[Bill,
June 9, 2009]
Pro-Life, Roe, and the Temptation of Popular Sovereignty
I just realized something. On the issue of abortion, my beliefs are not what they say. They are a pretense. I had bought into the federalist position — that states ought to decide for themselves the abortion question. That's what Justice Scalia says — in fact, that's the GOP's argument. Let the people decide.
No wonder we pro-lifers can't win. The federalist position is simply a recycled version of Stephen Douglas' "popular sovereignty." I quote from the first Lincoln-Douglas debate:
"The next question propounded to me by Mr. Lincoln is, Can the people of a Territory in any lawful way, against the wishes of any citizen of the United States, exclude slavery from their limits prior to the formation of a State constitution?
"I answer emphatically, as Mr. Lincoln has heard me answer a hundred times from every stump in Illinois, that in my opinion the people of a Territory can, by lawful means, exclude slavery from their limits prior to the formation of a State constitution ... It matters not what way the Supreme Court may hereafter decide as to the abstract question whether slavery may or may not go into a Territory under the Constitution, the people have the lawful means to introduce it or exclude it as they please, for the reason that slavery cannot exist a day or an hour anywhere, unless it is supported by local police regulations. Those police regulations can only be established by the local legislature; and if the people are opposed to slavery, they will elect representatives to that body who will by unfriendly legislation effectually prevent the introduction of it into their midst. If, on the contrary, they are for it, their legislation will favor its extension. Hence, no matter what the decision of the Supreme Court may be on that abstract question, still the right of the people to make a Slave Territory or a Free Territory is perfect and complete under the Nebraska bill. I hope Mr. Lincoln deems my answer satisfactory on that point.
I think, in the back of my mind, I figured first things first. We'll get Roe overturned, then we'll fight in the state legislatures. But now, I recognize, that I find the federalist solution inadequate. It is identical to the position of Douglas' Democrat Party and the disintegrated Whig Party. That's the problem with the GOP: If we truly mean our pro-life arguments, then we'll never be satisfied that our unborn brothers and sisters can be subject to arbitrary and violent death. That means we must be unapolegetically pro-life and that means all states must become anti-abortion.
If unborn humans have rights, and of course they do, then they have rights that we must be willing to defend. The Democratic Party is of course reprobate. The GOP's wimpy compromise isn't much better. We can wait and try to solve this peacefully in order to preserve the civil order while we work out this moral blindness on part of about three-quarters of our countrymen. But we pro-lifers can never be satisfied with a federalist solution to the abortion question.
No wonder we pro-lifers can't win. The federalist position is simply a recycled version of Stephen Douglas' "popular sovereignty." I quote from the first Lincoln-Douglas debate:
"The next question propounded to me by Mr. Lincoln is, Can the people of a Territory in any lawful way, against the wishes of any citizen of the United States, exclude slavery from their limits prior to the formation of a State constitution?
"I answer emphatically, as Mr. Lincoln has heard me answer a hundred times from every stump in Illinois, that in my opinion the people of a Territory can, by lawful means, exclude slavery from their limits prior to the formation of a State constitution ... It matters not what way the Supreme Court may hereafter decide as to the abstract question whether slavery may or may not go into a Territory under the Constitution, the people have the lawful means to introduce it or exclude it as they please, for the reason that slavery cannot exist a day or an hour anywhere, unless it is supported by local police regulations. Those police regulations can only be established by the local legislature; and if the people are opposed to slavery, they will elect representatives to that body who will by unfriendly legislation effectually prevent the introduction of it into their midst. If, on the contrary, they are for it, their legislation will favor its extension. Hence, no matter what the decision of the Supreme Court may be on that abstract question, still the right of the people to make a Slave Territory or a Free Territory is perfect and complete under the Nebraska bill. I hope Mr. Lincoln deems my answer satisfactory on that point.
I think, in the back of my mind, I figured first things first. We'll get Roe overturned, then we'll fight in the state legislatures. But now, I recognize, that I find the federalist solution inadequate. It is identical to the position of Douglas' Democrat Party and the disintegrated Whig Party. That's the problem with the GOP: If we truly mean our pro-life arguments, then we'll never be satisfied that our unborn brothers and sisters can be subject to arbitrary and violent death. That means we must be unapolegetically pro-life and that means all states must become anti-abortion.
If unborn humans have rights, and of course they do, then they have rights that we must be willing to defend. The Democratic Party is of course reprobate. The GOP's wimpy compromise isn't much better. We can wait and try to solve this peacefully in order to preserve the civil order while we work out this moral blindness on part of about three-quarters of our countrymen. But we pro-lifers can never be satisfied with a federalist solution to the abortion question.