Ambassador Alan Keyes on Bob Enyart Live

[Jefferson]

Ambassador Alan Keyes on Bob Enyart Live

This is the show from Tuesday September 3rd, 2013

BEST QUOTE FROM THE SHOW:

Bob Enyart: Dr. Keyes, should the issue of abortion returned to the states?

Alan Keyes: We can’t return the issue of abortion to the states because it’s already been decided by God Almighty. We are endowed with unalienable rights which have to be respected by governments at every level - state level, local level, national level. The Declaration of Independence says we’re endowed by God with unalienable rights and that governments exist to secure these rights. Now, that’s not just this government or that government, but all governments.

Summary:

Looking forward to Dr. Keyes' Denver appearance this Saturday at the Colorado RTL banquet, Bob Enyart re-asks Dr. Keyes a question from Michael Medved about returning abortion to the states, and about John McCain comparing a Muslim fighter's cry Allahu Akhbar to a Christian saying, Thank God. The two also talk about the change in what it means to be a RINO, and about "conservative Christians" who are ashamed to recognize the authority of God in government.

 

[Christian Liberty]

Of course Bob Enyart would condone statist Alan Keyes over libertarian freedom supporting Ron Paul.

 

[Lighthouse]

Of course Bob Enyart would condone statist Alan Keyes over libertarian freedom supporting Ron Paul.

Do you have a valid argument against Keyes' statements?

 

[Granite]

Of course Bob Enyart would condone statist Alan Keyes over libertarian freedom supporting Ron Paul.

Birds of a feather and all that.

 

[Christian Liberty]

Do you have a valid argument against Keyes' statements?

Alan Keyes is a theocrat (For the record, I base that on the reasoning through which he reaches his conclusion, not the conclusion itself), not a constitutionalist. Since he doesn't even appeal to the constitution, at least not in the OP, I really can't address his arguments. I can't argue with him that God does indeed define life as beginning from conception. I forget which of the Psalms it is, I'm not going to look it up now, but the Bible says "You knit me in my mother's womb." That's simple enough for me. So no, I can't argue with him that the issue has been decided by God Almighty. That doesn't change the fact that The Federal Government, constitutionally, has no right to get involved with the issue in any way.

If you're willing to admit that imposition of God's Law on the entire country is more important to you than the US Constitution, than feel free to do so, but I completely disagree with that line of thinking.

That said, Alan Keyes couldn't even figure out that the murderous war in Iraq was absolutely nothing. As such, he's absolutely worthless to anyone who would claim to be "Pro-life." Anyone who can't even figure out that nation building is absolutely wrong is far less "pro-life" than Gary Johnson, let alone Ron Paul.

 

[WizardofOz]

We can’t return the issue of abortion to the states because it’s already been decided by God Almighty. We are endowed with unalienable rights which have to be respected by governments at every level - state level, local level, national level.

Ah, blind idealism. It's cute isn't it?

:sozo: It is not being respected by government at the national level!

So, if a state wants to criminalize abortion against the will of the federal government they should be able to do so. Or, nullify the ruling that makes it so (Roe V Wade). The above is/was Paul's strategy.

What is Ambassador Alan Keyes' strategy?

What is Bob Enyart's?

And no, I'm not calling the show.

 

[Lighthouse]

Alan Keyes is a theocrat (For the record, I base that on the reasoning through which he reaches his conclusion, not the conclusion itself), not a constitutionalist. Since he doesn't even appeal to the constitution, at least not in the OP, I really can't address his arguments. I can't argue with him that God does indeed define life as beginning from conception. I forget which of the Psalms it is, I'm not going to look it up now, but the Bible says "You knit me in my mother's womb." That's simple enough for me. So no, I can't argue with him that the issue has been decided by God Almighty. That doesn't change the fact that The Federal Government, constitutionally, has no right to get involved with the issue in any way.

So why should we advocate adherence to a document that doesn't recognize what God knows? Regardless of whether or not we should base our laws on what God says simply because God says so [we should not] should we not base them on what is the truth [which is what God recognizes]?

If you're willing to admit that imposition of God's Law on the entire country is more important to you than the US Constitution, than feel free to do so, but I completely disagree with that line of thinking.

It is not the imposing of God's law, but rather the truth. The truth should dictate the law.

That said, Alan Keyes couldn't even figure out that the murderous war in Iraq was absolutely nothing. As such, he's absolutely worthless to anyone who would claim to be "Pro-life." Anyone who can't even figure out that nation building is absolutely wrong is far less "pro-life" than Gary Johnson, let alone Ron Paul.

That has nothing to do with this specific issue. It was not mentioned in the OP, and unless you listened to the show and it was mentioned therein it's not relevant. And even if it were mentioned it isn't relevant to the question I asked.

 

[Christian Liberty]

And no, I'm not calling the show.

I so would do that but I don't think my parents would appreciate it. And of course, all the Enyart supporters on here would probably hate me after I was done with that call

 

[Lighthouse]

Ah, blind idealism. It's cute isn't it?

:sozo: It is not being respected by government at the national level!

So, if a state wants to criminalize abortion against the will of the federal government they should be able to do so. Or, nullify the ruling that makes it so (Roe V Wade). The above is/was Paul's strategy.

What is Ambassador Alan Keyes' strategy?

What is Bob Enyart's?

And no, I'm not calling the show.

Are you at least willing to listen to this particular episode to see if their is an answer to your question?

 

[Christian Liberty]

So why should we advocate adherence to a document that doesn't recognize what God knows? Regardless of whether or not we should base our laws on what God says simply because God says so [we should not] should we not base them on what is the truth [which is what God recognizes]?

If you want to advocate for an amendment, go ahead. But to advocate ignoring the constitution is not really acceptable. To advocate that those who would actually follow the constitution support baby killing is really not acceptable.

I've told you what my personal stance on this. The Federal Government should be able to, after a constitutional amendment, give the boot to states that will not protect the unborn. The Federal Government should not, however, be involved with law enforcement, so they should not actually take any action to protect the unborn themselves, that is the job of state governments or local governments.

It is not the imposing of God's law, but rather the truth. The truth should dictate the law.

I don't disagree with this. Our disagreement is on what level this should be done, and how it should be done, not whether it should be done. We don't disagree on applying personhood to the unborn. And neither does Ron Paul.

That has nothing to do with this specific issue. It was not mentioned in the OP, and unless you listened to the show and it was mentioned therein it's not relevant. And even if it were mentioned it isn't relevant to the question I asked.

Its relevant even if he didn't say it. The man actually cannot figure out whether or not government sanctioned murder is evil. He has no business appealing to God for anything, since his stance on war is ungodly and evil. I don't take what he says about the unborn seriously when he supports state sanctioned murder.

 

[Lighthouse]

I so would do that but I don't think my parents would appreciate it. And of course, all the Enyart supporters on here would probably hate me after I was done with that call

I dare you.

 

[Christian Liberty]

I dare you.

lol.

Maybe sometime.

 

[Lighthouse]

If you want to advocate for an amendment, go ahead. But to advocate ignoring the constitution is not really acceptable. To advocate that those who would actually follow the constitution support baby killing is really not acceptable.

I advocate tearing it up and starting over.

Those who advocate sticking to it rather than amending it or starting over are legal positivists.

I've told you what my personal stance on this. The Federal Government should be able to, after a constitutional amendment, give the boot to states that will not protect the unborn. The Federal Government should not, however, be involved with law enforcement, so they should not actually take any action to protect the unborn themselves, that is the job of state governments or local governments.

Apart from the USC why shouldn't they take any action?

I don't disagree with this. Our disagreement is on what level this should be done, and how it should be done, not whether it should be done. We don't disagree on applying personhood to the unborn. And neither does Ron Paul.

Our disagreement is on what level the enforcement of the law should take place, not on what level the law should exist.

Its relevant even if he didn't say it. The man actually cannot figure out whether or not government sanctioned murder is evil. He has no business appealing to God for anything, since his stance on war is ungodly and evil. I don't take what he says about the unborn seriously when he supports state sanctioned murder.

I didn't ask about Keyes, I asked about his comments regarding God's recognition of the personhood of the unborn and whether or not any government has the authority to disregard that [Re: Romans 13].

 

[Jefferson]

I so would do that but I don't think my parents would appreciate it.

Why would they not appreciate it?

 

[Christian Liberty]

Why would they not appreciate it?

They already think I waste too much time arguing

 

[Jefferson]

I advocate tearing it up and starting over.

Do you think a new constitution (written by government officials who grew up in today's anti-God public school system) are likely to produce a constitution that is more Biblical or less Biblical than our current one?

 

[Christian Liberty]

Do you think a new constitution (written by government officials who grew up in today's anti-God public school system) are likely to produce a constitution that is more Biblical or less Biblical than our current one?

Far, far less.

 

[Jefferson]

They already think I waste too much time arguing

Oh come on. Another 10 minutes will just be a drop in the bucket. Besides, you could compensate by staying away from TOL for a day. (Yes, I know. Blasphemy).

 

[drbrumley]

We do realize The United States is a state of its' own don't we?

 

[Jefferson]

Far, far less.

I agree.