Radio Show
      Listen Host Guests Archive
On The Side

View the Latest Action Alerts and Stay informed!

Read our current Commentaries for indepth analysis into hot issues!

 

 

 




June 2004   paula devlin
 
Right Versus Rights, None Dare CAll It Misogyny By Paula Devlin

RIGHT VERSUS RIGHTS NONE DARE CALL IT MISOGYNY

By: Paula Devlin

The original spinmeister has such an ego that he figured it was better to rule in hell than serve in heaven. And that is what our cultural war is all about: ruling in hell or serving in heaven. This is an old battle and not for the faint of heart. Right implies serving a higher order and rights imply self-rule (the natural end of which is anarchy). The individual is not the arbiter of morality.

The latest decision by U.S. Judge Phyllis Hamilton cries out for vengeance. In fact, a little frontier justice with an old-fashioned hanging would be a good start for this sort of irrational, un-American, unconstitutional freaked-out jurisprudence. Is Phyllis stoned, just plain stupid or an arrogant ideologue whose idea of justice is "my way or the highway"? For her to maintain that "it was ‘grossly misleading and inaccurate’ to suggest that the banned procedure verges on infanticide" would be ridiculous did she not have such unbridled power. Obviously she never saw Dr. Bernard Nathanson’s "The Silent Scream". The creature that is having its skull crushed and its brain sucked out in a partial birth abortion is a human being and just as worthy of legal protection as the President. Can you imagine what reaction PETA would have if this procedure were done to a horse?

It may be time to make the Constitution required reading – in fact, memorization and recitation – for all law school students. Let no one pass the bar who cannot recite the Constitution verbatim. A course in syllogistic reasoning for law students would also be nice – or is that too much to expect from these sharks who ply the waters of human misery looking for their next fat fee?

"Amendment IV: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized."

Nowhere in the United States Constitution does it grant the federal judiciary power over abortion, sodomy or marriage. These are contrived cases where the judiciary has wrested states rights and government of the people, by the people and for the people from the very people they should be serving. Now we have a judicial oligarchy, legislating from the bench, certainly not what the Founding Fathers had nor what the vast majority of citizens still have in mind. For a woman to conspire with her doctor to murder is not a legitimate privacy issue. It is the matter for probable cause for a Constitutional search.

Instead of a system of jurisprudence where the mores of the majority and natural law inform legal opinions, the American system has perverted these values, particularly the rule of law, into the rule of moral evil throughout the land. The ordinary American has been subjected to a barrage of insulting rulings which should have provoked violent reactions by now. It’s no wonder these wicked judges require round-the-clock protection at taxpayer expense.

Judging Phyllis should become a sitcom as soon as she is impeached. She has got to be one of the most corrupt judges ever to serve on the federal bench. She is a legal lightweight, unfit for service. Perhaps we should reconsider the definition of a fetus to include everyone up to age thirty and judges permanently. That way, if our children don’t turn out well or judges fail to uphold the Constitution as written, we can crush their skulls, suck out their brains, sell their organs and use the leftovers for research. If that is a suitable ending for an "undue burden", why not the same ending for bad judges? Naturally, they would not have anesthesia either.

A woman makes her choice when she hops in the rack with her passion. If all of us were allowed to terminate the inconvenient in our lives, we would be less than animals. I have made a lot of stupid decisions that have become "undue burdens". Why not eliminate them by the same means? What mother has not, on occasion, looked at even her most beloved children as "undue burdens" and wished to bundle off the little darlings to an orphanage so she could enjoy more of life’s pleasures?

Nowhere in all the writings of all the serious philosophers in the world have I ever heard of a philosophy that holds life is a bed of roses and we will all get what we want. Nowhere have I ever seen that "rights" of the individual supercede the obligation to do right. Nowhere, except in devil-worshipping cultures (Moloch & Queszacotl), has human sacrifice been acceptable. Yet the pro-abortion crowd puts pleasure above duty, convenience above moral obligation.

The pro-abortion lobby is anti-family and particularly anti-women. Why is abortion not considered a hate crime? It surely is. This is the most hateful thing that can be done to a woman and her baby.

The pro-abortion lobby puts an inconvenient pregnancy in the same category as cancer. Most Americans are not that cold-hearted. They recognize there are situations in which women may find themselves where help is needed. There are willing organizations that can help these women through a pregnancy and adoption. There are very few health reasons for abortion these days, what with the tremendous strides in medicine.

China has waged war against the family by allowing only one child per couple. The United States has waged war against the family by promoting reduced family size, by requiring unwed mothers on welfare to live away from their families; by promoting free sex, birth control and abortion in the schools. The purpose of all these eugenics programs is to destroy the influence of the extended family and replace it with the state. How Marxist!

Having experienced both sides of the issue I conclude by saying that our parents were right: Morality is an essential ingredient for a free republic.

"Published originally at EtherZone.com : republication allowed with this notice and hyperlink intact."

Paula Devlin is a former New Englander who bolted to the Rocky Mountain West, where the air is clean, the stars are brilliant and men still put their pants on one leg at a time. Paula is a regular columnist for Ether Zone.

Paula Devlin can be reached at: pdevlin@bacavalley.com

Published in the June 4, 2004 issue of Ether Zone. Copyright © 1997 - 2004 Ether Zone.