"...in the Year of our Lord." That's in the Constitutition. Our nation does have Christian roots, whether or not the Constitution is based on the Bible is a fruitless debate as it doesn't really matter.The point is the Constitution is there, we need to listen to it; although there's not much of that going on.

A basic rebuttal to your anti-life/pro-choice thinking. ( Since you insist on referring to us as 'anti-choice', I shall do the same, naming my terms. Hope you don't mind ) Since you obviously view things through a secular lens, I'll use that. Abortion is unconstitutional. "...and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity," I believe you'll recognize that; it's from the Preamble to the Constitution. To our Posterity, meaning to all our future generations, descendants, children, etc, etc. Moving on. The 5th Amendment, "...nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." And since abortion is murder, as affirmed by common sense and the Law of Biogenesis, abortion is unconstitutional.

Comments?

1. Yes, the nation has Christian influences, but it also has Enlightenment rationalism influences. The latter has clearly been more influential in the framing and maintenance of our government.
2. "Anti-life" is inaccurate, since pro-choicers do not want people to die; they advocate liberty. The term "anti-choice" is appropriate, since anti-choicers do not allow people to choose to end their own lives or to use progestin contraceptives, and their ultimate agenda is a totalitarianism based on bible-literalism. I know that not all pro-abortion-ban ppl are anti-choice, but abortion bans would deprive women of liberty without due process; so these ppl would still be anti-women's-liberty. "Pro-life-but-not-anti-choice" might be appropriate for those who oppose one organism w/ human DNA killing another organism w/ human DNA (which means opposing abortion, war, death penalty, etc.) but do not oppose an organism choosing to kill itself. I consider such people anti-morality, as I have already explained in my essay.
3. The Preamble can't be used to declare things unconstitutional. It's only a statement of what the Constitution is, not a statement of what the government shouldn't do.
4. Both the 5th Amendment and the 14th Amendment are referring to what the government shouldn't do, not to what citizens shouldn't do. Only government activity can be called constitutional or unconstitutional. Abortion cannot be unconstitutional because it is not government activity. Criminal laws (not in the Constitution, but must adhere to the Constitution, particularly to "due process") state for which individual/organizational activities the government can punish people. If abortion were banned, the government could punish people for it. Government prosecution & punishment for abortion has been deemed unconstitutional, a violation of due process, except for late-term abortions where the mother's life/health is not in danger. Click here for the meaning of "due process."

You're biased, I'm biased, so we both have differing opinions on what affected our government the most. I believe it was Christianity. Our case law system is derived directly from biblical Levitical laws. All of our founding fathers were Christians (with the exception of Thomas Jefferson, who was a deist, but still a man of great Christian morals and a beliver in God.)

"...since pro-choicers do not want people to die; they advocate liberty." And therein lies the problem. Pro-choicers lower the standards of the debate to mere 'choice', and act like it is a simple matter, and just woman's 'rights'.  They just such lingo as 'liberty' and 'constitutional right of privacy'. They fail to recognize the actual procedure, and the atrocity abortion really is.

"...and their ultimate agenda is a totalitarianism based on bible-literalism." Well, that's news to me. Totalitarianism is evil, and I'm totally against it. I'm a freedom loving American patriot, and I despise socialism and any of it's connotations. We do not seek to imprison all who disagree with us. We seek spiritual revival, an issue only the churches of this nation can address. But I assure you, we do not seek totalitarianism.

"...so these ppl would still be anti-women's-liberty." Where's the constitutional justification for the 'right of privacy'? Abortion is not a right, only as much as murder is a right, as abortion is murder.

'...which means opposing abortion, war, death penalty, etc." I am pro-death penalty, and I am not a pacifist. See my CP essay here. And please just use the term 'human', "organism" is degrading and insulting.

"The Preamble can't be used to declare things unconstitutional." It's a statement of what the Constitution is for, and it is a part of it. It's for preserving the blessings to our posterity. Abortion is not exactly a blessing.

"Both the 5th Amendment and the 14th Amendment are referring to what the government shouldn't do, not to what citizens shouldn't do." Oh great, it's nice to know our fellow citizens are allowed to kill us.

"Abortion cannot be unconstitutional because it is not government activity." The government stuck it's nose where it shouldn't be ( as usual) and made abortion legal. Abortion is federally funded in some states, as well.

The point is, abortion is murder, and by switching the debate over to the woman's 'choice', you demean the debate. The only reason the US Supreme Court ruled in favor of legalization, was because the ruling made the assumption that the unborn are not human, a preposterous idea. Abortion is murder, no matter how conception occured.

As for you comment in my guestbook: One debate at a time please. I'm not interested in atheism, but thank you anyway.

I have my opinions, but they're not simply biases, since they're based on evidence. My views can change w/ evidence, while your views are currently stuck with the English translation of a version of an ancient text called the bible.
Where is the evidence for this claim: "Our case law system is derived directly from biblical Levitical laws"?

Ben Franklin and Thomas Paine were also deists. George Washingtion, James Madison, and other Federalists were Christian, but not bible-literalists. Same goes for the Anti-Federalists. Read the Federalist and Anti-Federalist papers.

How does advocating liberty "lower the standards"? You don't think liberty is important, apparently. I'm not surprised, given that you support a totalitarianism based on bible-literalism. You say that you oppose totalitarianism, but actions speak louder than words. You want everyone to your God's slaves/servants, and your God is a father-type figure described in the bible as forbidding all sorts of things and allowing people suffer on earth and in hell, right? Then, you want totalitarianism based on bible-literalism. Pretty sick, given that the slavery and other crimes should be allowed, according to the bible.

You can't argue that abortion shouldn't be allowed b/c it's an "atrocity," since you support atrocities like war and the death penalty. Anti-choicers fail to recognize that the point of morality isn't to just keeping people from dying; it's about minimizing suffering and maximizing well-being for as many people as possible. Sometimes, people are killed for the well-being of others. Ironic that anti-choicers don't seem to understand this, considering how they fawn over a character that let himself be killed, which is like euthanasia.

My comments on your essay about the death penalty:
The point of punishment is to deter harmful behavior. The point of deterring harmful behavior is to minimize suffering. It has nothing to with what the bible says. If a person w/ mental retardation accidentally killed someone, should you have that person put to death? According to Genesis 9:6, you should. But the bible can be quoted to support all sorts of idiocy. Any rational person would know that it's pointless to kill the mentally retarded because such an execution wouldn't prevent other persons with mental retardation from accidentally killing people. The execution would only increase suffering w/out preventing any future suffering.

I use the most accurate and unambiguous terms as possible, to avoid confusion, not to be demeaning. People have different definitions of "human," so there could be confusion/miscommunication. Everyone understands what "organism w/ human DNA" means, so there's no confusion. Likewise, "child" can refer to anyone, since everyone is a child of someone, and "baby" usually refers to people aged 1-2, so to avoid confusion, I say "fetus" when I mean fetus. I say what I mean, and I mean what I say.

What you say about the Preamble still does not make abortion unconstitutional. As I already said, the terms "constitutional" and "unconstitutional" only apply to government activity. Why are you ignoring what I said about criminal law? I've noticed that Fundamentalists like to ignore whatever doesn't fit their preconceptions. Murder is not allowed because of criminal laws, not because of the Constitution.

Decriminalization is not the government "sticking it's nose where it shouldn't be." It means less government interference. Federal funding, on the other hand, is government interference. Whether or not abortion should be publically funded is another issue.

This is misinformation: "The only reason the US Supreme Court ruled in favor of legalization, was because the ruling made the assumption that the unborn are not human." In Roe v. Wade, the Court recognized that fetuses are alive, so it allowed the government to restrict abortion when the fetus is "viable," or able to live outside of a womb. It also recognized that fetuses are inside of women's bodies, so it said that the government can't punish women for having abortions, until the fetus is "viable."

My point is that anti-choicers don't really care about liberty. They just want obedience to literalist interpretations of English translations of the bible. You don't want to learn about atheism because you're afraid that it might be right, just like you're afraid that pro-choicers are right. These debates are all related: to your fear of an imaginary place called hell. Take heed of what FDR said: the only thing to fear is fear itself. Until you get over your fear and face the fact that you really don't know God, unless you are God or have actual evidence of God (not a book), these debates are never gonna end.

 "I have my opinions, but they're not simply biases, since they're based on evidence. My views can change w/ evidence, while your views are currently stuck with the English translation of a version of an ancient text called the bible." Typical viewpoint of secularists. You have presuppositions, correct? You'd be lying if you said you didn't. Those presuppositions form the entire base for you worldview, in other words your bias. You bias prompts you to look for evidence that supports your claim, as is shown by your repeatedly quoting such absurd sites as "evil bible".

"How does advocating liberty "lower the standards"?" Because it's not advocating liberty.  The 'right' to murder your offspring is not a liberty, not a civil right, and it's not a privilege. It's an atrocity.

"You don't think liberty is important, apparently." I take offense at that. You keep saying you advocate liberty, which amounts to relativism, in your case. Then you advocate 'morality'. Contradiction. The kind of liberty you're talking about is abortion 'rights'. I'll bet you support the 'Day of Silence' as well.

"Anti-choicers fail to recognize that the point of morality isn't to just keeping people from dying; it's about minimizing suffering and maximizing well-being for as many people as possible." Morality is distinguishing right from wrong. How would abortion minimize suffering? (Rhetorical question)

"The point of punishment is to deter harmful behavior." Not entirely. It's also to bring justice to the name of the victim. It does detere future behaviour. It absolutley silences the possiblity of recurrence of crime from the perpetrator, and it deters future criminals, as I cited in my article. Capital punishment is to be administered to murderers, not retards. The difference is that a murderer premeditates his crime, while a metal retard who accidently killed someone, would not be executed, it was not premeditated or intentional.

"Why are you ignoring what I said about criminal law?" It was unclear. Sorry. "I've noticed that Fundamentalists like to ignore whatever doesn't fit their preconceptions." And you don't? Biased.

"In Roe v. Wade, the Court recognized that fetuses are alive, so it allowed the government to restrict abortion when the fetus is "viable," or able to live outside of a womb." In other words, humans before viability were considered 'parasites' and thus it was ok to kill. Fetuses before vialbility should still be considered human and treated with the same respective rights. Roe v. Wade opened up the slippery slope, and it happened fast. The government will not punish a woman for having an abortion , because today's common consensus is that the unborn are not human. Even if 9 panel judges recognized the obvious, America does not.

"My point is that anti-choicers don't really care about." How is murder true liberty?  

"You don't want to learn about atheism because you're afraid that it might be right, just like you're afraid that pro-choicers are right." Umm...yeah. Of course I am. You assume a lot. I have absolutley no fear that atheism might be right, because I know it's wrong. It's imposible in every way for there not to be a God ( to me), because I have been enlightened by the Word of God. Abortion is murder. How much clearer does it get? Why would I fear that murder is morally right?

"These debates are all related: to your fear of an imaginary place called hell." Ha! Yeah right. The fear is not of hell, my friend. Jesus doesn't save us from Satan. He saves us from God's wrath.

l8ter

i believe that you should have a choice in abortion. if you want it then do it. i believe that babies should have a choice to live. they deserve to live.

You're 21 and you still  haven't seen the light of God's Graces. I'll pray for you.

I'm still not sure why you signed my guestbook because I'm one of the most conservative people you could meet, but I wouldn't want to surround myself with someone who could potentially influence me in a bad way, so I bid you good-bye forever, and hope that you respect my privacy.

---

Hello, my name is Shyft and I am scanning through xanga blogs to find people that might be interested in my debate forum. The address is:

http://www.circoverseers.proboards38.com

There is a huge range for topics, so feel free to browse around and touch down on what means some thing to you.

Hello
You worked hard to make your site simple yet elegant but I see that you don write here much anymore!
I like to write articles about God and religion on my site. I want to help people to really get to know God, especially in these troubled times. Jesus gave us a message of hope that is in the Bible: 14 "And this good news of the kingdom (the Gospel) will be preached throughout the whole world as a testimony to all the nations, and then will come the end." (Matthew 24:14) (AMP) I hope you get a chance to look at them.