Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: EternalVigilance

Right now, a moral law that prohibts the intentional killing of innocent human life from the moment of conception would be struck down immediately by the Supreme Court (and by every court on the way up to SCOTUS). We need to chip away at Roe v. Wade in order to get it struck down eventually. Besides, even if you believe that Roe can be overturned without there being any chipping away first (which may or may not be the case if a Republican president names Ginnsburg’s or Kennedy’s replacement), it is certainly the case that a law such as the one I would prefer and which is my eventual goal (banning abortion from the moment of conception, except if the continued pregnancy would likely lead to the death of the mother) would save zero lives (since it would be struck down immediately and would never go into effect) while a ban on abortions after 20 weeks and a requirement that women get the option to see an ultrasound of their baby would save thousands of lives.

As Father Frank Pavone would say, when we choose something that is not perfect, what some call “the lesser of two evils,” we aren’t “choosing evil,” but choosing to *reduce* evil, and that is an eminently moral choice. While a law that banned all abortions is the opposite of evil, the fact that it immediately would be struck down (and it *is* a fact, given the current state of our Judiciary) means that the effect of such a law is a continuation of the current abortion-on-demand at all stages of pregnancy. So even if we could convince a majority of members of the AZ House and Senate to ban abortion from the moment of conception (which I think would be unlikely), and the AZ Governor to sign the bill, it would not stop a single abortion.

If this law is upheld by the courts, it will be a huge victory in our long war to protect innocent human beings from the moment of conception. I know that “don’t make the perfect the enemy of the good” is overused and following the adage often leads to making weak choices, but in this particular instance we would save fewer lives if we passed on the AZ law and insisted that the law that we eventually want to see in place is approved right now.


16 posted on 04/13/2012 6:30:44 AM PDT by AuH2ORepublican (If a politician won't protect innocent babies, what makes you think that he'll protect your rights?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]


To: AuH2ORepublican
Those legislators swore before God to support the Constitution, not the Court.

"No person shall be deprived of life without due process of law."

"No State shall deprive any person of life without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."


24 posted on 04/13/2012 6:58:11 AM PDT by EternalVigilance (You can be a Romney Republican or you can be a conservative. You can't be both. Pick one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson