This post concerns abortion and due process of law. If you have a problem with my pro-life, pro-due process opinions, stop reading now.
I saw another political spot on TV this morning for and approved by Patty Murray. Actually, the spot was another pack of lies attempting to defame Dino Rossi, but it says volumes about Murray. In the ad, Rossi is portrayed as a relic of a better-forgotten era when abortion was disfavored and illegal. Of course, liberals never say they are in favor of abortion, they say that they favor "a woman's right to choose". By stating that Dino Rossi is against "a woman's right to choose" and portraying that as a bad thing, Patty Murray has essentially stated that she is pro-abortion.
A fetus is a living human being not yet born. It is a life, and no matter how the libtards try to frame an unborn baby's existence, I believe that the unborn human has a right to life. Jurisprudence has not quite caught up to this, but it will as soon as the politics are taken out of the analysis. The political roadblock to the ethically and scientifically sound reasoning that a living unborn human being has the right to life is the liberal position that the "woman's right to choose" is superior to the living unborn child's right to life. Thus the liberals have been successful in denying the living unborn child's right to due process of law before it's right to life is terminated.
We readily acknowledge that a person accused of a capital crime has the right to due process of law before his right to life is taken away by the state. We actually allow the judicial system to become the world's longest running circus once the accused has been found guilty and sentenced to the termination of his or her life. Although many of us express displeasure at the numerous and lengthy appeals that follow in most cases where a death sentence is imposed, we respect the judicial system we have with its standards of innocence until proven guilty, no cruel and unusual punishments, the right against self-incrimination, and the right to due process of law prior to deprivation of rights.
Patty Murray has demonstrated that, at the most benign interpretation of her actions, she does not understand the concept of due process of law. She supports granting of rights to causes she favors, but does not support due process of law for rights she does not favor. Her active support for the denial of due process of law to living unborn human beings prior to the termination of their lives tells me volumes about Ms. Murray having no respect for the right to life when it does not match up with her political beliefs. A person who has respect for the right to life and the concept of due process of law prior to the termination of the right to life supports these concepts regardless of his or her political beliefs. Ms. Murray's disrespect for the right to life and due process of law is why I referred to her as the Coathanger Queen.
Murray's disrespect for due process of law is apparent in other areas as well. At a time when mortgage-holding banks are trespassing on private property and changing locks on homes prior to completing foreclosure proceedings, where is Patty Murray? Should she not be stepping up and standing up for the the common man against the big banks when they act without due process of law? She will not because she is in the pocket of the big banks and does not care about individual homeowners. Murray supported bailing out the big banks with taxpayer money and supported the "financial reform" that was a giveaway to the big banks.
When Obama care had not yet passed and the Democrats were angling to shove an unconstitutional mandate to purchase insurance down our throats, where was Patty Murray? Oh, that's right, she was voting in favor of shoving this unconstitutional mandate down our throats.
When Chrysler Corporation was being shoved through bankruptcy proceedings and parties who had a contractual and legal right to be paid from the bankruptcy estate were cast aside in favor of the United Auto Workers Union and Libyan-owned Fiat Motors, where was Patty Murray? Certainly not standing up for the common man who had money invested in Chrysler. She was busy backing the union that contributed to her campaigns.
It is disturbing when a politician has no respect for the Constitution and for due process of law guaranteed by the Constitution regarding the ordinary affairs of Americans, such as choosing health insurance and investing money. It is downright appalling when a politician seeks to supplant the right to life, guaranteed by the Constitution and by our Creator, with an invented right not appearing in the Constitution and which appears downright silly when juxtaposed with the supplanted right. Which do you want, the right to live or the right to choose.
If I follow Murray's position to the logical extreme and decide that due process of law is no longer necessary when its application interferes with one's political principles, there would be no end to the carnage that would ensue. I don't like politicians that vote for Marxist policies and enact taxes upon me that I am unwilling to pay. My right to choose what works for me supplants the right of that politician to live. Hmmm, just where do libtards like Murray think that one would end? Especially if we call it the "right-to-choose-later-on", rather than the ugly truthful term retroactive abortion.
As tempting as it would be to adopt liberal principles in that scenario, I'll stick with supporting the right to life and the concept of due process of law.
Remember in November.
My Mind to Your Mind... My Thoughts to Your Thoughts...
14 minutes ago