Not with my tax dollars you don’t
- Image via Wikipedia
By Annie Fowler, guest blogger
All sorts of ill-conceived, unethical wrongdoing can be accomplished under the recently passed SB 7, The Missouri Science Innovation and Reinvestment Act (MOSIRA), due to its inadequate reporting mechanism and funding arrangement history. The potential for taxpayer-blessed dollars to be used for exploitive, unethical human cloning and embryonic stem cell research is very real. MOSIRA contains a reporting provision which, in effect, creates immunity for agencies which participate in ethically objectionable “true cloning”—such as somatic cell nuclear transfer.
Because of the faulty language currently contained in section 38 (d) of the Missouri Constitution, which only limitedly defines cloning as the implantation of a clone into a woman’s uterus, it lacks the necessary enforcement teeth to address other legitimately ethical research concerns. The after-the-fact reporting provision in the SB 7 coupled with only a ten-day window in which legislators may respond stymies any future investigative processes which may be warranted.
Missourians everywhere agree that a clone implantation must be legally prevented. However, Missourians also agree that a human embryo who is virtually genetically identical to an existing or previously existing human being who is “created” under any conditions also must be protected by the full measure of our law. The above-referenced section 38 (d) is commonly known in Missouri as Amendment 2, and it was passed on a fast track powered by misinformation. Doctors, citizens, biologists mounted an effort to slow the process and to require careful evaluation of the scientific evidence, but trickery prevailed. Now it is coming back to haunt us!
The history of the cozy little connection between MOSIRA and the Missouri Technology Corporation (MTC) goes like this: A fund was created that can be used for human life science research by tech businesses. It is administered by a quasi-government agency which has been a front-runner for pro-cloning efforts. The fund is channeled through our state budget process and supplied with state money—our tax dollars. MOSIRA is the fund, MTC is the controlling administrator, and our elected Missouri legislators are the overseers of the state budget process.
Do you want your Missouri tax dollars contributing to this type of life science research? What Missourians want to support is the use of ethical adult stem cell-based regenerative medicine research with its track record of successful human and humane therapies.
For additional information, visit: http://missourilife.org/legislation/mosira.html
We can have our pie and eat it too
By Hannah Harper, guest blogger
There’s so much wrong thinking with the editorial in the October 29-30 weekend issue of the Wall Street Journal that I do not know where to begin. However, the importance of weighing in motivates me to compile this refutation. The title of the referenced article is, “The Other Jobs Crisis.”
The author’s complaint is that the recent illegal immigration crackdown has resulted in economic woes due to the worker drought across the skill spectrum. Migrant farm laborers are not to be found and so the harvest spoils. The insufficient number of study visas issued in math and science contribute to a deficit of needed engineers and scientists.
After reading the litany of criticism directed at the various states’ recent anti-immigration efforts which range from the requirement that employers use E-Verify to enactment of tougher enforcement provisions, it leads me to ask: What part of legal does the author support? The suggestion that those who do not have the necessary papers be granted a way to become legal only ignores the prior existence of that option—one which legal immigrants have followed for decades. It also reveals an audacious advocacy to spurn and circumvent law. Amnesty only serves to affirm law breaking.
The look we were given at possible solutions to the job crisis was colored by the author’s all-too-eager-to-find-fault attitude. The corrective measure which Idaho and Arizona took in utilizing available incarcerated criminals to work the fields was described as “desperate.” If this solution was so desperate, why are Georgia and Alabama looking into it?
Other cited obstacles were the strenuous nature of the required labor as well as the need for cyclically available returning, experienced workers. That sounds like a potentially compatible match for our college youth demographic which seeks to avoid student loan debt. Also, what about structuring shorter shifts to widen the potential appeal and do-ability of the strenuous work to a numerically larger work force?
Smart students seeking visas are welcome. We also must cultivate and increase the number of our own, homegrown math and science-gifted students by emphasizing those subjects. Finally, we are committed to the preservation and promotion of the legitimate immigration process through necessary reform of its cumbersome aspects. Come on, America, we can have the rule of law and our economy, too!
Contact the author at: sowerofwords@gmail.com
Related articles
- The Other Jobs Crisis (online.wsj.com)
Cain didn’t get caned; he was potentially enabled
- Image via Wikipedia
By Hannah Harper, guest blogger
Susan B. Anthony’s group (SBA-List) was exercising due diligence when they recently issued a take action alert to members in response to confusing statements made by Herman Cain in an interview with Piers Morgan on CNN.
As we have seen on a state level, it is critically important to know specifics regarding a person’s pro-life position. We, the electorate, are given opportunity through multiple avenues such as interviews, debates, pro-life organizations, talk radio, articles, blogs, etc., to learn exactly who the Presidential Republican candidates are and how their stands will likely translate into useful or dreadful policy.
Making these necessary determinations can be a confusing road full of bends and turns, but I am on it for the responsible ride to the end! It’s my prayerful goal that God will lead us in our acquisition of accurate information and strengthen us to resist the slide to apathy, cynicism and inaction.
Please go to Herman Cain’s official website and read his own response to the confusion surrounding that recent interview: http://www.hermancain.com/
The “drill down” by the pro-life community and our interface with Herman Cain and all the candidates is critically important. A necessary attitude by us should be a willingness to expend the hard work and tedium required to be truly knowledgeable, and likewise, worthy candidates should reciprocate with provision of as much detailed answer as we request.
That’s what participatory government is all about; it’s a lot of work, but the alternative isn’t worth working for!
Paul Krugman is a fake human
Cover of The Conscience of a Liberal
By Stephanie Williams
The New York Times runs an op-ed column by Paul Krugman titled “The Conscience of a Liberal.” Does anyone else find that title oxymoronic?
Krugman is a Ph.D. from MIT and Nobel prize winner in 2008 for Economics. He is one more East Coast Ivy League elitist lobbing snide volleys at the great unwashed masses via a once esteemed news rag now known for little more than loss of readership.
On the tenth anniversary of the terror attacks of September 11th Krugman wrote a piece titled “The Years of Shame” wherein he referred to Bernie Kerik, Rudy Giuliani, and George W. Bush as “fake heroes” who “raced to cash in on the horror.”
Krugman even closed his column to comments, for obvious reasons, he writes.
For most Americans, September 11th is a day of great pain and remembrance of lives lost, families broken along with hearts, and tributes to heroism and miracles.
For Paul Krugman, it is something much different:
The memory of 9/11 has been irrevocably poisoned; it has become an occasion for shame. And in its heart, the nation knows it.
What is a shame, perhaps, is that the Nobel Prize has become a joke when it is awarded to the likes of America haters such as Jimmy Carter, Barack Obama, and Paul Krugman.
What is a further shame is that someone like Paul Krugman is given a forum to teach young skulls full of mush in our upper division education system – no wonder we are in learning retrograde compared against other cultures.
What is a shame is that the New York Times published this column on September 11, 2011.
What is a shame is that a fake human such as Paul Krugman turned a day of mourning into a cry for attention onto him.
There is no such thing as a liberal with a conscience. And there is no such thing as a liberal who comprehends shame.
The Spirit of 93
Cover of Flight 93: The Movie
Today is September 11th. It is the 10th anniversary of the terror attack on our country. Observances abound.
For me, the the most touching remembrance is the story of Flight 93. It was a United Airlines flight bound from Newark to San Francisco. The flight ended in a hole in the earth near Shanksville, Pennsylvania.
The passengers on board had enough time to learn what was happening that day. Many of them called loved ones to say good-bye. Some were told about the World Trade Center and fact that the hijackers were terrorists using commercial aircraft as weapons in suicide attacks on the U.S.
These brave Americans came together, analyzed the situation, and planned a counter-attack. They knew their lives were on the line and survival was not likely. But they planned and executed their attack anyway. They knew other lives were at stake if they failed.
Natural leaders rose to invite participation from the group. Some people offered their ideas for what weapons they could fashion, others committed to following the plan. Some sat back and declined to act as they were certain appeasing the terrorists would make them likeable and all would be well in the end.
Finally, the plane was over a rural area. The time came and the brave ones stormed the cockpit. The cowards yelled Allahu Akbar and pointed the nose of the plane down racing earthward at a speed greater than 500 mph.
Little was found of human remains. But the brave ones stopped the cowards.
Who knows what icon of America was preserved and how many lives saved.
This story affects me more than any other of that day. It is the spirit of America that filled these brave soldiers of the Republic that they selflessly gave their lives for us, for freedom, for all the wondrous ideals that motivated our ancestors to make a good life here. It is our inheritance.
So this story of spirit is not unlike the true story of the Tea Party movement. Grass roots Americans come from all walks of life. Some natural leaders arise everyday and plan with committed others how to preserve our freedom and the legacy left to us by those who gave their lives.
We must honor that legacy no matter what names we are called or what misrepresentations are made about us. We must honor the spirit of Flight 93.
In the words of Todd Beamer “let’s roll.”
A Lynching in Kansas
By Stephanie Williams
Phill Kline
Kansas history is rooted in the Wild West: a land of gunmen, outlaw gangs, cattle drives, pioneer trails west to destinations like Santa Fe, California, and Oregon. Dodge City was notorious for gunslingers and lawmen like Bat Masterson and Wyatt Earp.
Hangings were a part of meting out justice. They were legal. Lynchings also meted out justice, mob justice.
The term “lynching” mostly has a racial connotation from the shameful history of race relations in this country. Even Clarence Thomas in the confirmation hearing for his nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court where he had to defend his good name against outrageous allegations of sexual harassment by Anita Hill said the following:
This is not an opportunity to talk about difficult matters privately or in a closed environment. This is a circus. It’s a national disgrace. And from my standpoint, as a black American, it is a high-tech lynching for uppity blacks who in any way deign to think for themselves, to do for themselves, to have different ideas, and it is a message that unless you kowtow to an old order, this is what will happen to you. You will be lynched, destroyed, caricatured by a committee of the U.S. Senate rather than hung from a tree.
These words of Clarence Thomas seem to foretell a chilling story of the modern-day lynching of Phill Kline; such story interwoven in a drama featuring Paul Morrison, Kathleen Sebelius, and George Tiller.
A well-known modern-day lawman in Johnson County Kansas was District Attorney turned short-lived Kansas Attorney General, Paul Morrison. Morrison was born in Dodge City in the mid-1950s. His bushy mustache and sparse dome are reminiscent of those lawmen from the 1800s who often played fast and loose with law enforcement as well as their own behavior. And Morrison’s behavior looms large in this Wild West story of Kansas law.
Then there’s Phill Kline, the Republican Kansas Attorney General defeated by Republican-turned-Democrat Paul Morrison in 2006. Kline subsequently took Morrison’s job as Johnson County District Attorney in a tables-turned job swap election.
Kline, also a native Kansan, was born in Kansas City, Kansas in 1959 and grew up in Shawnee, Kansas. Many in Kansas City will remember Phill Kline from talk radio where he argued positions from the conservative perspective in contrast to former Catholic nun, Mary O’Halloran, the very liberal Democrat consultant.
Kline served as a member of the Kansas House of Representatives and won the election for Attorney General in 2002.
Kline is the subject of charges by the Kansas State Disciplinary Administrator’s Office that investigates and takes action against lawyers who are accused of breaches of professional conduct. Anyone can file a complaint against a Kansas licensed attorney and in Kline’s case various parties did so in an attempt to thwart his investigations into acts by late-term abortion doctor, George Tiller, as well as Planned Parenthood. Kline had evidence that both parties may have been violating Kansas law regarding late-term and partial birth abortion and covering up cases of child rape.
One of the accusers in the ethics complaint filed against Kline was Dan Monnat, George Tiller’s attorney. Monnat was named a Missouri and Kansas Super Lawyer of 2010.
Monnat attended a Jesuit high school and graduated from Jesuit Creighton University School of Law. Monnat said of Tiller’s death, “It was just the ultimate horror. A certain energy goes out of the world when vital, epic, heroic people like Dr. Tiller aren’t here anymore. It’s a tragedy for all of us.”
In an interview, Monnat said that Tiller knew that what he was doing (that is, partial birth abortions) was “morally right.”
Stanton Hazlett, the Kansas Disciplinary Administrator, filed formal charges in December 2010 against Kline. Such charges are the subject of a formal ethics proceeding against him. Hazlett is quoted in his December 2010 letter stating, “We will argue that Mr. Kline’s strong personal anti-abortion beliefs interfered with his judgment in prosecuting the abortion clinics.”
Prior to 2010, Hazlett referred the matter for investigation to two Topeka attorneys, S. Lucky DeFries and Mary Beth Mudrick, who found in a written report dated May 21, 2008, that Kline violated no rules of ethics imposed on lawyers in the state of Kansas.
On page 13 of their report, DeFries and Mudrick opined, “After reviewing the substantial documentation in this case, it is the opinion of these investigators that there is not probable cause to prove that Phill Kline violated any of the rules of ethics.”
This report was apparently buried by Hazlett’s office and discovered by Kline in his review of related documents in preparation of his defense in the February 2011 phase one ethics hearing.
In addition to the DeFries and Mudrick report there are other findings regarding Kline’s pursuit of Planned Parenthood and Tiller. District Judge Clark V. Owens of Sedgwick County in his opinion ruling in response to defendant’s motion to dismiss or suppress evidence in 2007 case, The State of Kansas vs. George R. Tiller wrote the following,
There is no doubt that Phill Kline’s campaign for and conduct of the Attorney General’s office was heavily involved in abortion issues. It is not uncommon for elected prosecutors to pledge intensive efforts to address areas of perceived criminal violations. Some of these may tread very closely to constitutionally protected conduct such as cracking down on pornography and the freedom speech [sic] or concentrating on street gang activities and freedom of association. The problem arises when the prosecutor steps over the line and threatens the constitutionally protected activity.
While Phill Kline testified that he would like for all abortions to be outlawed, his investigations made no attempts to prevent lawful abortions from being performed in the State of Kansas. His procedures have certainly been questioned by the Kansas Supreme Court, but his conduct in the investigation does not merit the sanction of the dismissal of the charges or suppression of evidence.
In the February 2011 ethics hearing, Kline testified that the Kansas Supreme Court ordered him to turn over to Paul Morrison, his successor as Attorney General, all records of his criminal investigation not only of Tiller’s clinic and Planned Parenthood in Kansas but also information on other abortion clinics and testimony of former Planned Parenthood employees in cases under investigation in other states. It is reported that Kline testified that Morrison then handed this evidence over to the defendants’ attorneys.
After assuming office as Kansas Attorney General, Paul Morrison wrote a letter to Pedro Irigonegaray, attorney for Planned Parenthood, advising him that he would not be pursuing the case against Irigonegaray’s client and would be returning their medical records. Morrison also warned Irigonegaray that Phill Kline did retain a copy of such records in his new capacity as Johnson County District Attorney clearly indicating that he (Kline) was expected to continue his investigation and action against Planned Parenthood.
Subsequently, AG Morrison declared in 2007 that he was clearing Planned Parenthood of criminal wrongdoing and joined with Planned Parenthood in a suit against Phill Kline intended to deprive Kline of redacted copies of the medical records that formed the evidentiary basis of the 107 criminal counts against Planned Parenthood. Such stalling tactic by Morrison in league with the abortion provider’s attorneys kept Kline from proceeding with his case right to the end of his term in office. Morrison also denied Kline legal representation for his defense even though he, Kline, was sued in his public capacity as Attorney General. Kline was forced to hire private counsel chalking up six figure fees.
Then Morrison’s public shame began. He was accused of sexual harassment by Linda Carter, an administrative staff person from his former office as Johnson County District Attorney, after she ended their extended adulterous affair. Carter also accused Morrison of using her to spy on Kline’s actions against a Planned Parenthood clinic when Kline succeeded Morrison as Johnson County D.A.
Carter reported her belief that Morrison’s hatred for Phill Kline would be his downfall. Carter revealed that she and Morrison had sex in the Johnson County Courthouse as well as numerous other places during the course of her employment with Johnson County. Paul Morrison, a Roman Catholic, was conducting marriage preparation classes at his parish at the time he was having sex with a woman who was not his wife.
What also was buried is another complaint from 1991 of sexual harassment and other personal and job related retaliatory offenses by Morrison against Kelly Summerlin, a former employee of the Johnson County District Attorney’s office.
In a 2006 public statement released by her lawyer after Morrison stated during the campaign that his office had operated without a “whiff of scandal,” Summerlin said, “Mr. Morrison has provided misleading and false information.” Summerlin admits she settled with Morrison to end her personal difficulties and potential prolonged litigation.
In January 2008, Morrison resigned as Attorney General stating that he had done nothing contrary to the ethical standards of his profession. Some may disagree. He served barely a year in office.
After the Linda Carter revelation, Morrison was investigated for blackmail, telephone harassment and other charges but he was exonerated of criminal wrongdoing.
While ethical complaints were filed against Morrison by a pro-life group, no readily available record of Stanton Hazlett rigorously pursuing a disciplinary action against Morrison is evident. In fact, Paul Morrison is practicing law in Olathe, Kansas as the Morrison Law Firm.
So it seems in Kansas, if you have the right alliances and publicly declare your support for abortion providers, even those under investigation, you just might avoid scrutiny for alleged abuses of office, sexual harassment, having sex with a subordinate in a courthouse, expressing personal contempt to the point of hatred for a fellow attorney and public office holder, constructive termination of an employee who rejected sexual advances, retaliation, or just behaving in a manner that is unbecoming an officer of the court, let alone a District Attorney and Attorney General. Forget personal beliefs, just consider public behavior.
So what do we have here? Sebelius, Morrison, Monnat, very public Roman Catholics, a religion whose catechism teaches reverence for the sanctity of life, educated in esteemed Catholic institutions of higher learning, who are so far in bed with the abortion industry, and in some cases persons other than their spouse, that it is clear that their vacuous souls and insatiable greed for power, money, and public acclaim drove them to actions intended to destroy a man – a simple man doing nothing more than his job. A man whose fortitude offered a glimpse of the honor they lack.
And, what value is an ethics complaint from one’s adversary in a legal proceeding? It is clear from the outset that both parties have opposing interests and that filing a complaint such as this by Monnat and fellow abortion-provider attorneys is nothing more than trial tactics at play. If you have neither the facts nor the law on your side then use your political cronies to neuter your opponent. In fact, if you get him disbarred in Kansas he will not be able to proceed with the cases against your clients in any jurisdiction. You will send a message that should strike terror in the mind of any prosecutor who remotely considers taking on the abortion providers: back off or we will come for you next.
Is Stanton Hazlett pursuing an investigation or charges against Monnat and his fellow officers of the court for obstructing an investigation or trial delaying tactics, tactics which in fact use Hazlett himself as their obstructive pawn?
What does this case say about the Kansas Supreme Court, a court populated with Sebelius appointees? How unbiased are they when their members are beholden to the abortion industry and its queen, Kathleen Sebelius? Who will investigate the highest court in the state that forbade testimony from Judge John Anderson, a key witness in overseeing Kline’s investigation of Planned Parenthood and who had actual knowledge of the facts?
And who will investigate its subordinate in the Disciplinary Administrator’s Office, Stanton Hazlett, who hid critical findings by neutral third parties exonerating Kline of ethical wrongdoing, and who apparently ignored district court judges who found Kline to be on firm legal ground in his actions.
Anyone in elective public office seeks it based on a platform of ideology coupled with promised actions. The people of Kansas elected Phill Kline to do a job. It is immaterial if Phill Kline holds pro-life personal beliefs. He performed his duties admirably in a state that held the shameful title of late-term abortion capitol of the country. The volume of these restricted abortions in Kansas should cause any reasonable person to suspect that corners were cut and rubber stamps affixed to get past the threshold guidelines. Kline had the evidence and he proceeded appropriately to enforce the laws of Kansas.
But it appears that Planned Parenthood just might own the most powerful arm of the law in Kansas and it intends to send a very clear message to anyone who seeks to win against it in a court of law: we will destroy you.
The ethics tribunal has adjourned on Count I against Phill Kline; the hearing for Count II begins this week.
Who knows the motives of Sebelius, Morrison, Monnat, Hazlett, or any of the other persons caught up in this case. But what I can say is this, whatever the fate of Phill Kline, this is a circus; it’s a national disgrace… unless you kowtow to an old order, this is what will happen to you.
This is a modern-day lynching in Kansas.
The next phase of the ethics trial against Phill Kline in Kansas begins July 18, 2011. For further background information on this travesty, visit the following:
http://plannedparenthoodcorruption.org/the-story/
http://standwithtruth.com/about-phill-kline/
Related articles
- Six’s Answers Are Implausible Concerning Abortion Questions (deaconforlife.blogspot.com)
- Whatʼs The Matter with Kansas? The 750 Mile Plan (Guest Contributor KSMom) (momocrats.typepad.com)
We are not hugging the delusive phantom of hope
- Image via Wikipedia
By Stephanie Williams
We celebrate Independence Day this week. Most people still call it the Fourth of July. Yes, it is that, but more importantly it is the day to celebrate the miracle of the birth of this nation and those brave men and women who brought it into existence.
The simple fact of the birth of the United States is that it came about by the commitment and vision of principled men of primarily Western European ancestry steeped in ideals stemming from the Protestant Reformation who recognized the hand of Providence on this nation and understood that our rights are inalienable as they come from the Divine, not man.
Today, we are fighting a new revolution of sorts against our fellow citizens who lost their way in recent decades and against a government inebriated with power and seemingly unlimited access to other people’s money. It is serious this struggle and like the dawn of this nation, the mantle of the struggle has been taken up by simple citizens leaderless and self-organizing. Many voices speak out these days, from diverse ethnic heritages and religious traditions, made possible by sophisticated means of communication that will not be thwarted by a cabal of traitors to the founding principles. These voices are one in defending freedom as un-hyphenated Americans firm in their resolve to return the country to what its Founders intended.
So on this day of celebration of Independence, as we enjoy backyard barbecues and evening fireworks, let us consider the March 1775 speech of Patrick Henry to the Virginia colony’s delegates. Bear in mind this speech was given with great passion and no notes, no teleprompter.
No man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as
abilities, of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed the House. But
different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I
hope that it will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen, if,
entertaining as I do opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I shall
speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve.This is no time for ceremony. The question before the House is one of
awful moment to this country. For my own part I consider it as nothing less than
a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the
subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we
can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold
to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through
fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my
country, and of an act of disloyalty towards the majesty of heaven, which I
revere above all earthly kings.Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope.
We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of
that siren, till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men,
engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of
the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and having ears, hear not, the
things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation?For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know
the whole truth — to know the worst and to provide for it. I have but one lamp
by which my feet are guided; and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no
way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to
know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten
years, to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace
themselves and the House?Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately
received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not
yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious
reception of our petition comports with these warlike preparations which cover
our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of
love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled
that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves,
sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation — the last arguments to
which kings resort. I ask gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its
purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlemen assign any other
possible motives for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the
world, to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies?No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us; they can be meant for no
other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the
British ministry have been so long forging. And what have we to oppose to them?
Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years.
Have we anything new to offer on the subject? Nothing.We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it
has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What
terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech
you, sir, deceive ourselves longer.Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which
is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated;
we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its
interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament.
Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced
additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we
have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne. In vain, after
these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is
no longer any room for hope.If we wish to be free — if we mean to preserve inviolate those
inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending — if we mean
not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged,
and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object
of our contest shall be obtained, we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must
fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of Hosts is all that is left us!They tell us, sir, that we are weak — unable to cope with so formidable
an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the
next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard
shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and
inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance, by lying supinely
on our backs, and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall
have bound us hand and foot?Sir, we are not weak, if we make a proper use of the means which the God
of nature hath placed in our power. Three millions of people, armed in the holy
cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible
by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not
fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of
nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us.The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the
active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to
desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat
but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be
heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable — and let it come! I
repeat it, sir, let it come!It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, “Peace!
Peace!” — but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that
sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our
brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that
gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to
be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know
not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty, or give me
death!
