medical discoveries over
the past three decades have only verified and solidified this
age-old truth. At the completion of the process of fertilization,
the human creature emerges as a whole, genetically distinct,
individuated zygotic living human organism, a member of the
species homo sapiens, needing only the proper environment in
order to grow and develop. The difference between the individual
in its adult stage and in its zygotic stage is not one of
personhood but of development."
The rest of that article can be read at that site.
Abortion is the taking of a human life and there is no greater
reason for the existence of government than to protect human
lives from the initiation of force by others. What happens when
government fails at that task? What happens when human life
becomes subject to the mob rule of public vote, or the populist
activism of Supreme Court rulings?
What if the people of a country decided in a popular vote, that
it was ok to take the lives of all that country's Jews or blacks?
What if that country's Supreme Court, bowing to popular opinion,
upheld that decision? Does populist mob rule democracy make it
right to take a human life? To take millions per year?
Yet this is exactly the situation we face every year in this
country over the abortion issue. Medical science has proven that
human life begins at conception, yet the mob has voted in a
majority that it's ok to take the lives of the unborn, based
merely on the convenience or wishes of the mother or both
parents. Sometimes women are even threatened into such decisions
by their husbands.
So while I think the killing that Eric Rudolph did was wrong, I
also think the millions of killings that abortion does each year,
in the U.S. alone, are wrong. What makes them any better than
what Rudolph did? The fact that the democratic mob approves of
those killings and that the government keeps them legal? Is
legalized killing of innocent human life morally any different
than the illegal killing of innocent human life?
So I can certainly understand the frustration that Eric Rudolph,
and people like him experienced, though I don't condone his acts.
For when the people and their government fail to protect human
life, what other recourse is there?
--
Yours In Liberty, Melissa - Colorado, U.S.A.
http://melissasliberty.blogspot.com/
DOESN'T EVERYONE DESERVE A BILL OF RIGHTS?
The last best hope for a liberty.
A subscriber Bill of Individual Rights with the goal of enlisting
the support of hundreds of millions of people all over the world.
http://upalliance.blogspot.com/
http://upalliance.org/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Universal-Planetary-Alliance/
http://lakewoodcolorado.net/school.htm
.
|
|
| User: "Bert Hyman" |
|
| Title: Re: What recourse is there? |
18 Jul 2005 04:51:57 PM |
|
|
In news:Xns96979D4459630VoiceFreedomfreedomn@216.196.97.142 Melissa
<melissa@Colorado.xxx> wrote:
Eric Rudolph was just sentenced to life in prison for the
bombings he did, and let me start out by saying that I think
those bombings were wrong, but he was trying to do something that
the government failed to do, protect human life, ...
Ummm... *****.
He was a bloodthirsty murderer.
--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN bert@iphouse.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Grassroots American" |
|
| Title: Re: What recourse is there? |
18 Jul 2005 05:35:18 PM |
|
|
Bert Hyman <bert@iphouse.com> wrote :
In news:Xns96979D4459630VoiceFreedomfreedomn@216.196.97.142
Melissa
<melissa@Colorado.xxx> wrote:
Eric Rudolph was just sentenced to life in prison for the
bombings he did, and let me start out by saying that I think
those bombings were wrong, but he was trying to do something
that the government failed to do, protect human life, ...
Ummm... *****.
He was a bloodthirsty murderer.
He didn't just go around killing for no reason.
--
Grassroots
United States of America
.
|
|
|
| User: "mimus" |
|
| Title: Re: What recourse is there? |
18 Jul 2005 06:23:06 PM |
|
|
Grassroots American <Grassroots@USA-RULES.xxx> wrote:
Bert Hyman <bert@iphouse.com> wrote :
In news:Xns96979D4459630VoiceFreedomfreedomn@216.196.97.142
Melissa
<melissa@Colorado.xxx> wrote:
Eric Rudolph was just sentenced to life in prison for the
bombings he did, and let me start out by saying that I think
those bombings were wrong, but he was trying to do something
that the government failed to do, protect human life, ...
Ummm... *****.
He was a bloodthirsty murderer.
He didn't just go around killing for no reason.
No, just a bad one, to save all the zygotes.
Oh, the humanity!
--
Ma, comunque si sia, io non giudico né giudicherò
mai essere difetto difendere alcuna opinione con
le ragioni, sanza volervi usare o l'autorità
o la forza.
< Machiavelli
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bert Hyman" |
|
| Title: Re: What recourse is there? |
18 Jul 2005 05:53:20 PM |
|
|
In news:7bqdnWrLFrE7s0HfRVn-jA@forethought.net Grassroots American
<Grassroots@USA-RULES.xxx> wrote:
Bert Hyman <bert@iphouse.com> wrote :
In news:Xns96979D4459630VoiceFreedomfreedomn@216.196.97.142
Melissa
<melissa@Colorado.xxx> wrote:
Eric Rudolph was just sentenced to life in prison for the
bombings he did, and let me start out by saying that I think
those bombings were wrong, but he was trying to do something
that the government failed to do, protect human life, ...
Ummm... *****.
He was a bloodthirsty murderer.
He didn't just go around killing for no reason.
So? Do you think that just because he had a "reason", that he should get
to kill whomever he pleased?
Are you planing something yourself?
--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN bert@iphouse.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Grassroots American" |
|
| Title: Re: What recourse is there? |
18 Jul 2005 06:26:06 PM |
|
|
Bert Hyman <bert@iphouse.com> wrote :
In news:7bqdnWrLFrE7s0HfRVn-jA@forethought.net Grassroots
American
<Grassroots@USA-RULES.xxx> wrote:
Bert Hyman <bert@iphouse.com> wrote :
In news:Xns96979D4459630VoiceFreedomfreedomn@216.196.97.142
Melissa
<melissa@Colorado.xxx> wrote:
Eric Rudolph was just sentenced to life in prison for the
bombings he did, and let me start out by saying that I
think those bombings were wrong, but he was trying to do
something that the government failed to do, protect human
life, ...
Ummm... *****.
He was a bloodthirsty murderer.
He didn't just go around killing for no reason.
So? Do you think that just because he had a "reason", that he
should get to kill whomever he pleased?
Never said that moron!
--
Grassroots
United States of America
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bert Hyman" |
|
| Title: Re: What recourse is there? |
18 Jul 2005 06:35:52 PM |
|
|
In news:iZadnf7yt6YTp0HfRVn-sA@forethought.net Grassroots American
<Grassroots@USA-RULES.xxx> wrote:
Bert Hyman <bert@iphouse.com> wrote :
In news:7bqdnWrLFrE7s0HfRVn-jA@forethought.net Grassroots
American
<Grassroots@USA-RULES.xxx> wrote:
Bert Hyman <bert@iphouse.com> wrote :
In news:Xns96979D4459630VoiceFreedomfreedomn@216.196.97.142
Melissa
<melissa@Colorado.xxx> wrote:
Eric Rudolph was just sentenced to life in prison for the
bombings he did, and let me start out by saying that I
think those bombings were wrong, but he was trying to do
something that the government failed to do, protect human
life, ...
Ummm... *****.
He was a bloodthirsty murderer.
He didn't just go around killing for no reason.
So? Do you think that just because he had a "reason", that he
should get to kill whomever he pleased?
Never said that moron!
Then how was I to take your comment, oh wise one?
Statements like that are usually offered in way of excuse; what was your
intent?
--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN bert@iphouse.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ms Voice of freedom" |
|
| Title: Re: What recourse is there? |
18 Jul 2005 07:05:43 PM |
|
|
Bert Hyman <bert@iphouse.com> wrote :
In news:iZadnf7yt6YTp0HfRVn-sA@forethought.net Grassroots
American
<Grassroots@USA-RULES.xxx> wrote:
Bert Hyman <bert@iphouse.com> wrote :
In news:7bqdnWrLFrE7s0HfRVn-jA@forethought.net Grassroots
American
<Grassroots@USA-RULES.xxx> wrote:
Bert Hyman <bert@iphouse.com> wrote :
In
news:Xns96979D4459630VoiceFreedomfreedomn@216.196.97.142
Melissa
<melissa@Colorado.xxx> wrote:
Eric Rudolph was just sentenced to life in prison for the
bombings he did, and let me start out by saying that I
think those bombings were wrong, but he was trying to do
something that the government failed to do, protect human
life, ...
Ummm... *****.
He was a bloodthirsty murderer.
He didn't just go around killing for no reason.
So? Do you think that just because he had a "reason", that
he should get to kill whomever he pleased?
Never said that moron!
Then how was I to take your comment, oh wise one?
Statements like that are usually offered in way of excuse;
what was your intent?
The article gave disclaimers that such violence wasn't condoned
by the writer. Did you read it?
--
Ms Liberty - Colorado, USA
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bert Hyman" |
|
| Title: Re: What recourse is there? |
18 Jul 2005 08:09:41 PM |
|
|
In news:Xns9697B8184D8E3MsVoiceofFreedomfree@216.196.97.142 Ms Voice of
freedom <MsVoiceofFreedom@freedom.XYZ> wrote:
Bert Hyman <bert@iphouse.com> wrote :
In news:iZadnf7yt6YTp0HfRVn-sA@forethought.net Grassroots
American
<Grassroots@USA-RULES.xxx> wrote:
Bert Hyman <bert@iphouse.com> wrote :
In news:7bqdnWrLFrE7s0HfRVn-jA@forethought.net Grassroots
American
<Grassroots@USA-RULES.xxx> wrote:
Bert Hyman <bert@iphouse.com> wrote :
In
news:Xns96979D4459630VoiceFreedomfreedomn@216.196.97.142
Melissa
<melissa@Colorado.xxx> wrote:
Eric Rudolph was just sentenced to life in prison for the
bombings he did, and let me start out by saying that I
think those bombings were wrong, but he was trying to do
something that the government failed to do, protect human
life, ...
Ummm... *****.
He was a bloodthirsty murderer.
He didn't just go around killing for no reason.
So? Do you think that just because he had a "reason", that
he should get to kill whomever he pleased?
Never said that moron!
Then how was I to take your comment, oh wise one?
Statements like that are usually offered in way of excuse;
what was your intent?
The article gave disclaimers that such violence wasn't condoned
by the writer. Did you read it?
I'm not refering to any article. I asked the poster what he meant by his
statement "He didn't just go around killing for no reason."
Did he mean that if he had a "reason", then it was ok for him to "go
around killing"?
What do you think?
You said that he was acting "to protect human life"; do you think it was
OK for him to "go around killing"?
Where do you stand?
With the mass murderer or with the humans?
--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN bert@iphouse.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ms Voice of freedom" |
|
| Title: Re: What recourse is there? |
19 Jul 2005 11:51:59 AM |
|
|
Bert Hyman <bert@iphouse.com> wrote :
In news:Xns9697B8184D8E3MsVoiceofFreedomfree@216.196.97.142 Ms
Voice of freedom <MsVoiceofFreedom@freedom.XYZ> wrote:
Bert Hyman <bert@iphouse.com> wrote :
In news:iZadnf7yt6YTp0HfRVn-sA@forethought.net Grassroots
American
<Grassroots@USA-RULES.xxx> wrote:
Bert Hyman <bert@iphouse.com> wrote :
In news:7bqdnWrLFrE7s0HfRVn-jA@forethought.net Grassroots
American
<Grassroots@USA-RULES.xxx> wrote:
Bert Hyman <bert@iphouse.com> wrote :
In
news:Xns96979D4459630VoiceFreedomfreedomn@216.196.97.142
Melissa
<melissa@Colorado.xxx> wrote:
Eric Rudolph was just sentenced to life in prison for
the bombings he did, and let me start out by saying
that I think those bombings were wrong, but he was
trying to do something that the government failed to
do, protect human life, ...
Ummm... *****.
He was a bloodthirsty murderer.
He didn't just go around killing for no reason.
So? Do you think that just because he had a "reason", that
he should get to kill whomever he pleased?
Never said that moron!
Then how was I to take your comment, oh wise one?
Statements like that are usually offered in way of excuse;
what was your intent?
The article gave disclaimers that such violence wasn't
condoned by the writer. Did you read it?
I'm not refering to any article. I asked the poster what he
meant by his statement "He didn't just go around killing for
no reason."
Did he mean that if he had a "reason", then it was ok for him
to "go around killing"?
What do you think?
You said that he was acting "to protect human life"; do you
think it was OK for him to "go around killing"?
Where do you stand?
With the mass murderer or with the humans?
I think abortion is killing a human life. If it was illegal to do
that, then the government would be doing it's job of protecting
human life. Being the mob and the Supreme Court years ago have
ruled that it's ok to kill humans with abortion, something like 7
million human lives are being snuffed each year by it.
People like him did things that were wrong out of frustration
with a government and people ( the mob rule democracy ) that
refuses to recognize and protect human life. But like my grandma
always used to say, two wrongs don't make a right, and he was as
wrong for killing people as the abortionists are. But that still
leaves 7 million human lives being snuffed in the U.S. every
year.
--
Ms Liberty - Colorado, USA
.
|
|
|
| User: "I. R. Heller" |
|
| Title: Re: What recourse is there? |
21 Jul 2005 06:25:02 AM |
|
|
"Ms Voice of freedom" <MsVoiceofFreedom@freedom.XYZ> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:Xns96986E9004BF4MsVoiceofFreedomfree@216.196.97.142...
Bert Hyman <bert@iphouse.com> wrote :
In news:Xns9697B8184D8E3MsVoiceofFreedomfree@216.196.97.142 Ms
Voice of freedom <MsVoiceofFreedom@freedom.XYZ> wrote:
Bert Hyman <bert@iphouse.com> wrote :
In news:iZadnf7yt6YTp0HfRVn-sA@forethought.net Grassroots
American
<Grassroots@USA-RULES.xxx> wrote:
Bert Hyman <bert@iphouse.com> wrote :
In news:7bqdnWrLFrE7s0HfRVn-jA@forethought.net Grassroots
American
<Grassroots@USA-RULES.xxx> wrote:
Bert Hyman <bert@iphouse.com> wrote :
In
news:Xns96979D4459630VoiceFreedomfreedomn@216.196.97.142
Melissa
<melissa@Colorado.xxx> wrote:
Eric Rudolph was just sentenced to life in prison for
the bombings he did, and let me start out by saying
that I think those bombings were wrong, but he was
trying to do something that the government failed to
do, protect human life, ...
Ummm... *****.
He was a bloodthirsty murderer.
He didn't just go around killing for no reason.
So? Do you think that just because he had a "reason", that
he should get to kill whomever he pleased?
Never said that moron!
Then how was I to take your comment, oh wise one?
Statements like that are usually offered in way of excuse;
what was your intent?
The article gave disclaimers that such violence wasn't
condoned by the writer. Did you read it?
I'm not refering to any article. I asked the poster what he
meant by his statement "He didn't just go around killing for
no reason."
Did he mean that if he had a "reason", then it was ok for him
to "go around killing"?
What do you think?
You said that he was acting "to protect human life"; do you
think it was OK for him to "go around killing"?
Where do you stand?
With the mass murderer or with the humans?
I think abortion is killing a human life. If it was illegal to do
that, then the government would be doing it's job of protecting
human life. Being the mob and the Supreme Court years ago have
ruled that it's ok to kill humans with abortion, something like 7
million human lives are being snuffed each year by it.
People like him did things that were wrong out of frustration
with a government and people ( the mob rule democracy ) that
refuses to recognize and protect human life. But like my grandma
always used to say, two wrongs don't make a right, and he was as
wrong for killing people as the abortionists are. But that still
leaves 7 million human lives being snuffed in the U.S. every
year.
--
Ms Liberty - Colorado, USA
Hello Ms. Liberty:
You have chosen a noble name for yourself,
HOWEVER you seem to grant liberty only for YOUR beliefs,
i.e.: the killings going on in other countries of innocent little humans,
the poisoning of the rest of the humans in that country, including
our own military personnel, which is going to suffer the consequences
for decades to come. - Have you ever thought of those ??
Question: are you young enough to still conceive, say having your mate
having served in the army in the DU-infected areas, have a child with
DU-caused deformities. Do you have the means to treat and accomodate
this child ??
Note: ALL participants in that war, like all the participants in the
previous war
on that country have been exposed to DU-infected materials.
There is plenty of information about the most likely effects of radiation
poisoning on the offspring of the exposed;
ask any medical professional, any (Military) hospital.
The government will not acknowledge their responsibility - again - as after
the other military-caused illnesses. I personally have met soldiers who were
refused treatment, as the government did not admit to their part in the
caused illnesses, after exposure shsortly after WWII the atomic bombing of
the islands,
the fallout caused deformities in the children, fathered by those soldiers
who had been sent on boats to "observe" the immediate effects;
or the effects of Agent Orange, and on, and on.
Think about it.
It could just be, that you will one day fight FOR the possibility of
abortion
after it has been detected in the early embryonic stages that the possible
little beings might become a catastrophe for the families, the State and the
Country.
Let me clarify my position:
Abortion should certainly NEVER be used as a form of birth-control - EVER.
So much on this subject. - Its worth thinking about. -
FYI: read also: http://www.iacenter.org/du-warcrime.htm
Be well,
I.R.Heller
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "mimus" |
|
| Title: Re: What recourse is there? |
18 Jul 2005 04:42:48 PM |
|
|
Melissa <melissa@Colorado.xxx> wrote:
<snip good start and bad finish>
Anyone who considers a single cell-- viz., the fertilized egg-- to be a
human being is an idiot.
And anyone who wants to injure-- "punish"-- others over not allowing that
single cell to implant or grow is a thug.
--
Ma, comunque si sia, io non giudico né giudicherò
mai essere difetto difendere alcuna opinione con
le ragioni, sanza volervi usare o l'autorità
o la forza.
< Machiavelli
.
|
|
|
| User: "Melissa" |
|
| Title: Re: What recourse is there? |
18 Jul 2005 05:34:40 PM |
|
|
mimus <tinmimus99@hotmail.com> wrote :
Melissa <melissa@Colorado.xxx> wrote:
<snip good start and bad finish>
Anyone who considers a single cell-- viz., the fertilized
egg-- to be a human being is an idiot.
Tell that to the scientists.
--
Yours In Liberty, Melissa - Colorado, U.S.A.
http://melissasliberty.blogspot.com/
DOESN'T EVERYONE DESERVE A BILL OF RIGHTS?
The last best hope for a liberty.
A subscriber Bill of Individual Rights with the goal of enlisting
the support of hundreds of millions of people all over the world.
http://upalliance.blogspot.com/
http://upalliance.org/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Universal-Planetary-Alliance/
http://lakewoodcolorado.net/school.htm
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
Impeachment the only recourse that can halt coming Iran WAR - Are Dems up to task
Paul Wolfowitz "negotiating" a "departure settlement"? What's there to negotiate or settle - he abused the system, so he should just leave in disgrace.
I know that the Repubs really aren't interested In John Kerry's voting record where troops are concerned, but what the hell; let's put this out there anyway...
There is no REASON to FEAR - Only what is in your heart you must FEAR!!
Opposition to Alternative Energy: Duhh, what if there's no wind?
What Do You Want From Iraq, Americans? What Are You Doing There?
Now there's infighting between the FBI and Homeland Securtiy. What a mess.
What EPA? Is there one? Ask the Polluter-In-Chief.
| What's today's GOP good at? Well,...um... lessee.....there's campaigning...and...uh...................................
"Trouble, I Say There's Trouble Right Here In River City" and in every State, County, City and Town in America: WHAT ARE YOU VOTERS GONNA DO ABOUT IT?
Congressman Murtha on Cheney " I like guys who got five deferments and (have) never been there and send people to war, and then don't like to hear suggestions about what needs to be done,"
1) There would be 1200+ coalition troops alive. | Re: What if Bush hadn't invaded Iraq?
What happens over there affects us here (duh!)
What proof is there that Cheney donated his stock option profitsto charity?
Re: Always Watch What Homosexual Do, Not What They Say
|
|
|
