[MHGinTN]

"On the profound issue of when life begins, this court cannot drive public policy in one particular direction by the engine of the common law when the opposing sides, which represent so many of our citizens, are arrayed along a deep societal and philosophical divide." In other words, it matters not whether these are alive human beings being slaughtered, liberalism's convention has established that society wants this right to kill these without facing the truth of whom they slaughter, so we demigods on the bench will give them cover by ignoring the aliveness of the victims of this secular utility. May the judges rot in the hell they deserve for whom they serve.

[WOSG]

Human life begins at conception.

However, if the ruling says:”On the profound issue of when life begins, this court cannot drive public policy in one particular direction by the engine of the common law when the opposing sides, which represent so many of our citizens, are arrayed along a deep societal and philosophical divide.”

They are basically saying common law doesn’t compel this. It sounds like the plaintiffs are asking for notification as a common law requirement in a tort. It’s a tough sell, especially to a NJ court.

Simple solution, that some states have adopted: Write the notification requirement into statutory law. We have many medical notification requirements and rights written into law.

Such as consent and 24-hour waiting period:
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/38789.php

Abortion notification laws WORK.

GET THIS - PARENTAL NOTIFICATION LAWS CUT TEENAGE STDS:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/09/060927201526.htm

[fetal heart beats by 21st day]

Don’t forget that the court decided they would ignore

“the well-known facts of fetal development.”

Blackmun assured us that if the court recognized the unborn chid’s development, the child would be protected under the 14th amendment.

He wasn’t gonna have any of that.