People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it. Welcome to From On High.

Sunday, July 10, 2005

Today's Wisdom

It seems appropriate to cite Ralph Waldo Emerson at this point in time when Londoners are still sifting through the rubble in the Underground looking for the remaining victims of the recent terror bombing.
Great men, great nations, have not been boasters and buffoons, but perceivers of the terror of life, and have manned themselves to face it.
"Fate," The Conduct of Life, 1860.

Behan Has His Priorities Straight

John Behan over at Commonwealth Conservative suggests that we devote some time this weekend to taking in some minor league baseball. The perfect weekend entertainment.

I've always preferred attending minor league games (Louisville!) over those played in Cincinnati or Chicago. Detroit or Cleveland. Especially St. Louis. I've attended games in all those cities, and for sheer spectacle, they make for wonderful entertainment. But when it comes to relaxation and fun, I'd rather spend an evening with the Salem Avalanche.

Last time I was there, as the home team was giving a good whoopin' to the Winston-Salem Warthogs, the family was gathered in a picnic area down the third base line and little Jayla and Kaid occupied themselves with sliding down a grassy hillside toward the third base coach (who took the time from his strategizing to throw Kaid a ball that had been hit foul). You're not going to get that kind of ambience at Comerica Park or Camden Yards.

So. If my firefighter son will come across with some tickets ... I'm going to be in Salem, Virginia cheering the Avalanche on to victory.

Folks, I can't be on guard against terrorists and Democrats all the time.

The Court & Roe V. Wade

Roe v. Wade will remain the law of the land for now (even though there has never been a law passed). So say two reporters for the New York Times.
In New Court, Roe May Stand, So Foes Look to Limit Its Scope

The basic right to abortion, declared in Roe v. Wade in 1973, will survive regardless of who replaces Justice O'Connor, given that the current majority for Roe is 6 to 3, many experts agree. Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist was one of the two original dissenters from the Roe decision; if he retires, as has been widely speculated, President Bush would presumably replace him with a similar conservative, so that would not change the balance on Roe.

But a number of cases that are likely to reach the court in the next few years, including the latest versions of the ban on the procedure that critics call partial-birth abortion, may give a new set of justices the opportunity to restrict abortion in significant ways. (
These reporters are right of course. Roe v. Wade will not be overturned in the near future.

But rest assured; it will be overturned.

Imagine how opponents of slavery must have felt when, in an 1857 case involving a slave named Dred Scott, the United States Supreme Court ruled that Scott, even though he had lived for a time with his owner in a free state (Illinois) and in a free territory (Wisconsin), had no standing as an American citizen to sue for his freedom. The court ruled that he was literally the property of his master and had no rights under the law.

The opponents of slavery must have been outraged at the ruling. And bitter. But from all accounts, they were also undeterred. Undaunted. They pressed ahead.

It finally took a civil war, the loss of three quarters of a million men, a presidential emancipation proclamation, and an amendment to the Constitution to right that wrong.

So it is, and will be, with abortion. Each time a ruling comes out of some federal district court rejecting the latest attempt at curtailing the slaughter of innocents, these days involving the horrid practice of partial birth abortion and parental notification (!), abortion foes press on. They rally. They demonstrate. They vote.

Just as most people knew in 1857 that Dred Scott was an abomination and an affront to mankind, most people know that Roe v. Wade is as well. Not to mention the fact that the ruling was intended to supplant state and federal laws with the court's own legislation. They know, too, that it will not stand.

In time Roe v. Wade will be overturned. You can count on it. It can't happen soon enough.