Who Do You Work For, Good or Evil? And How to Tell....Part 1

All of the recent legal activity surrounding the Partial Birth Abortion Act has had me thinking. (I am a lawyer and a professor; I think about things for a living...)

Abortion is bad law because it is bad science. And of course, because it is bad science, it is horrendously bad morality. It is evil, pure and simple. And in my opinion, it is the single greatest evil facing American civilization. Yes, worse than poverty, worse than illiteracy, worse than racism or discrimination - all of which abortion supporters throw up as straw men to distract from the real, more basic issue. And none of which even become relevant unless one is allowed to live. You can bring yourself out of poverty. You can overcome discriminatory preconceived notions others have about you, your race, your color, your culture. But you can't do any of this if you are dead.

The writers of our Declaration of Independence knew this, and said so explicitly. That is why the Declaration of Independence says, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness..."

Note how this has been phrased:

1) "We hold these truths to be self-evident" In other words, the rights that are described in the D/I are not subject to debate and not in need of proof. The writers wanted to eliminate the possibility that anyone could come behind them and argue that some people are not entitled to life, liberty, or the pursuit of happiness.

2) "... that all men are endowed by their Creator..." "Men" here means mankind, despite what some have tried to argue. And the fact that the rights articulated in the D/I are "endowed" by a "Creator" means that we are not permitted to take these rights away from other people without grave justifications. Furthermore, note that although the writers mention a "Creator," they do not name any specific deity. Whether they believe in one (or many) or not, all persons are deemed to have these same rights and protections.

3) " ... and among these..." This is terribly significant, and often overlooked. Lawyers use language like this a lot. This is to say that the rights articulated (in this case, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness) are not intended to be an exhaustive list of all of the rights to which human beings are entitled; merely that these are the most important ones we can identify at the moment.

4) "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." The order here is critical. LIFE IS FIRST. Liberty is second. And neither the Declaration of Independence nor any other document or law guarantees happiness. But the D/I at least acknowledges that we have the right to pursue it. As long, of course, as in so doing, we are not infringing someone else's right to life, or liberty.

The writers of the Declaration of Independence maintained that the above statements are TRUE. It stands to reason, then, that the test of whether a law is a good one or a bad one, depends upon whether it is consistent with this TRUTH; with the nature of humanity and the proper role of government.

In law, as with every other science, the objective should be the pursuit of TRUTH. And to pursue the TRUTH is to pursue God, whether that is one's intention or not.

So, in order to answer the question, "Who do you work for?" the first thing you need to ask yourself is whether you are telling the truth.

More about this in Part 2.

/Prairy P.