I’ve posted my response to the Honorable Justice Mulready’s question ‘What is the right to life?’, and we’ve had a lively debate in the comments on the post. I’d love to hear more of your thoughts (and debate Mulready a bit more!), but I’m also interested in his definition of the next inalienable right.
I must admit, I feel a little awkward initiating the disucssion at this point. This morning, my pastor wisely (and rightly!) reminded us that the Declaration of Independence is not perfectly sound theology. The inalienable three, while good guides for a secular government, are not the highest calling of Christians. Paul’s exhortation in II Corinthians 4:17 that “our light affliction, which is but for a moment, worketh for us a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory” is a much better guide for our action.
But we’re talking of a secular state. So I ask Mulready, as we continue our conversation of the right to life, what would you define as the right to liberty?