Patriot Perspective
Sanctity of Life Day
Today marks the 40th anniversary of the two most tragic Supreme Court decisions in American history, Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton. Those decisions sparked a contentious debate between those who would deny that babies in the womb are worthy of legal protection, and those who rightly acknowledge that those babies constitute "life" as understood throughout history and affirmed in our Declaration of Independence. That right has been tragically denied to countless millions of unborn children who have been sacrificed on the altar of "choice" since 1973.
Roe v. Wade was the infamous Texas case where Norma McCorvey was used as a plaintiff by Leftist attorneys to overturn laws restricting abortions in Texas, and ultimately on appeal to the Supreme Court, found a heretofore unprecedented "right to privacy" in the so-called "due process clause" of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Despotic Branch" divined from their "living constitution" that this right entitled a mother to end the life of her baby before its birth.
Simultaneous with Roe v. Wade, in Doe v. Bolton, using the plaintiff Sandra Cano, the Supremes determined that any complaint -- including headaches -- could be used as grounds for requesting an abortion.
Since the decisions in those cases, both McCorvey and Cano have recanted their testimony. Norma McCorvey said plainly, "I think abortion's wrong. I think what I did with Roe v. Wade was wrong," and she has stood by those words in the years since.
Sandra Cano, in her 2005 testimony before the U.S. Senate, said: "Using my name and life, Doe v. Bolton falsely created the health exception that led to abortion on demand and partial birth abortion. How it got there is still pretty much a mystery to me. I only sought legal assistance to get a divorce from my husband and to get my children from foster care. ... At no time did I ever have an abortion. I did not seek an abortion nor do I believe in abortion. Yet my name and life is now forever linked with the slaughter of 40-50 million babies. ... How can cunning, wicked lawyers use an uneducated, defenseless pregnant woman to twist the American court system in such a fraudulent way? Doe has been a nightmare. ... My name, life, and identity have been stolen and put on this case without my knowledge and against my wishes. How dare they use my name and my life this way! One of the Justices of the Supreme Court said during oral argument in my case 'What does it matter if she is real or not.' Well I am real and it does matter."
So are the babies who have been ripped from wombs.
Both women have been guests in my home. They are good and decent people who at a very vulnerable time in their lives were used by Leftist jurists to advance a horrendous agenda. Both women were instrumental in the establishment of the National Memorial for the Unborn, and their respective statements on abortion are enshrined there.
Celebrating the occasion last year, Barack Hussein Obama said, "[W]e must remember that this Supreme Court decision not only protects a woman's health and reproductive freedom but also affirms a broader principle: that government should not intrude on private family matters. I remain committed to protecting a woman's right to choose and this fundamental constitutional right. ... As we remember this historic anniversary, we must also continue our efforts to ensure that our daughters have the same rights, freedoms and opportunities as our sons to fulfill their dreams."
And I repeat, millions of babies sacrificed on the altar of "choice" in the name of freedom...
The Órko tou Ippokrátiis, commonly called the Physicians Hippocratic Oath, dates back to 500 BC. It is the first known physician's oath, and the essential message, "Do all to heal and do no harm," was and remains a seminal statement of moral of conduct for physicians.
The Oath's first and foremost standard of care translates, "I will prescribe regimens for the good of my patients according to my ability and my judgment and never do harm to anyone. I will not give a lethal drug to anyone if I am asked, nor will I advise such a plan; and similarly I will not give a woman a pessary to cause an abortion."
It has always been evident, scientifically and morally, that life begins at conception. For the last word on the matter, we consult our Creator's guidebook. The Psalmist wrote, "For You formed my inward parts; you wove me in my mother's womb." He then noted, "Your eyes have seen my unformed substance; and in Your book were written all the days that were ordained for me, when as yet there was not one of them."
Imago Dei!
Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis! Libertas aut Mortis!
Mark Alexander, Publisher, The Patriot Post
19 Comments
Tod in Brooklyn N.Y.
Tuesday, January 22, 2013 at 6:08 AM
"Yea, even the unborn are fearfully and wonderfully made!" Psalm 139---From shepherd boy to King of 12 tribes---Simply amazing---David!!
H Hazell in VA
Tuesday, January 22, 2013 at 7:32 AM
Agreed!!!
H Hazell in VA
Tuesday, January 22, 2013 at 6:30 AM
Though I consider abortion morally repugnant, I find there is disquieting truth in the argument and subsequent majority opinion that the so-called right to choose an abortion is a derivative of the 1st, 4th, 5th, 9th and 14th amendments to our Constitution. I also consider it morally repugnant that anyone would deny that a human life exists from the moment of conception. If there is truly a risk to a mother's life by carrying a child to full term, I support the choice be one made by that mother in consultation with her doctor. The risk is truly one the mother must take or avoid. In the absence of that risk, the mother chooses to take the life of an unborn child for the sake of her lifestyle, not for the sake of her life. Though I would defend the right to make that choice, I would never support the choice of placing a lifestyle above a life. Yes, there is a right to choose; choosing life is the far better choice.
Brian in Virginia
Tuesday, January 22, 2013 at 11:12 AM
I have heard that there has not been any situation arise that the life of the mother is deemed at risk due to pregnancy. (That is not to say that labor is without risk, hence the need for cesearian deliveries, as my son was delivered.) Can anyone corroberate this?
H Hazell in VA
Tuesday, January 22, 2013 at 12:09 PM
My second child was touch and go for both mom and child. It was day-to-day for several weeks, but all turned out well for both. Thankfully, the risk was taken, the condition became manageable and we have a great kid. In this day and age, I doubt there are many pregnancies that could truly put the mother's life in peril.
MB in Pennsylvania
Tuesday, January 22, 2013 at 3:54 PM
I have know two women who were diagnosed with breast cancer during their pregnancies. In each case, doctors initially advised terminating the pregnancies. Both women adamantly refused and the doctors were able to develop successful treatment working around the pregnancies. Both children were born healthy and their moms beat their cancer.
Anton D Rehling in Olympia, WA
Tuesday, January 22, 2013 at 11:50 AM
The founders would have considered killing any unborn as repugnant and the worse of crimes. Abortion murder is not supported or condoned in any of the constitution or any of the amendments except through a wild and crazy stretch of the imagination.
H Hazell in VA
Tuesday, January 22, 2013 at 12:27 PM
Although I agree that there is no explicit right to abortion, nor is there even an implicit right, reading the argument in the case and the majority opinion, it is hard to argue that a right to choose derived from the 1st, 4th, 5th, 9th and 14th amendments is not present. The true issue, for me, is the morality of invoking that right to choose for anything other than saving the life of the mother, if imperiled by the pregnancy. What I find a personal challenge is that, to be true to our Constitution, I must support those rights that are not just explicit or implicit, but also derived (typically settled law through the Supreme Court). You and I certainly accept that a child in the womb is human life. What we must face is that, as morally repugnant as it is, that living child in the womb does not have the same status as the living mother carrying the child inside her. Unfortunately, nearly all abortions are to preserve the lifestyle of the mother rather than to save her life. Truly our culture should significantly object to abortion on moral grounds, but unfortunately, we are in a near "tie" between those of us who object and those who promote unfettered abortions. I personally believe that the vast majority of Americans are pro life and much of the media has fabricated the size of the pro choice faction.
H Hazell in VA
Tuesday, January 22, 2013 at 12:30 PM
And I fully agree that our founders would consider abortion as practiced today to be a crime.
Tim Wrbas in Bronson FL
Tuesday, January 22, 2013 at 9:13 PM
Hmmm, sounds like a hypocrite to me. You want to tell the left they cannot "interpret" the Constitution yet you know you just did the same thing. How do you know what the founding fathers would have done? Are you 240+ years old? Therefore, you are a hypocrite. Here's the way it should be. The government NOR you NOR anyone else has a right to tell a woman what to do with HER body. You NOR the government has the right to tell anyone who to love. You cannot say there weren't any "gay" founding fathers for sure. No one knows...they were not all Christians now were they? Nope. The only thing that is definite is WHOEVER the person believes in is who they will be judged by. You are not God nor is the government.
mark in massachusetts
Tuesday, January 22, 2013 at 10:09 PM
Tim,You want to talk hypocrisy? Why do so-called "progressives" believe that killing unborn babies is okay but they repeatedly vote No for capital punishment?(At least here in Assholechusetts.) It's okay to kill an unborn child who is a gift from God but NOT OK to put a murderer to death? I for one am sick and tired of my tax dollars being used for abortions-as-birth-control for these animals who can't keep their legs closed.Screw planned parenthood.They should be defunded.Nowhere in the Constitution does it say any these insane programs are supposed to be funded.If Obummer and his Fascists want all this crap let THEM pay for it! If they can't feed em',don't friggin'breed em'! Stick your ideological Socialism where the sun don't shine!!
JtC in TX
Tuesday, January 22, 2013 at 8:19 AM
It's none of the government's business.
Anton D Rehling in Olympia, WA
Tuesday, January 22, 2013 at 11:43 AM
55 million dead babies from 40 years of using abortion as birth control; Let’s see 55 million divided by 40 years equals 1,375,000 killed babies per year, the daily toll is 3,767 babies per day in the USA or 188.35 Sandy Hook Elementary Newton CT mass shootings per day in this country broken down further that is equivalent to almost 4 Sandy Hook Elementary School shootings per day in each of the 50 states. Where is the outrage! Let’s look at it in another view, 1,375,000 children slaughtered per year, divided by 50 states equals 27,500 per state divide that by 365 days in a year and the daily carnage by state is 75-76 children on the average per state per day. The daily deaths of the most innocent that need our protection the most should be as criminal as any Sandy Hook school massacre.
Now our government wants to disarm the citizens of this country because of a couple of deranged psychos killing people with guns. Let’s compare gun deaths of all kinds except suicide as that is self-inflicted. Gun deaths in 2010 in the USA were 30,470 of that 19,392 were from suicide and 11,078 were homicide. Where should our outrage be, 30,000 deaths per year from guns or 1,375,000 per year from Pro-Choice? I remember when Roe vs Wade was passed, abortion was to be for the life of the mother, rape or incest not because of a night of drunken sex or because of convenience. Can anyone tell me what is wrong with this picture?
Anton D Rehling in Olympia, WA
Tuesday, January 22, 2013 at 11:58 AM
The current Genocide is not in Africa or any other location that may be the current poster location for our Hollywood idiots, it is in our front yard and it is now.
MAJ USA Ret in Saint Louis
Tuesday, January 22, 2013 at 12:34 PM
H Hazell in VA et al:
Our Declaration of Independence states explicitly certain rights are endowed by our Creator and are unalienable. Then it continues to list the three of the most important, universal rights: life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. No where in our Constitution can these rights be abrogated or mitigated. Even the infamous "Three-fifths clause" ultimately failed to diminish these rights, ultimately resolved in our bloodiest war.
Some say the abortion issue is now the slavery issue of the 1800's. It is a moral issue. It is now legal though contrary to the plain language of the Declaration of Independence. It has certainly cost even more lives.
One might argue the abortion issue pits the right to life against the right to liberty. I believe the authors of the Declaration of Independence were very careful to list the unalienable rights in order of precedence: life first and formost above all; liberty second and limited only by the right of life; and the pursuit of happiness limited only by the rights of the two previously listed. Thus one's pursuit of happiness will not be achieved if it requires the liberty or life of another. Similarly one's right to liberty will stop when it infringes upon another's right to life.
So simple, a child could understand it. Only those who wish to do what's right in their own eyes could not not see this truth. There are none so blind as those who refuse to see.
H Hazell in VA
Tuesday, January 22, 2013 at 1:12 PM
It also states, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal..." Though you and I understand the implication of that, it may characterize, but does not define all that follows in our Constitution. The Declaration of Independence is essentially our Nation's purpose statement and our Constitution the executing document. Taken together, they define this Nation, but it is our Constitution that defines it's laws. We have to acknowledge that there is in their creation an expectation that citizens of this Nation are capable of self-rule. The vast majority are capable, but there is left room in our laws for those who exercise a right in ways immoral, but also legal. We are right to stand our ground morally. If we are convincing, the immoral may be swayed.
Philip Nielsen in Emmett, ID
Tuesday, January 22, 2013 at 6:11 PM
Send this article to all of the Fox News Depts. This needs to be seen by all concerned.
mary dean in ravenna oh
Thursday, January 24, 2013 at 3:53 PM
this lady & friends have their heads going the wrong way if they think i should tolerate murder i don't need their opinion or their permission to not murder the most innocent they talk about peace but it seems to me they are thinking upside down if murder is not unpeaceful & hate filled what is
sunforester in left coast
Friday, January 25, 2013 at 4:35 PM
We are supposed to believe that we are talking about "a contentious debate between those who would deny that babies in the womb are worthy of legal protection, and those who rightly acknowledge that those babies constitute "life".... How deceitful, deceptive and deliberately demonizing. You Christians refuse to consider anyone else's beliefs or needs as valid, putting your religion above everyone else who shares this country with you who see things differently.
It is nobody's business or right to interfere with what a woman does with her first trimester pregnancy. How DARE you stick your preachy, prying noses into her business and tell her that her decisions about her own life aren't good enough for YOUR morality! You care nothing about that woman's life, only about forcing her to conform to your beliefs so that you can feel better about yourselves.
This is why Christians are widely despised, and why Republicans lose elections. You shove your religion down our throats while you preach your beliefs ad nauseum, and then you expect the rest of us to welcome your preaching, your bullying and your candidates?
If you want to split the conservatives wide apart, you are doing a great job. If you had stuck to the things that unite us, like fighting that mobster in the White House, we would have been fine. But NO... you haven't learned anything from the last election, and now the Democrats will rule us all because you can't keep your intolerant, bigoted, deeply offensive and unAmerican mouths shut. Republicans will lose election after election, because they are forever associated with Christians who badly want us Americans to live our lives their way. Thanks for nothing, you selfish, self-centered bigots.