Image via Wikipedia
"A just security to property is not afforded by that government, under which unequal taxes oppress one species of property and reward another species. "
I don’t think the reason is that people fear being let down. I think the reason is that people don’t like to compare themselves to someone with a higher standard; I think they fear they are letting themselves down. Tebow sets a high moral standard, one that few of us can live up to; it’s easier to tear him down than to try to build ourselves up to the standard he sets.
It seems the atheists are at it again with the billboards. They ask us to celebrate REASON during the upcoming holy season of Christmas. The problem is, I think reason would have to tell us that we DON’T know it’s a myth, we can’t possibly know. There is no measurement we can make that will tell us definitively whether this is a myth or not. It isn't reasonable to want something to be true and insist that is but not offer any sort of concrete proof. There is, however, considerable historical evidence to suggest that the factual claims made in the Bible concerning those events, given by eye witnesses, are accurate. Still, there is nothing that allows us to know or not know what is true about these events.
Yesterday the erstwhile denizens of New York's Obamaville called for a day of rage that included disruptions in the Wall Street area, on the subways and at Foley Square, site of the state and federal courthouses. WCBS-TV reports that "some grade school students were forced to walk a gauntlet of screaming 'Occupy Wall Street' protesters just to get to school."I fail to see how this is a good thing. Just sayin'
"In the middle of thousands of protestors yelling and chanting--some kicking and screaming--CBS 2's Emily Smith found little school kids trying to get to class," the report continues. "Nervous parents led them through the barriers on Wall Street. The [New York City Police Department] helped funnel the children, anything to ease their fears while some protestors chanted 'follow those kids!' "
"A big failure? No, quite the opposite," writes the Washington Post's Eugene Robinson. "Lower Manhattan was swarming not just with demonstrators and police but with journalists from around the world--and with tourists who wanted to see what all the fuss was about. A small, nonviolent protest had been amplified into something much bigger and more compelling, not by the strength of its numbers but by the power of its central idea."
The fact is, as Spitzer points out, from Blackstone and previous decisions of State Courts, legal precedent existed that the human fetus at all its stages was a human person. The Court simply ignored this background.
The Court’s effort to make a distinction between a “human being” and a “person” was spurious from the beginning. Spitzer’s analysis of the legal, linguistic, and metaphysical use of the word “person” in every instance identifies it with a human being protected both by natural and constitutional law. Why the Court could not find the word “person” in previous Court decisions was simple. The issue never came up before. It would be, Spitzer suggests, like saying that because the old maps did not show the existence of the American continent, therefore, it did not exist.
This background also leads to the issue of the scientific status of the human fetus. No longer is there any doubt that the fertilized human zygote from its beginning is an independent human life separate from the mother. Spitzer cites the work of Jerome Lejeune on the DNA of the human fetus. This work became known a few years after the decision, but the Court has not recognized its force. The Court equivalently said that, if it is in doubt about whether a thing is human, we can assume that it is not. This is a principle directly contrary to reason. If in doubt about a thing’s humanity, we do not act until we find out.
|Role of Honor of Clan McCrae for WWI dead.|