Kerry Lee Morgan Debates Bob on States' Rights

Jefferson

Jefferson

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Kerry Lee Morgan Debates Bob on States' Rights

This is the show from Wednesday August 24th, 2011.

SUMMARY:





* Do States have the Authority to De-criminalize Murder: Kerry Lee Morgan, a Michigan attorney, political candidate, and Ron Paul supporter, defends Ron Paul's philosophy that the federal government should be tolerant of the states decriminalizing the murder of children and Paul's statement that "While Roe v. Wade is invalid, a federal law banning abortion across all 50 states would be equally invalid." Bob demonstrates that inconsistent pro-lifers like Morgan and Paul follow neither God's enduring command Do not murder, nor the U.S. Constitution's 5th and 14th amendments. Morgan, for example, could not agree that other nations had the right to stop Germany from committing genocide and killing millions of men women, and children. For a full discussion of this matter, see ProlifeProfiles.com/Paul!

Paul's Bills Even Violate Constitution: allow depriving of life and liberty. Ron Paul would require the federal government to violate the U.S. Constitution and tolerate child killing, rejecting the 5th Amendment and the 14th: "...nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." Of course pre-Roe, the state of New York deprived unborn persons of life by decriminalizing their murder. The states may prosecute murder, YES. But they may not decriminalize murder, as ARTL points out.

* Focus II: An organization at the domain name "andthenyoucankillthebaby.com" doesn't want you to see the groundbreaking DVD, Focus on the Strategy II. You may want to check it out anyway!

Today's Resource: Have you seen the Government Department at our KGOV Store? We are featuring Bruce Shortt's vitally-important book, The Harsh Truth about Public Schools. And also, check out the classic God's Criminal Justice System seminar, God and the Death Penalty, Live from Las Vegas, and Bob on Drugs DVDs, and our powerhouse Focus on the Strategy resources! And if you subscribe to the BEL Televised Classics, you will see this debate on TV, since it is one of the many extraordinary programs that come to your home on DVD when you subscribe!
 
WizardofOz

WizardofOz

New member
Jefferson said:
Bob demonstrates that inconsistent pro-lifers like Morgan and Paul follow neither God's enduring command Do not murder, nor the U.S. Constitution's 5th and 14th amendments.
Click to expand...

How backward. The federal state can "deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws", but if a state wants to put their foot down and say "NO!" Bob and other federalists won't support their efforts?

Wait, wasn't CO trying to do just that not so long ago?

Did Bob or Jeff support the efforts to pass Amendment 62?

Jefferson said:
Morgan, for example, could not agree that other nations had the right to stop Germany from committing genocide and killing millions of men women, and children. For a full discussion of this matter, see ProlifeProfiles.com/Paul!
Click to expand...

Why didn't we invade the Soviet Union who were killing many, many more? Regarding Germany, it wasn't about genocide until the war was over. We didn't know anything about genocide!

Aggression against our allies was the difference between Nazi Germany and Communist Russia. We had just as much a "right" to stop Germany as we did Russia. Of course we would have entered WWII under a Ron Paul presidency, after we were directly attacked by Japan and after Congress declared war!

Just more neoconservative double-speak. Kerry Lee Morgan does not speak for Ron Paul. She speaks for herself and is a supporter of Dr. Paul.

Can't get Dr. Paul on the show?

Jefferson said:
Of course pre-Roe, the state of New York deprived unborn persons of life by decriminalizing their murder. The states may prosecute murder, YES. But they may not decriminalize murder, as ARTL points out.
Click to expand...

What about the trigger laws? Roe V Wade legalized abortion where it was prohibited.

Selective in our history just a bit.

So, what's the current strategy? I'm all ears. Meanwhile pro-life advocates like Dr. Paul might actually be able to get something done rather than just talk about it.
 
Granite

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
Leave it to Enyart to attack the only Christian in the race with consistency and honesty. This is so incredibly typical...
 
Frayed Knot

Frayed Knot

New member
I think Pastor Bob is wrong - murder is not criminalized by the 5th and 14th Amendments. Those are prohibitions on the state killing/imprisoning someone, not against killing between individuals.

Now murder *is* a federal crime, but abortion is not covered by laws against murder.

Further, the Constitution says nothing about whether the US is justified in attacking a foreign country to prevent mass murder. The Constitution protects the rights of US citizens. Whether it's right to attack another country is purely a political decision, not constrained by the Constitution.

Pastor Bob has shown us again and again that he doesn't feel that the Constitution is a binding document, though, and that we should follow the laws of the Bible instead. So when Bob was talking to a Ron Paul supporter, they're coming at the issue from two orthogonal perspectives.
 
Granite

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
Technically only certain types of homicides are federal offenses (killing a federal judge, say). It's almost always not considered a federal crime.
 
Jefferson

Jefferson

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
WizardofOz said:
Aren't you thereby supporting "states' rights"? Would the state of CO have the right to grant person-hood to a fetus?

You seem to be playing both sides of the issue.
Click to expand...
States have a duty to protect innocent life. They do not have the right to decide whether or not an innocent life should be murdered.
 
WizardofOz

WizardofOz

New member
Jefferson said:
They do not have the right to decide whether or not an innocent life should be murdered.
Click to expand...

That is exactly what CO Amendment 62 was going to ultimately decide.

States have the right to outlaw abortion but do not have the right to allow abortion? Do I have your position characterized correctly?

Do States have the Authority to De-criminalize Murder? No, that's absurd.
 
Jefferson

Jefferson

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
WizardofOz said:
That is exactly what CO Amendment 62 was going to ultimately decide.

States have the right to outlaw abortion but do not have the right to allow abortion? Do I have your position characterized correctly?

Do States have the Authority to De-criminalize Murder? No, that's absurd.
Click to expand...
States have the duty to acknowledge abortion to be murder. They do not have the right to allow abortion.
 
aCultureWarrior

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
Granite said:
Leave it to Enyart to attack the only Christian in the race with consistency and honesty. This is so incredibly typical...
Click to expand...

Are you talking about Ron Paul?

What kind of "Christian" wouldn't even acknowledge that homosexuality is a sin? Notice that Congressman Paul doesn't attempt to use Scripture as his argument, he uses his own opinion, kinda like moral relative atheists do.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zIeW0DY64bE

What kind of "Christian" would run as a candidate for President for a politcal party that wants to legalize things such as recreational drug use, prostitution and suicide; and keep things such as pornography, abortion and homosexuality legal? This so-called "Christian" admits to being a lifetime member of that Party as well.
http://www.lp.org/platform

What kind of "Christian" who is also an elected official doesn't acknowledge Romans 13:4, but instead votes against God's Word, as Congressman Paul did here:
http://www.aipnews.com/talk/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=18423&posts=1
 
aCultureWarrior

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
Granite said:
Indeed, as are the penalties. For example, in NH killing a cop is a capital offense; first degree homicide of a citizen is not.
Click to expand...

You're talking about people that have been convicted of crimes. The last time I checked, the innocent unborn hadn't.

This one's for Wizard of Oz:

If the states allowed the murdering of Jews, Blacks or other religious or racial minorities, do you think the federal government would have a right to intervene then?
 
WizardofOz

WizardofOz

New member
aCultureWarrior said:
This one's for Wizard of Oz:

If the states allowed the murdering of Jews, Blacks or other religious or racial minorities, do you think the federal government would have a right to intervene then?
Click to expand...

Yay...aSeattleconserv is back :plain:

Murder is a violation of the Constitution/Bill of Rights. Unfortunately, abortion is not murder, legally speaking. If we get the authority out of the hands of the federal government and into the hands of the states where it belongs, abortion is illegal through trigger laws automatically in many states. No amendment 62 necessary.

The SC isn't going to overturn Roe. The states are not going to pass pro-life initiatives like CO 62. The strategy is futile.

Time to move on.....
 
aCultureWarrior

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
WizardofOz said:
Murder is a violation of the Constitution/Bill of Rights. Unfortunately, abortion is not murder, legally speaking. If we get the authority out of the hands of the federal government and into the hands of the states where it belongs, abortion is illegal through trigger laws automatically in many states. No amendment 62 necessary.

The SC isn't going to overturn Roe. The states are not going to pass pro-life initiatives like CO 62. The strategy is futile.
Click to expand...

It was a federal ruling that made abortion legal, it will take a federal law (amendment) to stop it.

As the writer of this article explains, allowing the states to decide the abortion issue won't make things much better for the "unwanted" unborn:

ECHOES OF 1860: IS “LIFE“ A QUESTION OF STATE’S RIGHTS?
Some voices naively assert that simply eradicating abortion at the federal level and returning the issue to the states will correct the problem, but they are completely wrong. When the federal courts get out of the abortion issue and return it to the states, 20 states (based on both pro-life and pro-abortion estimates) will continue their current abortion practices, and those states include many with the largest population (e.g., California, New York, Illinois, etc.). Citizens from the other 30 states will therefore travel to one of those 20 states to get an abortion; so while the number of abortions will undoubtedly go down when the issue is returned to the states, it will come nowhere close to ending. Additionally, stopping abortion at the federal level will do nothing to correct the legal rulings generated in the state courts over the past 35 years as those state courts infused federal court positions into their own state case law. State courts will remain hostile to state attempts to restrict abortion because state case law is now as infused with the broad “health” exceptions, etc., as were the federal decisions."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top