Thursday, October 18, 2007

Kudos to CBN; Will First Things Get Left Behind?

David Brody, a national correspondent for CBN News, has been giving Ron Paul a fair shake recently. He recognizes Paul's rock star following noting Paul's opposition to the war and take on Roe v. Wade. While some evangelicals like Bob Jones are endorsing Romney, others have still left themselves open, like James Dobson and Pat Robertson.

It is interesting to note that the Chairman of Paul's Iowa campaign is from Iowa's Christian Alliance and the former chairman of Pat Robertson's Iowa campaign. There is still hope for big shot evangelical support of Ron Paul. The question for them is how beholden are they to the Iraqi nation building project to make a vote for a truly pro-life presidential candidate?

On the other hand, in the case of First Things, editor Joseph Bottum seems to foreclose a vote for a Ron Paul presidency as an act of "go[ing] mad." He fails to make any kind of substantive critique of Paul's ideas or even give credence to Paul's pro-life credentials. Paul offers a fresh approach which is rarely, if ever, considered by the pro-life establishment: enact a Congressional limit on Federal appellate court jurisdiction. In short, statutorily overrule Roe v. Wade. For a man who would "sup with the devil to see" Roe v. Wade overturned, it is sad to seem him summarily dismiss Ron Paul's bright ideas founded in Constitutional authority. It seems for the time being, First Things is much more beholden to the nation building project in Iraq.

Ron Paul on the bully pulpit would give the most radical pro-life Presidency ever, seeking within the confines of federal power a respect for life from cradle to grave, both foreign and domestic. And I dare speculate, that even if he didn't get Congress to statutorily overturn Roe v. Wade, if a state sought to enforce abortion statutes as murder, a Ron Paul executive would not enforce a decision by the Federal courts overturning such a state statute. Thus, while the court in that instance may have spoken, it would do so only with a mere opinion without the force of the executive behind it. Under a Paul presidency, the states could exert their proper plenary powers outlawing abortion without any kind of executive interference. In short, a Paul presidency would really allow for bold action by the pro-life movement in the several states.