Go to: =>
TOP Page;
What's New? Page;
ROAD MAP;
Shopping Mall;
Emmaus Ministries Page;
Search Page
[COMMENT: Below is a response to a query I made about
the two genuinely conservative parties in the US today. I was looking for
how they differ. If below is accurate, I would have a hard time voting for
the Constitution Party which I have been favoring. Alan Keyes, the
candidate for the American Independent Party, is a strong supporter of the
Declaration of Independence as an organic document in American law (one of those
documents which help define the very meaning of a legal tradition).
I am not certain about Keyes as a leader, but he is passionate for the babies,
and a very good speaker. I know less about Chuck Baldwin.
The significance of the difference is that the AIP believes
that there is a federal obligation to defend the lives of the preborn overriding
states-rights to permit abortion. Apparently the Constitution Party does
allow the states to permit abortion on the grounds that protecting the babies is
not an authority enumerated in the Constitution for the Fed.
I believe that is wrong because the Declaration of
Independence obligates our federal government under the law of God to protect
all human life, we all being created equal under God.
E. Fox]
Earle,
In your article arguing that Sarah Palin is NOT
pro-life you wrote :
If Palin was Pro-Life at one time, it seems that she has compromised
that to get the VP spot on McCain's ticket -- she is representing his
position, not that of God. Either she is ignorant of what she is
doing, or she is being dishonest. Do NOT vote for McCain/Palin.
Vote for Chuck Baldwin in the
www.ConstitutionParty.com
or Alan Keyes in the American Independent Party -- www.aipca.org/index.html
(I am not yet decided between the two. Would appreciate comment.)
There are many things to admire about the
Constitution Party and Dr. Chuck Baldwin. The schism between them and those
who have created America's Independent Party is very unfortunate for many
reasons, but the schism does have what to me is perhaps an overriding logic
that trumps considerations about their disagreements on foreign policy, the
war, Israel, etc.
The Constitution Party platform accepts the
claim that (legally, though not morally) the
right to life is subject to veto by state governments. We must be very
careful to acknowledge that many devout opponents of abortion share that
"States' Rights" view, including some with substantial constitutional
credentials and some who absolutely agree that the executive branch
has a constitutional duty to treat Roe as null and
void.
Despite my admiration for some who hold to that
view, I find it inadequate pragmatically, morally and legally. I believe it
cedes the moral high ground, surrenders the philosophical/legal foundation
of the nation and the potent legal principles in the Declaration of
Independence. As policy, I believe it cannot lead to an acceptable result in
the fight against abortion -- or on other fundamental moral issues such as
marriage or parents' rights.
In contrast, (unless I'm mistaken) the new
party, the American Independent
Party, adheres to the Declaration of Independence as an inseparable
and legally binding part of the Organic Law of the United States
(David Barton's book "Original Intent" explains this). They accept what I
think is the inescapable logic of the pro-life position: that an
inalienable right cannot be alienated
by either state or federal government. (In fact, this is so fundamental, I'm
not sure it is not implicit in the republican form of government
that the Constitution requires the Federal government to guarantee to the
citizens of every state.)
Again, this is not to deny that sincere
opponents of abortion likely dominate the Constitution Party --
obviously unlike the GOP, which is a fortress of demagogues like McCain for
whom abortion and the entire culture war is a very minor issue.
* * * * * * * * *
* * * * * * *
Date Posted - 09/15/2008 - Date
Last Edited -
09/15/2008