Technology makes start of life clear

Sidelines ^ | 11/10/04 | Juanita Thouin

[cpforlife.org]

The "personhood" case is the legal factor that is the heart of the matter as to why this nation has had a 30-year holocaust of people waiting to be born. What really adds to the disgust is the hypocrisy as exposed in the excerpt below from this article.

From Constitutional Persons: An Exchange on Abortion (emphasis mine)

Nathan Schlueter:
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."

Also from
Constitutional Persons: An Exchange on Abortion
Robert H. Bork:
"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. Roe should be overruled and the issue of abortion returned to the moral sense and the democratic choice of the American people. Abortions are killings by private persons. Science and rational demonstration prove that a human exists from the moment of conception. Scalia is quite right that the Constitution has nothing to say about abortion."

Robert H. Bork is a Senior Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington, D.C.

____________________________________________________

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

[MHGinTN]

Thank you, brother. I shall squirrel this away again in my files! ... Pings up

[Smartass]

I AM

A CHILD OF GOD
THE HEART OF A MARRIAGE
THE FOUNDATION OF A FAMILY
THE FUTURE OF OUR REPUBLIC
A CITIZEN--WAITING AND WANTING TO BE BORN
A PERSON
DESTROY ME--AND YOU DESTROY THE FUTURE

[cpforlife.org]

FRiends:

Regarding the amazing 1965 photos Lennart Nilsson took, via an endoscope, of a fetus still in the womb, mentioned in this article: They were put into a special issue of LIFE Magazine and are truly breathtaking. You can order reprints of the issue in full vivid color for a measly four bucks from http://victorywon.com/books.htm

Life Before Birth - LIFE Reprint The Famous photos of life before birth, detailing the development of a child from conception to birth. It contains the original 1965 LIFE text. An excellent, inexpensive pictorial for counseling or distributing. These are TREMENDOUS TOOL for sidewalk counselors. (20 pages)

"Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe." - H.G. Wells

[Coleus]

Funny you should mention the Life Magazine issue. A friend a mine, a few yrs. my senior, was just mentioning to me a few days ago about his reaction when he read that issue.

[TAdams8591]

Excellent poster! : )

[Mr. Silverback]

ProLife Ping!

If anyone wants on or off my ProLife Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.

[T'wit]

My thought for the day is: Life begins at conception. (I think that is a scientific certainty.) Therefore the right to life begins at conception.

[F.J. Mitchell]

So eight years after picture proof revealed that living humans occupy the wombs of women in the family way, a Supreme Court majority chose to ignore the proof their lying eyes had seen and make a ruling (Roe vs Wade) as though they were entirely ignorant of reality, that sentenced 45 million unborn Americans to death?

Those Supreme Court Justices that are unwilling to reverse this atrocious decision, should be impeached immediately, and replaced with others who will.

Specter must never be in a position to block Judges appointed to replace these monkeys.