I feel the same problem that reasonable men felt when John Brown formented revolution in the 1850s. John Brown was a terrorist who used wrong means to try to bring about the right conclusion.
The United States of 2005 is in the same condition as the United States of 1858: we are an immoral society hiding behind the rule of law. In 1858, the Supreme Court ruled that a black man was property, and had no right to determine his own fate under US law. In 2005, the United States court systems have ruled that Terri Schiavo is legally "unalive", and is therefore has no standing to express her own wishes under US law.
The Civil War occured because this nation had become so corrupted by the taint of slavery that the legally correct side (the South) was the morally bankrupt one. Our society ha s become so tainted by the corruption of abortion and "the right to not be inconvenienced" (abortion, right to die, freedom from religion, etc.) that the legally right side has too become morally bankrupt.
It may be that actions by either of the Bush brothers or Congress to save Terri Schiavo are illegal. It may be that Terri Schiavo has to die to save our legal system. It may be that abortion as birth control has to continue to keep the order of 9 dictators in black robes. But, at what cost? Is an immoral society following its own rules right? In the Civil War, we said no. At Nuremburg, the world said no. Do we reject that now?
In 2005, we are ALREADY under the tyrany of the judiciary. The question before the US now, do we continue to allow "legal" murder, just like we allowed legal slavery 150 years ago, or do we take a stand now?
As Lincoln said, it is more important that we are sure that we are on God's side. Are we?
Friday, March 25, 2005
Is the Republic worth saving? And at what cost?
Here is a comment to this post at the Captain's Quarters:
Posted by Anonymous at 11:53 AM