Posted on 12/03/2016 6:16:13 PM PST by ReformationFan
President-elect Trumps reconfirmation recently on 60 Minutes that he will nominate pro-life judges has sparked some unprecedented media focus on what will happen when Roe v. Wade is overturned. This focus is long overdue. The notion of Supreme Court justices acting as public-health officials ranking the priority of abortion as health care, deciding what standards should apply to the practice in clinics from coast to coast, and deciding what credentials are suitable for abortionists would have astounded the great justices of the past. Thats why it has to be dressed up as some solemn constitutional right that obscures the Courts actual role as the de facto National Abortion Control Board. Justice Sandra Day OConnor recognized what the justices were doing back in 1983, warning of our continued functioning as the nations ex officio medical board with powers to approve or disapprove medical and operative practices and standards throughout the United States.
But no one should jump the gun. There are three huge political hurdles to the Supreme Courts doing the right thing and returning the abortion issue to the democratic process in the States. First, it will take at least the replacement of Justice Scalia (with a like-minded Justice), plus the replacement of one or two of the Justices Breyer, Kennedy, Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan who threw out health and safety standards for Texas abortion clinics last June, claiming the need for evidence of a public-health crisis in abortion clinics.
Second, the U.S. Senate, with a 5248 (possibly shifting) RepublicanDemocratic split, will be a high hurdle when it comes time for a vote during the confirmation process. Third, Planned Parenthood and 30 allied organizations, and their billionaire population-control funders, like George Soros and Warren Buffett, backed by numerous billion-dollar foundations, will all be working 24/7 to pressure the Senate and prop up Roe v. Wade, backed by a media bullhorn featuring all kinds of horrible myths about the implications. They will work to hide the reality that in the U.S. today, abortion is legal through all nine months of pregnancy, for any reason whatsoever, and sometimes with taxpayers subsidies, putting our nation in the company of North Korea, China, and Canada as the only nations that allow abortion for any reason after fetal viability.
But once those hurdles are overcome and Roe is overturned, there are three essential conditions that will maintain the status quo for at least the short term and ease the transition back to the states.
First, overturning Roe does not mean that the Court makes abortion illegal. Overturning Roe will return the issue to the states, where legislators can act in accordance with the views of their citizens. And no federal law exists that would make abortion illegal. (Congress might try to legislate a national law, but Congresss constitutional authority to do so, in the absence of Roe, is doubted by legal scholars and judges.)
Second, if Roe were overturned today, abortion would be legal in 40 to 45 states tomorrow, up to 20 weeks and possibly to fetal viability, for the simple reason that there are no enforceable prohibitions on the books in those states before that time. The state legislatures and governors would have to act affirmatively. State regulations that are on the books on the day that Roe is reversed would likely be enforceable parental-notice or consent laws, clinic regulations, etc. subject to specific legal factors in each state that may prevent enforcement. Third, women wont be penalized. The actual practice of the states for nearly a century before Roe (1973) was to target abortionists (the actual practitioners) and to treat the woman as the second victim of abortion. The states will undoubtedly follow that effective practice when Roe is overturned.
What would the states actually do? Based on the data in Americans United for Lifes annual publication, Defending Life, and AULs Life List, showing how the states have legislated (or not) on the life issue for the past 40 years, a fair prediction might be that in the short term a dozen states would maintain abortion on demand, a dozen states would try to enact and enforce broad prohibitions, and about 25 states in the middle might try different limits. That diversity is called federalism, a bedrock of the American constitutional system, which prevents Congress from dictating a single national law (in some areas) and leaves important issues to be decided at the local level, by local representatives accountable to the people at regular elections. It would be wise to leave the abortion issue to the states where Americans can make their voices heard and where it was addressed since colonial days unless 37 states act through constitutional amendment to enact a national rule.
In the meantime, the Court should delegate the broadest possible discretion to the states to address abortion, a serious public-health issue that state legislators and public-health administrators can handle better than unelected judges in Washington. A public-health crisis exists in America today as under-monitored, rarely supervised abortion centers operate as the red-light district of medicine. Abortion advocates increasingly claim that abortion is the supreme right that has to be publicly funded and guaranteed by voters and their tax dollars. But consider the Second Amendment, containing the right to bear arms, which is actually protected by the text of the Constitution: Taxpayers dont have to subsidize the purchase of guns or ensure that people drive less than 30 minutes to have access to a gun dealer. The existence of that express right does not include federal or state responsibility to facilitate a sale.
But public opinion has long shown that the majority of Americans have rejected an extreme view of abortion and want limits on abortion. As the National Abortion Control Board, the Court has failed to protect women and their unborn children from the dangers of abortion and the sometimes deadly conditions inside rarely monitored, poorly supervised abortion clinics. This dangerous public-health vacuum could be filled by the states if the Justices would get out the way.
Clarke Forsythe, an attorney, is the acting president and senior counsel at Americans United for Life (AUL) and the author of Abuse of Discretion: The Inside Story of Roe v. Wade (Encounter Books 2013).
Ultimately the goal of justice for those who made judicial opinions or passed legislation for, funded, or help carry out abortions on a large scale should be indictments, Nuremberg-style trials, convictions, and sentences for genocidal murder, crimes against humanity, and treason.
Even without those who voted for murderous pro-abortion politicians, the number who should face trial likely exceeds 100,000. Some of these may include clergy.
Pro-life people who dismiss or oppose this goal of justice betray their cause and reduce their opposition to abortion to that of opposing the wearing of the wrong color of socks.
What will happen...probably not much. The matter will go back to the states, where it belongs.
Abortion should be banned except to save the life of the mother (everyone has the right to self-defense in libertylover's opinion).
This business of 20 weeks and fetal "viability" is a bad way to measure. Twenty weeks is an arbitrary point based on "viability" in the 1960s. And besides, "viability" is not a fundamental point, it's just a measure of local medical technology since the point of "viability" is vastly different between a neonatal care center in the U.S. as opposed to a hamlet in the middle of Kenya.
The only real solution is to accept the truth: that human life begins at fertilization, (which can be proven with a DNA test). A good ruling would be both timeless and placeless.
Abortion is one of the human miseries inflicted upon mankind by Democrats and other socialist pretending things to be true that aren't true: Slavery was the result of governments pretending that black people aren't people; the holocaust was the result of Germany pretending that Jewish people aren't people; abortion is the result of governments pretending that preborn people aren't people; and the problems are just beginning now that governments are pretending that homosexuality is normal.
If is were overturned, liberals would be lined up as far back as Alabama waiting their turn to jump into the Grand Canyon.
Its effect can be superseded by coming at the issue with a new line of legal argument. This has happened before in other areas.
Inner city population explosion?
As he notes, Trump would have to appoint 3 justices to get rid of Roe. Unlikely.
A number of things appear to be poised to change simultaneously under a Trump regime. If so: government welfare will recede and/or be assigned to states; charity (as in private donations, not administrators of government welfare) will increase. Charity conducted this way has the ability to preach the gospel, or even if not the gospel, sane self respect and community respect messages.
That would be nice to see. Our grandchildren would call us the Greatest Generation.
God has already shown that He is the master of the unlikely in the campaign and victory of Donald Trump.
Instead of scoffing, I believe the watchword should be to thank God as dearly as possible, and pray as fervently as possible.
This isn’t about Trump. Trump is a servant. This is about God.
More Adoptions? People actually using birth control instead of killing babies?
6 He sacrificed his own son in the fire, practiced divination, sought omens, and consulted mediums and spiritists. He did much evil in the eyes of the Lord, arousing his anger. 10 The Lord said through his servants the prophets: 11 Manasseh king of Judah has committed these detestable sins. He has done more evil than the Amorites who preceded him and has led Judah into sin with his idols. 12 Therefore this is what the Lord, the God of Israel, says: I am going to bring such disaster on Jerusalem and Judah that the ears of everyone who hears of it will tingle. 13 I will stretch out over Jerusalem the measuring line used against Samaria and the plumb line used against the house of Ahab. I will wipe out Jerusalem as one wipes a dish, wiping it and turning it upside down. 14 I will forsake the remnant of my inheritance and give them into the hands of enemies. They will be looted and plundered by all their enemies; 15 they have done evil in my eyes and have aroused my anger from the day their ancestors came out of Egypt until this day. 16 Moreover, Manasseh also shed so much innocent blood that he filled Jerusalem from end to endbesides the sin that he had caused Judah to commit, so that they did evil in the eyes of the Lord.
CHAPTER 24:
3 Surely these things happened to Judah according to the Lords command, in order to remove them from his presence because of the sins of Manasseh and all he had done, 4 including the shedding of innocent blood. For he had filled Jerusalem with innocent blood, and the Lord was not willing to forgive.
Yes it will.
A number of different things that will shy away from abortion. As long as “society” is sitting there too stunned to call abortion an abomination and to show it somehow, there are going to be people yielding to evil voices that what is “ok” is even a must.
As long as they resolutely embraced the hating spirits that brought this on, forgiveness would be impossible.
I think it will slowly return to the moral question over the “freedom” question. You don’t kill babies...period!!
Roe v. Wade will not be overturned, as such. But that will not mean it won’t be effectively over.
What the pro-life movement needs to accept is that the most likely solution will end almost all abortions, but will *not* be a “complete win”, intentionally made to prevent any celebration of victory by pro-life people.
It was described to me as “winning a million dollars in a lottery, but being paid in a giant pile of loose pennies that you must shovel into your own containers. By the time you have your million, you no longer want to celebrate.”
How this is done is up to the lawyers and justices.
Because of a new recognition of an overarching truth: God really does care.
If the re-moralization of America doesn’t prove this to some souls, nothing will. But a 100% consensus in America isn’t needed to see a blessing. Some people will always be miserable. A sufficiently large and active consensus is all that is needed.
Genesis 18:16-33New International Version (NIV)
Abraham Pleads for Sodom
16 When the men got up to leave, they looked down toward Sodom, and Abraham walked along with them to see them on their way. 17 Then the Lord said, Shall I hide from Abraham what I am about to do? 18 Abraham will surely become a great and powerful nation, and all nations on earth will be blessed through him.[a] 19 For I have chosen him, so that he will direct his children and his household after him to keep the way of the Lord by doing what is right and just, so that the Lord will bring about for Abraham what he has promised him.
20 Then the Lord said, The outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is so great and their sin so grievous 21 that I will go down and see if what they have done is as bad as the outcry that has reached me. If not, I will know.
22 The men turned away and went toward Sodom, but Abraham remained standing before the Lord.[b] 23 Then Abraham approached him and said: Will you sweep away the righteous with the wicked? 24 What if there are fifty righteous people in the city? Will you really sweep it away and not spare[c] the place for the sake of the fifty righteous people in it? 25 Far be it from you to do such a thingto kill the righteous with the wicked, treating the righteous and the wicked alike. Far be it from you! Will not the Judge of all the earth do right?
26 The Lord said, If I find fifty righteous people in the city of Sodom, I will spare the whole place for their sake.
27 Then Abraham spoke up again: Now that I have been so bold as to speak to the Lord, though I am nothing but dust and ashes, 28 what if the number of the righteous is five less than fifty? Will you destroy the whole city for lack of five people?
If I find forty-five there, he said, I will not destroy it.
29 Once again he spoke to him, What if only forty are found there?
He said, For the sake of forty, I will not do it.
30 Then he said, May the Lord not be angry, but let me speak. What if only thirty can be found there?
He answered, I will not do it if I find thirty there.
31 Abraham said, Now that I have been so bold as to speak to the Lord, what if only twenty can be found there?
He said, For the sake of twenty, I will not destroy it.
32 Then he said, May the Lord not be angry, but let me speak just once more. What if only ten can be found there?
He answered, For the sake of ten, I will not destroy it.
33 When the Lord had finished speaking with Abraham, he left, and Abraham returned home.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.