Fighting for life and property

  • Follow Editorials

Two of the most intriguing and profound public initiatives in years will appear on Mississippi voters’ ballots Tuesday.




Initiative 31 would protect property owners from having private developers use the government to take their land by force, through “eminent domain.” Proposition 26 would amend the state’s constitution to recognize that human life begins at conception.

These issues bear close watching; they regard two of our most fundamental human rights – that of life and property – and are not unique to Mississippi.

Remarkably, and regrettably, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2005 (Kelo v. City of New London) that governments can, indeed, take your property (with compensation) against your will and transfer it to another private entity which thinks it can do more with that land than you have. Some 43 states now have laws forbidding, or sharply discouraging, such takings; Mississippi’s would do the latter, requiring a prohibitive 10-year waiting period on such transfers.

A sad footnote: They never did develop Suzette Kelo’s Connecticut land after seizing it.

It’s pertinent to note that they can’t even do that with your car. Imagine a fellow pining for your vehicle – and using the government to order you to hand it over for its Blue Book value. Shouldn’t our homesteads and land be more sacred than our autos? It is wholly unconscionable and un-American to think one party could use the government to seize another’s property. Pray voters stand in the way on Tuesday.

Meanwhile, Mississippi voters will cast ballots on the so-called “Personhood Amendment,” the most sweeping and democratic response to Roe v. Wade since the high court divined a right to abortion in 1973.

The amendment is breathtaking in its straightforwardness and clarity – as well as its logic: To this point, no one has documented any evidence that a fertilized human embryo has ever produced anything other than a human being. So the question is, are all humans created equal, and do they all enjoy the same rights enumerated in our Constitution? Or are our babies somehow less than human?

These are two of our most fundamental rights. Americans shouldn’t have to vote to get them back – but it’s beautiful that they’re finally getting that chance.

Comments (50) Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
bjphysics
36
Points
bjphysics 11/07/11 - 03:15 pm
0
0
harley_52: “…what happened to

harley_52: “…what happened to the post where you questioned whether I read your wikipedia article?”

I edited it and added a link and now it has gone to the same place old IBM mainframe batch jobs used to go when they were lost: Cyber-Heaven.

On edit: it's back so make that Cyber-Limbo.

bjphysics
36
Points
bjphysics 11/07/11 - 02:52 pm
0
0
onlysane1left: “How can you

onlysane1left: “How can you be for pro-life in a state that is for capital punishment? Help me understand...”

Because the term “Pro-life” has always been shorthand for “Pro-Innocent-Life”; the Pro-life movement has never meant it any other way with the exception of the Catholic clergy. There is nothing inconsistent in their position.

harley_52
33638
Points
harley_52 11/07/11 - 02:54 pm
0
0
onlysane1left said "The

onlysane1left said "The pro-lifers are always around in a discussion like this, but always seem to disappear when it comes to capital punishment. How can you be for pro-life in a state that is for capital punishment? Help me understand......."

Happy to.

Unborn children are "innocent." They couldn't be more "innocent." They have done nothing wrong. They have their entire lives in front of them. Lives that could result in untold good for the earth and all of humanity. Their mothers are their protectors and their life support. Their lives rest in their mothers' hands.

The death penalty involves the complete antithesis of the above. The furthest thing possible from innocent life is at stake. An evil human being who has purposely taken the life of another for his own reasons. He deserves no advocate and no mercy.

Some claim you can't be against abortion and for the death penalty. They have an agenda on their side, not reason, and not humanity.

InChristLove
22491
Points
InChristLove 11/07/11 - 02:59 pm
0
0
Since there are some who just

Since there are some who just don't get it......

There is a huge difference in capital punishment and abortion. Capital punishment is judicial consequences or punishment for murder under the Law given to Moses by God. Read the following article and maybe this will explain it better.

http://logosresourcepages.org/OurTimes/capital.htm

bjphysics
36
Points
bjphysics 11/07/11 - 03:07 pm
0
0
harley_52: “How did you do

harley_52: “How did you do that, bjphysics?”

Do what?

Willow Bailey
20619
Points
Willow Bailey 11/07/11 - 04:18 pm
0
0
While God is very clear on

While God is very clear on life, I find room for discussion regarding capital punishment. Looking at the Old Testament, execution was called for regarding murder, rape, and offenses against God’s holiness, false prophecy and witchcraft. There were mechanisms to avert the death penalty in some situations, and God sometimes spared the lives of people whose actions would have called for the death penalty.

Death penalties were never applied loosely. In fact, its use actually shows us how precious human life is to God. Because human beings are image-bearers of God, murder was such a serious affront to both God and man that it had to be answered with the blood of the murderer. "Whoever sheds man’s blood, his blood will be shed by man, for God made man in His image." Genesis 9:6

As a true theocracy, Israel was unique -- God Himself crafted the laws. God clearly has the authority to save or condemn human lives, but does He exercise that authority in a democratic government?

The New Testament adds more interesting thoughts, but it doesn’t clearly instruct us one way or the other regarding the death penalty. The apostle Paul acknowledges that wielding “the sword” is a legitimate exercise of government authority to punish criminals, with violence if necessary. Although, many of Jesus’ actions and words, such as his foiling of the execution of the adulterous woman, suggest mercy and humility. And then look at Jesus’ own experience with capital punishment: he was the ultimate innocent victim of a government’s sword wielded unjustly.

The Gospel of grace (NT) is held to have fulfilled the Old Testament law. An overall theme of the New Testament is the undeserved forgiveness extended to us by a merciful God. As recipients of God’s grace, we are called to extend grace to others as well. How do we reconcile the need for justice with the importance of mercy and forgiveness? Where is the balance?

It would be easier if God had been clear in the new covenant, but, He has not. Whatever the conclusion, we must be motivated by justice and grace, rather than vengeance or hatred; and, we are all called to make sure that it is carried out justly and does not target the innocent.

What an incredible responsibility God has left us with.

harley_52
33638
Points
harley_52 11/07/11 - 04:55 pm
0
0
bjphysics, it's hard to carry

bjphysics, it's hard to carry on a conversation with you when you go back and change the questions after they've been answered the first time.

Can't you just pick a lane and stay in it?

InChristLove
22491
Points
InChristLove 11/07/11 - 05:33 pm
0
0
"The New Testament adds more

"The New Testament adds more interesting thoughts, but it doesn’t clearly instruct us one way or the other regarding the death penalty."

Willow, I will agree that it is hard for us humans to reconcile the harsh punishment commanded by God along with the love, mercy and forgiveness that Jesus taught. We have been so caught up in the world's philosophy that we become ashamed or blinded of the Lord's own words in Exodus 21 and forget the true character of God's Holy and Just Righteousness. We remember God's Love but tend to brush off God's wrath.

The Mosaic Law very strongly supported the death penalty and Jesus never once disobeyed the law or taught against it. He said, “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill.” Matthew 5:17. The law made numerous provisions for the death penalty and Jesus didn’t come to destroy those provisions but fulfill them.

In John 8, the scribes and Pharisees tried to find something against Jesus. They presented the adulteress and reminded Jesus that the Law of Moses commanded them to stone her and asked Jesus’ opinion. This was not so much about keeping the law as it was trying to trap Jesus. If Jesus had made an exception to the law, he would be in favor of breaking the law and if he upheld the law, then He would have been portrayed as cruel. Jesus did the unexpected. What he wrote in the dirt with his finger we do not know but possibly it was Leviticus 20:10, which states the man that commits adultery with another man’s wife will also be put to death. Notice they did not bring the man to Jesus, only the woman. One by one, the accusers slipped away until no one was left, therefore no accuser, no required penalty. Jesus wasn’t changing the law, the penalty for adultery was still death, but because there were no accusers, a penalty was not required.

Revelations and the two witnesses also speaks on the penalty of death and I believe there are some scriptures in Hebrew that speak on it (although I woud have to double check on that to be certain).

bjphysics
36
Points
bjphysics 11/07/11 - 05:35 pm
0
0
It’s all part of my nefarious

It’s all part of my nefarious plot to make responders look schizophrenic. I post:

“Is the devil in the chair?”

Responder: “What does devil in the chair have to do with paying down the national debt?”

Then I edit the original post to read: “What combination of budget cuts and revenue (targeted to debt payment only) are required to pay down the debt to 40% GDP by 2025?

Then I respond to your rejoinder with: “What devil in the chair? Are you hallucinating?”

Fiendish

bjphysics
36
Points
bjphysics 11/07/11 - 06:06 pm
0
0
EHS Knight: “Either your

EHS Knight: “Either your [sic] pro-life for ALL LIFE or you're a hypocrite. You cannot call yourself pro life while gladly cheering on wars and executions. That's about as far from pro life as one can get!

As soon as conservatives are willing to pay for health care and education for all children, then I might believe that they are "pro-life". As it stands, all they are "pro" about is to make people obey their particular religion and to control everyone's lives. They do not care at all about chilren once they clear the womb.

Before birth it's a precious miracle of god. After birth it is a dirty welfare cheat.”

Standard Liberal catechism (I’m a Liberal by the way); most American conservatives want a social safety net just like you, they are opposed to institutionalized parasitism, which has become epidemic in America.

As far as Pro-Life and the Death-Penalty goes, I’d say some people, like Nazi concentration camp operatives and Ted Bundy need killing in the worst kind of way.

In the movie Star Trek III: The Search for Spock, everybody cheers when Captain Kirk dispatches the unrepentant Klingon Captain, effectively executing him. No Liberal, or Conservative, or Independent walks out of the theater saying: “That’s outrageous; couldn’t Kirk capture him and render him onto the appropriate authorities for life-time imprisonment? No, they all cheer, because some beings need killing in the worst kind of way.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5b1a-hqvGNI

augusta citizen
10951
Points
augusta citizen 11/07/11 - 06:05 pm
0
0
Willow, Amen on your 10:33 AM

Willow, Amen on your 10:33 AM post. Have you heard of Patrice Lewis' new book, "The Simplicity Primer"? I think you would enjoy it, it's available at Amazon. (Shhh, don't let some of the posters on here know that in addition to running her blog - Rural Revolution - she is also a columnist for World News Daily).

bjphysics
36
Points
bjphysics 11/07/11 - 06:09 pm
0
0
Can’t we just all

Can’t we just all disagree?

Opps, nevermind, my bad.

Willow Bailey
20619
Points
Willow Bailey 11/07/11 - 06:16 pm
0
0
ICL, that was an excellent

ICL, that was an excellent post. Something very worth considering and studying the Word further. In either case, though, whether we find cause as Christians to be "For or Against" capital punishment, I believe God will be concerned with our motivations rather than the act, itself. As to non believers and their choices, well, I believe there will be far more pressing matters.

Willow Bailey
20619
Points
Willow Bailey 11/07/11 - 06:18 pm
0
0
Thank you, AC, and I will

Thank you, AC, and I will defintely check out her book. I appreciate you thinking of me.

Bizkit
49595
Points
Bizkit 11/07/11 - 06:39 pm
0
0
That is a weak Wikipedia

That is a weak Wikipedia article-read the discussion. It boils down to personhood rather than humanity. This is a better article:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slogan:_Human_life_begins_at_conception.
I think it interesting about the consistency in logic. Reminds me of our Attorney General who can't tolerate a patchwork of state laws regarding immigration but turns a blind eye to a patchwork of federally illegal medical marijuana. Thus my only conclusion is a new semantic term:situational logic. Brain hemorrhoid!
I don't think the legal defintion should refer to when life begins or when they are human because that isn't the issue. Really the issue is when are they a person. Equality before the law really refers to persons not whether they are alive or dead. A dead person has legal rights, a life conceptus doesn't except under special circumstance. Weird eh.

KSL
190558
Points
KSL 11/07/11 - 07:03 pm
0
0
Yep, it's weird, Biz. I'm

Yep, it's weird, Biz. I'm amazed at some of the comments that I hear from both sides of the issue.

Bizkit
49595
Points
Bizkit 11/07/11 - 07:18 pm
0
0
Hey Kathy Sue Loudermilk, How

Hey Kathy Sue Loudermilk, How are you?

InChristLove
22491
Points
InChristLove 11/07/11 - 09:19 pm
0
0
Willow, you are so right.

Willow, you are so right. God is concerned more about our motivation. If we put someone to death because of revenge or hatred, then that is wrong, but to follow the judgement layed out by Christ as punishment for the sin of murder then IMO it is not.

1 Peter 2:13 "Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme; Or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well."

Even in Romans, Paul was submitting himself to the authority of the government. In chapter 13 he says "For if I be an offender, or have committed any thing worthy of death, I refuse not to die: but if there be none of these things whereof these accuse me, no man may deliver me unto them. I appeal unto Caesar."

Paul is saying if he has committed a crime worthy of death then he wouldn't fight it but he hadn't so he appealed to Ceasar.

It matters not what we are for or against but what God is for and against. Personally I do not believe I could sentence anyone to death but then again I've never been in a position to have to make that choice. I hope I never am.

My comments were mainly to point out that believers who approve of capital punishment for the crime of murder but do not approve of taking the life of an unborn child are not hypocrites, they are following the punishment laid out by God. The real issue is not everyone is a believer so man's law takes so long to execute that the law has actually become about revenge instead of justice.

Ecclesiastes 8:11 warns us "Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil."

For non-believers, far more pressing matters indeed. Our work here is far from finished.

IsAnyoneAlwaysRight
40
Points
IsAnyoneAlwaysRight 11/09/11 - 08:59 am
0
0
How many acres does one

How many acres does one actually need?

Bruno
780
Points
Bruno 11/09/11 - 09:21 am
0
0
IAAR, I have read that you

IAAR, I have read that you will need about 15 acres for subsistence farming. But that misses the point in the issue of imminent domain.

As to the pro-life/con-life issue. The problem that I see is that too many people bring the Bible into the discussion rather than arguing the issue through logic and reason. This is where they fail.

/pro-life

bjphysics
36
Points
bjphysics 11/09/11 - 11:36 am
0
0
Mississippi “Personhood”

Mississippi “Personhood” initiative defeated by 62%.

Back to Top
loading...
Search Augusta jobs