I predict you'll REALLY have an exception to this one, but, given the
timeyou want to invest on these issues, I can at least try to help you see
the legal reality of these matters. My ultimate objective is to help you
as informed a set of decisions on where to invest your time, "money" and
energy as is possible to make. Toward that end, here are some thoughts
from the legal reality perspective that you won't find very many other
places. I hope you (eventually) find them helpful and constructive.
A thought to keep in mind is that Roe v. Wade dealt with Texas (and
Louisiana) statutes, and at least the Texas statute "sucked eggs,"
big time. Despite the "popular," and non-legal, opinion on the
point, the decision was "right" then, and it's "right," now, given
the issues that were actually presented and ruled on. What we've
heard "in the press" has no more addressed the substance of the
actual issues than they've addressed the man in the moon!
Plus, what everyone seems to overlook about that case is that the
did what no one else could, and that is to take the LONG-STANDING
definition of when life starts, which was "at birth," and move it BACK,
THREE MONTHS, into the third trimester of pregnancy. That being the
it would be a disaster to have them change that gained ground now!
See, the "abortionists" LOST THREE MONTHS! The Christians GAINED
THREE MONTHS! By order of the Supreme Court, in Roe v. Wade, life
starts in the third trimester, which is THREE MONTHS before the
common-law standard used
up until Roe v. Wade. To bang this idea overtly in the head, one more
time, under the common-law standard, life didn't start until "live
but, by Roe v. Wade, life starts at the "third trimester." For the
Christians, THAT'S A GAIN OF THREE MONTHS!! For the pagan, THAT'S A LOSS
OF THREE MONTHS!!! So, I'm still completely at a loss as to what most
Christians think the problem is with that holding.
The Supremes no more "blessed" "abortion" than the man in the moon.
The only ones who come close to seeing it that way are the
communists, and those they've managed to mislead. The Court struck
down some horribly worded statutory language, which language was
actually made all the more inapplicable by the way the DA's acted
upon that language. The DA's case development process are repugnant
to our understandings of Equal Protection and Due Process. It's been
the "pravda press corp in Amerika" that has transformed the matter so
far out of proportion as to what was really argued as to contort the
legal reality beyond all recognition. What did the Supremes strike
down? It wasn't just boneheaded statutory language. It was also the
political practice brought into the courtroom. While the Texas
statute was really pretty badly written, even worse was the practice.
Here's the problem with the DA's enforcement of the badly worded
language. It's a perspective that NO ONE seems to want to discuss,
and that is the nature of the crime, itself. See, it's IMPOSSIBLE
for "abortion" to exist
without a conspiracy. How so? Because it's not only the doctor, but
the MOTHER, who is participating in the crime against the fetus.
Given that it's a crime that doesn't typically exist without that
conspiracy, for the DA's to prosecute ONLY the doctors was a blatant
Unequal Protection problem screaming from the cases. So, unless and
until the MOTHERS are also indicted, tried and convicted for
"abortion," not only the docs, but also the MOTHERS, then it will be
legally impossible to
set up an anti-abortion law or systemic practice.
Let's take the story of the "woman taken in adultery." What screams
from the facts of that case as reported is that while (A) the woman
is charged with being caught red-handed in the act of adultery, (B)
adultery cannot be committed without a conspiracy. Reflect on the
point for a moment, if necessary. So, where the accusers bring ONLY
the woman, the Unequal Protection clause instantly kicks in, you see.
What the Pharisees were arguing was utter crap. It's a death penalty
for the WOMAN to commit adultery, but not for the MAN, who must also,
on those facts, have been caught red-handed in the act!
Apply that practical reality to the abortion issue, and you now see
the problem that the Supremes saw. And, to see the legal reality is
to see that the Supremes were "right" then, and they're still "right"
today. A crime that can typically be a "conspiracy only" type of
crime cannot be unequally enforced against only one class of
principals. God did not tolerate such unequal enforcement, and
neither can we, as a nation, tolerate such practice. It must be
enforced equally, or not at all. THIS is the essence of Roe v. Wade,
and this is simply 100% correct and proper legal reasoning. Since
communists are NOT taught to think, at all, only to react, much less
to think logically, we do well to get our information of legal issues
from sources other than the communists.
What we find, upon study and reflection, is that this particular
group of jurists have been opposing the banks and opposing the
communists from the beginning. Where we are upset by the popular
marketing of the opinions, we do well to study what was really said,
for, as in this particular case, the two are night and day different.
The Texas practice was to charge ONLY the docs, thus, only one class
of principals, and leave the other culpable party, thus the other
class of principals, completely untouched, as if she were a victim
rather than a principal in a criminal act. Given this reality, the
Supremes made the problem that much more simple to solve. Just write
a statute that encompasses ALL who participate in the crime, AND then
be very sure that the enforcement and prosecution of that language
prosecutes equally ALL who are participants, including the most
obvious party, the MOTHER. THEN, abortion can be practically
So, it strikes me that the vast bulk of "understanding" on this
particular has come NOT through study of the opinion, but rather through
the pre-digested "analysis" offered by the communist-leaning
who already hate our God and our country, or they wouldn't be promoting
the gagging stench of non-sense that belches forth through the radio and
TV waves every day.
Trust me, we don't WANT Roe v. Wade touched, at all! Abortion was
not promoted! It was kicked in the head! And what has SLOWED our
acceptance of that legal reality has been ALL of the communist,
anti-God, God-hating propaganda addressing the issue from such an
incompetent perspective that the nation that has listened to the
communists instead of studying into the opinion on their own, has
been horribly, horribly misled.
My prayer is that The Ever-living will continue to provide the
mind and purpose He has always provided our highest ranking jurists, and
that He continue to help us understand the brilliance to these matters
that these jurists have applied for more than 200 years. But for that
group of jurists, the bankers and internationalists would have had us
reduced to serfdom, overtly seen as serfdom, a very long time ago. The
Court has been at least one step ahead of them at every turn, and they
REALLY did a number on the pagan, God-hating pro-abortionists, because
an abortion in the third tri-mester is highly restricted. The pagans
three months! But, when has THAT aspect of the matter ever "made the
news!?" And, it's impossible for me to conceive of an approach more
supported by Christianity than the one implemented by the Supremes!
in another generation, we'll work back to the first trimester. But, we
can't get THERE, if we have reverse and give up that first ground already
We want to LEARN Roe v. Wade, NOT overturn it!
Republicans Offer the Unborn 32 More Years of Roe v. Wade