[cpforlife.org]

1973 United States Supreme Court

“The greatest evil is not done in those sordid dens of evil that Dickens loved to paint but is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried, and minuted) in clear, carpeted, warmed, well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voices.” C. S. Lewis

"Blackmun invented a right to abortion....Roe had nothing whatever to do with constitutional interpretation. The utter emptiness of the opinion has been demonstrated time and again, but that, too, is irrelevant. The decision and its later reaffirmations simply enforce the cultural prejudices of a particular class in American society, nothing more and nothing less. For that reason, Roe is impervious to logical or historical argument; it is what some people, including a majority of the Justices, want, and that is that."
Robert H. Bork Constitutional Persons: An Exchange on Abortion

Abortionists commit first degree murder.

From the law dictionary:
n. although it varies from state to state, it is generally a killing which is deliberate and premeditated (planned, after lying in wait, by poison or as part of a scheme), in conjunction with felonies such as rape, burglary, arson, or involving multiple deaths, the killing of certain types of people (such as a child, a police officer, a prison guard, a fellow prisoner), or certain weapons, particularly a gun. The specific criteria for first degree murder, are established by statute in each state and by the U.S. Code in federal prosecutions. It is distinguished from second degree murder in which premeditation is usually absent, and from manslaughter, which lacks premeditation and suggests that at most there was intent to harm rather than to kill.

Abortionists clearly act with malice aforethought.

From the law dictionary:
n. 1) the conscious intent to cause death or great bodily harm to another person before a person commits the crime. Such malice is a required element to prove first degree murder. 2) a general evil and depraved state of mind in which the person is unconcerned for the lives of others. Thus, if a person uses a gun to hold up a bank and an innocent bystander is killed in a shoot-out with police, there is malice aforethought.

[cpforlife.org]

From Constitutional Persons: An Exchange on Abortion

The common law basis of our system embodied in the principle of stare decisis and the just requirements of consistency in applying the law demand a respect for precedent. To this objection I offer two replies. First, there was a federal court precedent for the unborn person reading of Fourteenth Amendment before Roe v. Wade, though this fact was virtually ignored by Justice Harry Blackmun and the Roe Court.

In Steinberg v. Brown (1970) a three-judge federal district court upheld an anti-abortion statute, stating that privacy rights "must inevitably fall in conflict with express provisions of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments that no person shall be deprived of life without due process of law."

After relating the biological facts of fetal development, the court stated that "those decisions which strike down state abortion statutes by equating contraception and abortion pay no attention to the facts of biology."

"Once new life has commenced," the court wrote, "the constitutional protections found in the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments impose upon the state the duty of safeguarding it."

Yet in commenting on the unborn person argument in Roe, Justice Blackmun wrote that "the appellee conceded on reargument that no case could be cited that holds that a fetus is a person within the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment." He did so despite the fact that he had cited the case just five paragraphs earlier!

The failure of both appellees and the Court to treat this case is both unfortunate and inexplicable. Second, while our system is based upon a reasonable and healthy respect for precedent, this has never prevented the Court from revisiting and modifying precedent when the erroneous foundation and unjust results of that precedent become manifest. Such is the case with respect to abortion and the Fourteenth Amendment.

[Paleo Conservative]

The facts never mattered

[steplock]

WHY does that picture of scotus make me think of PURE EVIL?

[cpforlife.org]

Judge Admits "facts no longer matter" in Abortion Decisions.

McCorvey motion to overturn Roe v. Wade moves toward Supreme Court.

Please let me know if you want on or off my Pro-Life Ping List.

[Casloy]

McCorvey provided the Court with over 5000 pages of evidence, inlcuding over 1000 affidavits from women hurt by abortion.

And this is why he ROE V WADE decision was one of the worst decisions in the history of the court. If abortion were being decided in the political arena the fact women are being devastated by abortion (to say nothing of the babies) would be a consideration for legislators to consider. ROE V WADE found the word "privacy" in the Constitution which means each woman has the right to decide for herself regardless of the impact on society at large, other women, or the baby. We can argue all day long that woman and babies are being brutalized by abortion and it has nothing to do with the basis for the supreme court ruling. The only way to slow down or stop abortions is for another court to decide abortion is not a consitutional right and throw it back to the States to legislate. While one can argue an unborn baby should be protected by the constitution, I think a ruling outlawing abortion is not likely.

[Torie]

Roe v. Wade was based on "science." It may fall on "science." Courts using "science" for constitutional grounded decisions has always been questionable, and for good reason. Our system expected legislatures to enact or repeal laws based on "science," not the courts. In any event, this lower court was deferring to a higher court's ruling, and that is our system, like it or not. I like it. Any other system would lead to jurisprudential chaos.

[ppaul]

Ahhh.
We've entered the bizarre Land of

Penumbra

[Torie]

I might add that on fundamental issues involving constitutional interpretation overriding existing laws, stare decisis is rather fragile. Where controversy continues, it is even more fragile. Nothing is entrenced. In that sense, Jones is wrong, completely wrong. It just depends on the personalities with the power of the judicial decisional pen.

[Jaysun]

However, she warns that because laws have become entrenched, no 'live controversy" will arise that would allow the Supreme Court to re-criminalize abortion.

I see. If something is wrong for long enough, it becomes a permanent wrong. It's a good thing that the courts hadn't "advanced" to the thinking held by these cloven-footed reprobates during the time of slavery.

It's phenomenal that these criminals haven't been dragged from the whorehouses they call courtrooms by mobs of angry citizens.

[LiteKeeper]

MUST read later

[Bittersweetmd]

"Abortionists clearly act with malice aforethought"

Think about this, the first man,Cain, born of a woman committed the first murder of his own brother,Abel. The man Jesus, also known as the second Adam, born of a virgin and conceived by the Holy Ghost was born into this world perfect and without blame and he was gruesomely murdered by a false court trial of his own brethren. The first man said to the Lord "am I my brother's keeper?" The second Adam, Jesus Christ said "Father forgive them for they know not what they do." The only remedy for such evil in society is for true believers to repent from their own sins and drawing upon the grace of God, walk with the Lord moment by moment. Than in the Name of Jesus God the Father will hear our prayers and move heaven and earth to reach the lost and dying. I believe God the Father would heal our land if his children would take his Word seriously and live soberly and honestly. Jesus said the prayer of faith would move mountains. May God in his mercy grant faith and knowledge in Jesus Christ to the church.

[tuckrdout]

CP, thanks for the ping. Unusual! But, a step in the right direction, albeit a very small step, still a step!

I wonder what kind of end all those 1973 Justices came to? How many voted for and how many against?

[Fiddlstix]

BTTT