Tuesday, January 18, 2005

Abortion Litmus Tests and Fundamental Values - Christianity Today Magazine

At issue: Tim Roemer, former Governor of Colorado, has announced his intent to run for chairman of the Democratic National Committee. Unlike most of his fellow Democratic leaders (though I won't vouch for all his fellow Democrats), he opposes abortion. Naturally all those who now sit at the table of power in the Democratic Party oppose him.

Frankly, if any in the Democratic Party really thinks that the American people will go for window dressing, they ought to disabuse themselves of that notion. But in fact the Democratic Party is likely to have Howard Dean as its next Chairman, or maybe keep Terry McAuliffe around for another term. Why do I say that? Because I have seen signs that no man can number (with apologies to John the Revelator) that the Democratic Party has learned nothing--either from the last election or from American history.

Ted Olson at Christianity Today speaks of fundamental values--and by that he specifically means fundamental life values. I say that the Democratic Party is bereft of fundamental Constitutional values. Almost every program that their Presidents have enacted into law is in fact unconstitutional, and would be found so by a Supreme Court that paid the Constitution the respect it deserved. So why should I be surprised at their behavior today (especially as regards judicial appointments)? Tell them that Roe v. Wade is as constitutionally unsound as was Scott v. Sandford in 1856 (and in fact, Norma McCorvey, yesterday, announced her intention to petition the Supreme Court for reconsideration of that very decision), and they'll throw clouds of judicial-ese at you, all centering on the phrase stare decisis (pronounced "starry de-sigh-sis")--which means "let it stand as decided." Which, of course, is the trouble with much of our society today: in too many ways, and not just in Supreme Court cases, we take an attitude of stare decisis, when we ought to be taking an attitude of going back to correct something that is fundamentally wrong. That applies equally well to the way we live as to what the Supreme Court has most recently said about what the Constitution means.


Links to this post:


<< Home