I oppose the errant notion floating about that a bill should be passed that clarifies the Iowa State Constitution as allegedly being “neutral” toward the personhood of babies from the moment of conception.
This is fallacious error in so many layers that frankly, I find it staggering that I have to deconstruct it out loud.
It is always a very bad idea to surrender to a court’s lie with a second lie designed to upend the first lie.
You will NEVER defeat the judicial oligarchy by reinforcing the myth of their oligarchical powers every time you react to their abuses. If Republicans continue this folly, they help the tyranny of judges continue.
The perverted court said the Constitution supports abortion. The correct response is that the Constitution interpreted in its fundamental originalist context could support no position other than personhood from conception.
In fact, in the context of the drafters of the Iowa Constitution, Iowans so revered the moral law of the Decalogue that our Iowa cities once forbade work on the Lord’s Day. The notion that a state Constitution drafted by such pious persons could in any way support infanticide (or be neutral) is beyond dishonest.*
The error is a temptation to respond to the court with another fallacy which requires acceptance of the heresy of a “living constitution” wax-shaping – saying what is untrue…that the “state constitution is neutral.”
It is not and never has been neutral. It is only pretended to be neutral if you violate hermaneutic law when interpreting it.
If this folly continues then Republicans have once again agreed to allow and enable the following transgressions:
1) Bad judges are allowed to redraw battle-lines with Republicans surrendering on the terms drawn by judicial activism, again and again and again.
2) Republicans surrender the premise of Constitutional law tethered to historic context and the organic law of the United States. (Which is the basis for judicial activism in the first-place).
3) Republicans weaken the contextual reality of our state Constitution by violating natural law realities understood when it was drafted, as the ultimate basis for “limited government.” There is no “limited government” without acceptance of natural law realities. Is gravity or math up to the legislature, the courts, or is it up to neither one? The basis of American law says neither one.
4) Republicans publicly deny the authority of divine law (higher law) without which there is no intellectual basis for a Republic, in the first place (Thou Shalt Not Kill). Re-read point 3.
5) Republicans surrender to a deadly premise that pretends courts, legislatures (or humans in general) grant human rights to other humans, when Constitutional law exists on the legal assumption that rights come from God, alone. Re-read points 3 and 4.
6) Republicans reinforce secular humanism as the state-sanctioned religion of Iowa by determining that legislatures have any authority at all to say that murder is no longer murder, or in this case, that murder is only illegal or legal if the legislators say so (as opposed to courts saying so)? Think!
7) Republicans create a vacuum for euthanasia, and virtually every form of eugenics (kill the retarded baby?) to have a “neutral” springboard allegedly found in the state Constitution after their bad idea to respond to the abusive court with a combination of half-surrender and half-defiance.
Matt Trewhella has a book that will educate well-meaning Republican law-makers with a more Biblical understanding of what is required to kill a tyrannical oligarchy since that is the monster that controls Iowa.
Current trends of Republican too-clever-by-half malfeasance in response to judicial activism do not merely strengthen the courts, they will turn us into communists within 20 years.
A new paradigm MUST be accepted or we are doomed.
* “For our good; and only because it is for our good,’ God has given certain Rules to govern us known as the moral code. These rules are intended to prevent us from throwing ourselves under the domain of the inflexible laws of nature and being crushed by them. Because murder, drunkenness, sensuality and other vices, tend surely, to disease, death and extermination, God has commanded us to refrain from these. If we commit these acts
our course and influence delay the fulfillment of God’s plan, and we thus bring dishonor upon him. Theologians say such acts are sins, because they are forbidden. We would rather say they are forbidden because they corrupt and degrade mankind, hence retard God’s plans, hence dishonor him. The commands “Thou shalt” and “Thou shall not” were mercifully given to aid us in knowing and avoiding-the maelstrom of passion and appetite and escaping the inexorable consequences of violated physical law.” – The Honorable Judge H.M. Remley, Iowa 18th Judicial District Judge 1896-1902