STATES RIGHTS AND HUMAN RIGHTS- WE'VE BEEN HERE BEFORE

"Obamacare may be the last straw. It strips away fundamental economic liberties, empowering the federal government to de facto nationalize everyone's body by controlling our health. Americans are compelled - upon pain of penalty and eventual imprisonment - to purchase insurance.

Moreover, the law codifies the federal funding of abortion. Taxpayer dollars will be used to subsidize the murder of innocent life. Hence, Mr. Obama has violated the social compact: He has abrogated the conscience of pro-lifers, making them tacitly complicit in the slaughter of the unborn. Obamacare is a radical assault upon fundamental religious freedoms.

The Obama revolution threatens to tear America apart. This has happened before. Slavery eventually triggered the Civil War between the industrial North and the agrarian South. Abortion is the slavery of our time - the denying of basic human rights to an entire category of people.
Washington Times

It is becoming increasingly clear to me that we are entering times so similar to those that preceded the War Between the States that I have to believe the future will end with the same results. America is splintering. Compare the news of today to what was happening just prior to the outbreak of war in 1861.

We have a large segment of our society that are not recognized as persons. In the 19th century it was the blacks that were denied their personhood in the Dred Scott decision. Today it is the unborn child. In both cases the judicially defined lack of personhood denied both groups the rights enshrined in the Declaration of Independence; life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

We have political deals being made today that are designed to benefit certain business groups, deals such as health care, TARP and cap and trade. All of these deals exceed the powers granted the Congress in the Constitution. In the 1850's we had the Kansas-Nebraska Act, a piece of legislation designed to allow expansion of the railroads. While the transcontinental railroad did eventually lead to massive profits for politicians and businesses (not to mention nearly bringing down the Presidency of U.S. Grant through the corruption of the Credit Mobilier), because of its connection to the question of slavery it sparked the war along the Missouri-Kansas border in 1854, the first shots fired in the War Between the States. Health care is tied to the question of abortion in nearly the same way.

The question of state sovereignty was at the heart of all of this. The question of who held the power in this country, Washington or the states, was the root cause of a war that took the lives over a half million Americans. Taxation and Washington's power to use it to force individual states and their citizens to support programs that benefited one group while damaging another were at the center of the debate. Today, as state Attorney General's file suit and state legislatures create laws to enforce the Tenth Amendment to the constitution their arguments and reasons are the same as those put forth by the Southern states as they tried to stand against tyranny.

And just as it was 150 years ago, all of the underlying anger, the political strife and the public arousal just needs a reason, something to rally around, some spark to set it off. Something has to be seen as the moral justification to set the country aflame. In 1861 it was slavery; today it is abortion.

Some states (Thank God) have laws that are far more restrictive in regards to abortion than federal law. The citizens of those states may very well, by citing the Tenth Amendment, declare their intention to opt out of a system that is morally indefensible. Those of us that understand that we are participating in the murder of children now just by paying our taxes will look to our states for protection. It is our only possible recourse and defense. If a state decides that it has the authority under the Tenth Amendment to opt out, just as it did at Ft. Sumter the federal government will do something to provoke war. You see, South Carolina didn't fire on the fort because it wanted war, it fired because a foreign government (the United States) refused to vacate ground owned by a sovereign state, and further was attempting to resupply it. Lincoln provoked South Carolina to start a war. Today's government is more than capable of the same sort of thing.

And before I wrap this up, there is one more similarity between then and now; Lincoln and Obama both hail from Illinois.

History just continues to spin in circles.