Yes, abortion is infanticide
Infanticide has always been a serious component of the ugly side of human nature. Archaeologists have done a lot of digging in Ashkelon, an ancient town in what is typically known as the Holy Land. They found the town’s sewer, and, in a bend in the channel, they found a pile of infant skeletons. Forensic analysis could not find any congenital defects in the remains. It has thus been assumed that the local residents were disposing of their unwanted children.
Fast forward to our modern world. We have a judicial edict that no state can outlaw pregnancy termination. Hence, for the last half century, every time a Supreme Court Justice sneezes… the Roe v. Wade partisans, on both sides, line up in full battle regalia.
It used to be that the several states would individually license and thus regulate medical practice. Then, suddenly, a particularly controversial practice was mandated, regardless of local opinion.
Should Roe be overturned, then the states would be free to adopt their own policies. Should Nevadans be denied access to pregnancy termination, then various clinics in California would likely be able to deal with them. The beauty of our federal system -- the composite structure of jurisdictions -- allows for a politically expedient lack of uniformity.
Lurking beneath this persistent controversy is the profound innocence of infants. They have no voice to defend themselves. So, others adopt the cause. And, yet, definitions are constantly being challenged. Another historic note: in the early days of Christianity, babies were not baptized. Then along came a smallpox pandemic and early baptism became the norm.
[This is as far as I wrote before learning of the leak of the SCOTUS draft opinion on the latest challenge to Roe.] The political histrionics attached to abortion underscore the defect in deciding the issue by fiat, rather than the sausage-making of the political process. Roe is certainly not the only example of judges legislating from the bench, it is just the most controversial. Meanwhile, other important issues wind up being pushed aside while abortion sucks up all the oxygen instead of letting the political process run its course.
At the time Roe was first handed down, various states were already working towards accommodating the nascent demand for clinically safe pregnancy termination, New York being one of the most prominent by merely requiring a woman to be psychologically at risk. What Roe did was to forbid states from restricting access within the first trimester. Recently, however, some states have abolished any time limit, thus igniting the latest firestorm.
Pro-choice misinformation encourages the militant assumption that, should Roe be overturned, abortion would thus be forbidden across the land. The reality is that the authority to make rules governing access to the procedure would be returned to the states. Some states may go too far and SCOTUS would, again, become involved. But the temperature of the dispute would be seriously dialed down.
Image: Kerald
Lying About Roe v. Wade
By Bill Donohue | May 3, 2022 | 3:09pm EDT
The hysterical reaction of pro-abortion politicians and activists to news that the Supreme Court may overturn Roe v. Wade is an index of just how passionate they are in making sure that unborn kids can be legally killed. Leading the charge is our "devout Catholic" president. Biden said that Roe "has been the law of the land for almost fifty years, and basic fairness and the stability of our law demand that it not be overturned."
Truth to tell, Biden has no respect for laws that have been on the books for a long time. He proved that by hailing the Obergefell v. Hodges decision that legalized same-sex marriage. Unsettling this "settled law" — which has been around since the beginning of the Republic — didn't bother him. So why the sudden interest in preserving a ruling that is much more recent?
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer issued a joint statement condemning those Justices who regard Roe to be wrongly decided. They said they "have lied to the U.S. Senate." They cited not a single lie. The truth is that they lied about the justices. In fact, from the very beginning, Roe has been based on lies.
Prior to the 1973 decision legalizing abortion, pro-abortion activists told the media that there were five thousand to ten thousand deaths a year owing to abortion. But it was a lie. We know it was a lie because the man who broadcasted about it at the time, Dr. Bernard Nathanson, a practicing abortionist and activist, later admitted that he lied. By the way, the actual number of women who died of an abortion the year before Roe was thirty-nine; the figure was published by the Centers for Disease Control.
The pro-abortion industry loves to say that prior to Roe, women were prosecuted all over the country for having an abortion. This is another lie.
There are only two cases in which a woman was charged in any state for having an abortion: Pennsylvania in 1911 and Texas in 1922. Since 1922, there have been zero documented cases in which a woman has been charged in an abortion case.
The woman in Roe, Jane Roe (whose actual name is Norma McCorvey), was 21 when she became pregnant for the third time. She sought an abortion in Texas. But there was one problem: Texas did not allow for abortions except if the mother's life was endangered. So she lied. On the advice of her female lawyers, she said she was raped.
Supreme Court Justice Harry Blackmun wrote the decision in Roe arguing that "We need not resolve the difficult question of when life begins." This was a remarkable admission. Did he not understand that this question was central to this issue? The reason why this ruling has proven to be so controversial has everything to do with this question. Moreover, if Blackmun — or anyone else — is unsure when life begins, why not err on the side of caution? Why assume life is not present at conception?
In fact, well before 1973, there was scientific evidence that life begins at conception. Indeed, twenty years earlier, James Watson and Francis Crick discovered the structure of DNA, the very material that makes all of us unique human beings. It is present at fertilization — not a day later. Additionally, ultrasound technology was frequently being used when Roe was decided.
As important as anything, even distinguished pro-abortion jurists have slammed the decision in Roe for being without constitutional foundation.
Those who claim it is constitutionally sound are either ignorant or lying.
Harvard Law professors Archibald Cox, Alan Dershowitz, and Laurence Tribe have said the decision was fatally flawed. Even Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said it was lawmakers, not judges, who should decide this issue.
The New Republic, a staunch supporter of abortion rights, said at the time that it was not the provenance of the courts to rule on abortion. Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen, another advocate of abortion-on-demand, said that inventing a right to privacy was irresponsible.
"Whatever abortion may be," he said, "it cannot simply be a matter of privacy."
The biggest lie of all is the claim that abortion doesn't kill an innocent human being. The Catholic Church has been on the right side of science on this matter all along. We welcome others to the fold.
Bill Donohue is president and CEO of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, the nation's largest Catholic civil rights organization. He was awarded his Ph.D. in sociology from New York University and is the author of nine books and many articles.
COMMENTARY
Biden Says Start of Human Life Is Unresolved
By Bill Donohue | May 3, 2022 | 5:25pm EDTJoe Biden participates in a debate. (Photo credit: JIM WATSON/AFP via Getty Images)"Roe says what all basic mainstream religions have historically concluded — that the right — that the existence of a human life and being is a question. Is it at the moment of conception? Is it six months? Is it six weeks?"
Those are the latest words of wisdom from President Biden.
What "basic mainstream religions" have to say about when life begins is interesting, but it should not be controlling. What matters is what science says. We have known for a long time that life begins at conception.
People can debate all they want about when "personhood" begins — but be careful lest they slide down the eugenics slope — the ultimate issue is this: If what develops at fertilization proceeds undisturbed, the result many months later will be a baby boy or girl. Just as important, all of the characteristics that constitute the uniqueness of this new life were there from the time of conception. This is Biology 101.
The Catholic Church does not follow the science — it has been well out in front of it. It's about time our "devout Catholic" president caught up as well. There is no more "question" about when life begins, Mr. President — the answer is there for anyone not living in a state of delusion.
Bill Donohue is president and CEO of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, the nation's largest Catholic civil rights organization. He was awarded his Ph.D. in sociology from New York University and is the author of nine books and many articles.
In 1981, Then-Senator Biden Voted for a Constitutional Amendment Empowering States to Decide Abortion Legality
By Craig Bannister | May 3, 2022 | 3:43pm EDT
“Guess who supported the idea to let states overturn Roe v. Wade in 1981? Joe Biden,” Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) tweeted Tuesday, reminding Americans that Pres. Biden once voted for the very thing that he fears the Supreme Court will now do.
In a statement issued on Tuesday, commenting on the leak of a draft Supreme Court document signaling the court was prepared to overturn Roe v. Wade, leaving the issue of abortion legality up to the states, Pres. Biden states that is his administration has “argued strongly before the Court” in opposition to the anticipated ruling:
“[M]y administration argued strongly before the Court in defense of Roe v. Wade. We said that Roe is based on “a long line of precedent recognizing ‘the Fourteenth Amendment’s concept of personal liberty’… against government interference with intensely personal decisions.” I believe that a woman’s right to choose is fundamental, Roe has been the law of the land for almost fifty years, and basic fairness and the stability of our law demand that it not be overturned.”
But, as multiple news outlets have reported, in 1981, as a Democrat Delaware senator, Biden voted for a constitutional amendment that – like the overturn of Roe v. Wade the Supreme Court is currently considering – would have enabled each state to pass a law regarding the legality, restriction or prohibition of abortion.
As The New York Times reported in 2019:
“The amendment — which the National Abortion Rights Action League called ‘the most devastating attack yet on abortion rights‘ — cleared a key hurdle in the Senate Judiciary Committee in March 1982. Support came not only from Republicans but from a 39-year-old, second-term Democrat: Joseph R. Biden Jr.
“‘I’m probably a victim, or a product, however you want to phrase it, of my background,‘ Mr. Biden, a Roman Catholic, said at the time. The decision, he said, was ‘the single most difficult vote I’ve cast as a U.S. senator.‘”
That same year, in an article titled “Where 2020 Democrats stand on abortion,” PBS also reported on Biden’s vote in support of the constitutional amendment, which would have turned the issue of abortion over to each state:
“And while Biden later became a staunch defender of Roe, in addition to consistently opposing federal funding of abortions, he did vote in 1981 for a failed constitutional amendment allowing states to overturn Roe. At the time, he called it ‘the single most difficult vote I’ve cast as a U.S. senator.’”
“NPR News reported that Biden was ‘one of just two Democratic senators from the Northeast to vote to end federal funding for abortion for victims of rape and incest,’” Dr. Albert Mohler, a theologian and ordained minister who serves as president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, writes in his commentary “A Profile of Moral Collapse: President Biden, Abortion and the Culture of Death.”
After the constitutional amendment Biden voted for failed to make it to the Senate floor in 1981, Biden voted against it the following year.
Biden Says He Will Work to Enact a Law That Codifies a Right to Abortion
(CNSNews.com) - President Joe Biden said the apparent leak to Politico of a majority Supreme Court draft opinion overturning Roe v. Wade means "we will need more pro-choice Senators and a pro-choice majority in the House to adopt legislation that codifies Roe, which I will work to pass and sign into law."
Biden's statement was posted on the White House website on Tuesday morning, the day after Politico reported the unprecedented leak of a draft opinion the court has not yet issued.
"We do not know whether this draft is genuine, or whether it reflects the final decision of the Court," Biden said. "With that critical caveat, I want to be clear on three points about the cases before the Supreme Court," the statement continued:
"First, my administration argued strongly before the Court in defense of Roe v. Wade. We said that Roe is based on “a long line of precedent recognizing ‘the Fourteenth Amendment’s concept of personal liberty’… against government interference with intensely personal decisions.” I believe that a woman’s right to choose is fundamental, Roe has been the law of the land for almost fifty years, and basic fairness and the stability of our law demand that it not be overturned.
"Second, shortly after the enactment of Texas law SB 8 and other laws restricting women’s reproductive rights, I directed my Gender Policy Council and White House Counsel’s Office to prepare options for an Administration response to the continued attack on abortion and reproductive rights, under a variety of possible outcomes in the cases pending before the Supreme Court. We will be ready when any ruling is issued.
"Third, if the Court does overturn Roe, it will fall on our nation’s elected officials at all levels of government to protect a woman’s right to choose. And it will fall on voters to elect pro-choice officials this November. At the federal level, we will need more pro-choice Senators and a pro-choice majority in the House to adopt legislation that codifies Roe, which I will work to pass and sign into law."
VIDEO:
Joebama Gump
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0p7v2esLb64
Joe Biden: Constitution Gives Right to ‘Abort a Child’ — ‘Mainstream’ Religions Agree with Roe v. Wade
President Joe Biden further reacted to a leaked draft opinion from the Supreme Court on Tuesday, criticizing the “radical” argument against a constitutional right to abortion.
“The idea that we’re gonna make a judgment that is going to say that no one can make the judgment to choose to abort a child based on a decision by the Supreme Court I think goes way overboard,” Biden said.
The president spoke to reporters about the draft opinion as he left Washington, DC, for a trip to Alabama to visit a Lockheed Martin manufacturing facility.
During his remarks, Biden falsely claimed that all mainstream religions believe the beginning of human life is open to interpretation.
“Look, think what Roe says. Roe says what all basic mainstream religions have historically concluded — that the right — that the existence of a human life and being is a question. Is it at the moment of conception? Is it six months? Is it six weeks?”
The president failed to mention that the Catholic Church, of which he claims to be a member, teaches that life begins at the moment of conception.
Biden commented on the issue of abortion after a draft opinion from Justice Samuel Alito to overturn Roe v. Wade was leaked to the media.
He appeared deeply concerned by the leaked opinion, arguing the Supreme Court was threatening to make a “radical decision” if they did choose to overturn Roe v. Wade.
“If this decision holds, it’s really quite a radical decision… it basically says all the decisions related to your private life — who you marry, whether or not you decide to conceive a child or not… what does this do?” he asked.
He also warned that the constitutional right to gay marriage would be endangered as well as other Supreme Court cases involving the right to privacy.
“It’s a fundamental shift in American jurisprudence,” he said.
Biden said he supported a congressional effort to codify Roe v. Wade into law but declined to say whether or not he supported breaking the Senate filibuster rules to ensure its passage.
“I’m not prepared to make those decisions now,” he said.
Kristi Noem to ‘Immediately … Guarantee that Every Unborn Child Has A Right to Life’ if Roe v. Wade Overturned
South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem (R) said Monday evening that if the infamous Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade is overturned, she would “immediately call for a special session to save lives and guarantee that every unborn child has a right to life in South Dakota.”
Noem’s announcement comes as a preliminary decision by Justice Samuel Alito to overturn Roe v. Wade appears to have been leaked from the Supreme Court.
The decision, if legitimate, expressly overturns Roe as well as Planned Parenthood v. Casey with Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization — a case many on both sides of the debate saw as the most likely chance of overturning the 1973 case that has led to the deaths of millions of American babies.
Noem’s plans are part of what is likely to be a movement among state Republican leaders to end abortion in their states entirely, no longer having to attempt to thread the needle to be within the confines of Roe and Casey.
“The permissibility of abortion, and the limitations upon it, are to be resolved like most important questions in our democracy: by citizens trying to persuade one another and then voting,” the potential decision reads.
“We hold that Roe v. Wade must be overruled,” it continues. “The Constitution makes no reference to abortion, and no such right is implicitly protected by any constitutional provision, including the one on which the defenders of Roe and Casey now chiefly rely—the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.”
Abortion advocates are lauding the potential leaker, with some calling this person “brave” for taking an “[unprecedented] step of leaking a draft opinion to warn the country what’s coming.”
Others are much more concerned about the future institutional credibility of the nation’s High Court, saying, “It’s impossible to overstate the earthquake this will cause inside the Court, in terms of the destruction of trust among the Justices and staff. This leak is the gravest, most unforgivable sin.”
Breccan F. Thies is a reporter for Breitbart News. You can follow him on Twitter @BreccanFThies.
No comments:
Post a Comment