Headline News

About Us About Us
Advertising Advertising
Archive Archive
Art & Literature Art & Literature
Classifieds Classifieds
Commentary Commentary
Commentary Consumer News
Contact Us Contact Us
Guestbook Guestbook
Guest Forum Guest Forum
Headline News Headline News
Letters to the Editor Letters to the Editor
Opinion Poll Opinion Poll
Our Links Our Links
Quotations Quotations
Trading Post Trading Post
Home Home


Note: Links to other sites will open in a new window.


Legal Reality
Submitted by Don Stacey
Jan. 25, 2005

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 make 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 Supremes 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 case, 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 birth," 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 also 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 eliminated, nationwide.

So, it strikes me that the vast bulk of "understanding" on this matter, in particular has come NOT through study of the opinion, but rather through the pre-digested "analysis" offered by the communist-leaning "journalists" 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 strength of 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 NOW an abortion in the third tri-mester is highly restricted. The pagans LOST 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! Maybe 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 obtained!

We want to LEARN Roe v. Wade, NOT overturn it!


Republicans Offer the Unborn 32 More Years of Roe v. Wade

Original Article

Legal Reality

(Enhanced for Netscape)

top Top

Previous Page

World News Alaska News

ptbas.jpg - 5185 Bytes
Web Alaska Copyright 2006. All Rights Reserved