In the past several weeks, a bevy of states have passed extensive new restrictions on abortion. Alabama has effectively banned abortion from point of conception. Georgia has banned abortion from the time a heartbeat is detected, as have Ohio, Kentucky and Mississippi. Missouri has banned abortion after eight weeks. Other states are on the move as well.
This has prompted paroxysms of rage from the media and the political left — the same folks who celebrated when New York passed a law effectively allowing abortion up until point of birth and who defended Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam’s perverse statements about late-term abortion. According to these thinkers, conservatives have encroached on a supposed “right to abortion” inherent in the Constitution.
This, of course, is a lie. There is no “right to abortion” in the Constitution. The founders would have been appalled by such a statement. The Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade (1973) is a legal monstrosity by every available metric: As legal scholar John Hart Ely wrote, Roe “is not constitutional law and gives almost no sense of an obligation to try to be.” The court’s rationale is specious; the court relied on the ridiculous precedent in Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) that a broad “right to privacy” can be crafted from “penumbras, formed by emanations.” Then the court extended that right to privacy to include the killing of a third party, an unborn human life — and overrode state definitions of human life in the process.
More
DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
Since we are talking constitutional rights...please read the constitution and you will see there is NO MENTION of congressional oversight. The dems keep talking about their "constitutional duty" of oversight of the executive branch but there is no such thing. If they say it enough then people will just assume they are right. Nothing could be farther from the truth.
ReplyDeleteI would ask any law maker who feels it is a constitutional right to “show me”; then I would publicly denounce them as a bald faced liar.
ReplyDelete"Judges are not supposed to read things into the Constitution but to properly read the Constitution itself. The use of the judiciary as a club has led to a feeling of radical frustration among Americans; it has radically exacerbated our culture gap."
ReplyDeleteThat pretty much sums it up.
Shapiro misses the point.
ReplyDeleteIt's about autonomy and consent. It is ALSO about not being compelled to donate your body for someone else.
A man cannot be compelled to donate his body parts, at risk of health or even death, to sustain the life of anyone else, for any reason. Why is it any different for a woman? One that does not consent to being pregnant or having her body used?
A father can not be legally compelled to give up any part of their body at any time. Ever for any reason. Why is it different for a woman who did not consent to pregnancy?
Men cannot be legally obligated to do so, why are women being held to a different standard?
Reductio ad absurdum, it the "life" argument holds true, to compel a woman to give her body for another life... then ipso facto men must also be compelled to give their bodies, at risk of health or even death, to sustain the lives of others, their consent and autonomy irrelevant. All biological data has to be collected, and if anyone is a match, mandatory donation of their bodies must happen to save another human life.
Just what woman body part is being removed?
DeleteMay 23, 2019 at 9:58 AM:
ReplyDeleteThat "body part" is another life. It can not, and should not be discarded without any reason because of some mis-conceived "right" to do so. It is where you and every other human started their life long journey. Your thoughts are just pure evil. We are not talking about the life of the mother here. There are exceptions in almost every law for that. We are talking about your so-called right to terminate a baby's life for your convenience. Yes convenience. That what your code word "right" refers to. Evil, that's what you are.
10:36 spit on!
Delete9:58 You used a lot of words but said nothing🤦♀️ Here’s the bottom line: if a woman doesn’t want a baby she should keep her legs closed 🤷♀️ I understand accidents happen but if you’re gonna play you might have to pay. Actions have consequences. That’s the problem with this world. No one is held accountable for their actions. If you’re going to have sex there’s going to be a chance of getting pregnant. When you have sex you’re taking that chance. It’s a human life and you don’t get to throw it in the trash because it doesn’t suit you 🙄 How very selfish of you.
ReplyDeleteThe overturn of Roe v Wade is long overdue. Back to letting the people (states) decide what they think is a right, and what is not. Local / states decide what their culture and beliefs are, not some federal court. That's what the overturn of Roe v Wade would do. Those baby killers in NY, Virginia, and elsewhere, could keep on doing what they do and think is their right, and the pro-life and defenders of the unborn in Alabama and other like minded states and cultures can do what they know is right in their hearts. Before Roe V Wade, if a woman couldn't get a legal abortion in one state, all they had to do was go to a different state where is was legal, and readily available for a nominal price. For most women it was less than a 3 hour drive.
ReplyDeleteThese skanks come up with words to make it easier for them to justify murdering a baby. It's a baby no matter how you look at it. Once you murder that baby you will think life will go back to normal. It won't. You will have guilt, if you do decide to have kids you will wonder what the one you murdered would have been like. It all could have been prevented had you just taken the time to prevent the pregnancy in the first place.
ReplyDeleteHere is another question. If the government is saying it's just a fetus and not a life then how come they give the mother extra benefits when she becomes pregnant? They should wait until the baby is born to give them the extras.
May 23, 2019 at 10:42 AM
ReplyDeleteBy your logic, if you don't want to get into a car accident, you shouldn't drive nor travel by motor vehicle.
What is selfish is thinking you have the authority to compel someone do something with their body they don't consent to, at the possible detriment to themselves or worse possible death.
Your view is punishment. You want to punish those who you feel don't line up with whatever twisted sense of morality you subscribe to.
The reality is that pregnancy for homo sapiens is actually rather difficult, and that sex for our species is not specifically for procreation, and in fact socially and inter-personally holds many meanings and importance for all of us. A woman's fertility window is actually rather small compared the time frame with which she may engage in coitus. So sex in the human species in not solely about procreation, in fact it's the opposite. It has very little to do with it.
Many other animals only engage in such activities for the sole purpose of procreation. This is not so in humans. To make the argument that if a woman engages in sex that she should expect pregnancy and accept it is just not substantiated by the facts.
How selfish of you, to think you can force someone to donate their body, to compel someone to use their body against their will. That is what is selfish.
The Bible is quite clear on this - "Thou Shalt Not Kill" - that about sums it up - live a Godly life, or don't, but as several have stated, there are consequences
ReplyDelete1:50 “They didn’t consent to”... there you go. When she opened her legs she consented 🤷♀️ It’s really quite simple. Sweetie you can say all you want about abortion but its murder plain and simple. And it’s selfish of you to think otherwise. I can tell you’re part of the me me me society🙄 It’s all about you and never about the consequences. I wish you well and maybe someday you will wake up enough to see.
ReplyDeleteCurious tho...do you think when a pregnant woman is killed the accused should be charged with 2 murders? And do you think it’s fair for taxpayers to pay for women’s abortions?
"...when a pregnant woman is killed the accused should be charged with 2 murders?..."
ReplyDeleteIn most states the killing of a pregnant woman results in two charges for murder, manslaughter or whatever. The fetus, in this case, is considered a person.
@ May 23, 2019 at 2:03 PM
ReplyDeleteWRONG. They consented to SEX. Consenting to SEX is NOT consenting to pregnancy.
The form of your argument would mean that if you consented to choking on your food because you put it in your mouth. OR, you consent to being in a car accident because you went for a drive. OR You consented to rape because of how you dressed. OR you consented to being bit by a snake because you went swimming in a lake.
See how that works? You confuse RISK with consent. It's really quite simple. Sweetie, you simply want to punish people who don't follow your brand of morality.
To answer your questions: 1) No. 2) No.
In your little scenario you forgot one important factor-the baby-a life!
Delete@ May 23, 2019 at 1:40 PM
ReplyDeleteWell well well... what do you know? According to Life Way Research (motto is "biblical solutions for life")....
70% of women who get abortions identify as Christian.... 23% of them as "evangelical".
Now imagine that....
Facts REALLY put a damper on unsubstantiated claims and assertions.
3:14 Well lmao I don’t want to punish anybody. I’m stating abortion is murder plain and simple. If you don’t agree that’s fine. It’s ok to disagree. See how easy that was? You’re logic tho is flawed. It’s kinda like saying I drank 12 beers and got behind the wheel of a car and drove. Cause damn it I should be able to drink and drive. No one should be able to tell me I can’t 🙄There are risks and consequences to everything we do. It’s how you handle it that’s important. 🤷♀️ There’s an old saying ...just because you can doesn’t mean you should. In the end it’s you that will have to live with what you’ve done and I wouldn’t wish that on anyone. I’ve seen what it’s done to close friends of mine. You obviously weren’t raised with morals. I was. So abort away sweetie😁
ReplyDeletemiss the real truth and facts the womens body IS NOT HERS TO START WITH
ReplyDeleteHow Should A Woman View Her Body and the Preborn Life Growing in Her Womb?
"Behold, children are a gift of the LORD; the fruit of the womb is a reward" (Psalm 127:3, NASV).
"Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and that you are not your own? For you have been bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body" (1 Corinthians 6:19-20, NKJV).
@ May 24, 2019 at 12:16 PM
ReplyDeleteThe REAL truth, is America is not a theocracy, America is a secular republic with a secular government, and a secular law system. You will need to provide better arguments than quoting what you view as a holy text.
A religious argument here has no value, and is invalid.
Sure, YOU can practice your religion, and I will defend that right, if your perspective on your religion says don't get abortions, then YOU get to practice that. However, you do not get to impugn others with it, nor do you get to use it to legislate your comfy theocracy.
Ironically, wasn't it cited here that 70% of American abortions are carried out by Christian Women? I think you all need to get some sort of consensus before thwacking the rest of us over the head with your gobbledygook.
2:16 yes a rebublic so NO STATE ESTABILSED CHURCH got it
Delete...but
a document based on Biblical
values that is Gobley gook?? OK so let me get this right you take the GOD given right to defend your property, free speech and practice your religion? however GOD's law of basic life is ignored?
Deny it all you want but if you really think about it. ...the body does not belong to you or the women in such a Dilemma. it is a loan from GOD!! this planet,you and i are here because of GODs Grace...it has nothing to do with standard luciferian deceptive selfish me me me outlook. i hope it does not makes you feel better to make a mockery of lifes handbook? common sense, honesty, love, and mercy is all gobley gook? from the mouth of GOD his word and the truth will one day have the final. i pray your are there too brother.
@ May 23, 2019 at 4:36 PM
ReplyDeleteAhh... but you are not content to just "disagree", now are you? You would support, I assume- please correct me if wrong- a ban on abortion.. would you not?
You don't just disagree... you actively support and endorse legislation that would compel someone to donate their body for a use they do not consent to.
Also, I have no idea what you are doing with the drinking analogy, the form of it does not match or remotely resemble the ones given previously... I flat reject your example and assertion. The form would be more correct if it were: You consented to being raped because you drank 12 beers and were too drunk to stop it. This is the form of the argument, I am welcome to you attempting an example again.
I don't know how to make this any easier than: consenting to sex, is not consenting to pregnancy.
If you disagree, I would like you to demonstrate it. If your position is that when someone consents to sex, they are also consenting to pregnancy, I would like you do demonstrate that as true.
"If your position is that when someone consents to sex, they are also consenting to pregnancy, I would like you do demonstrate that as true."
ReplyDeleteConsenting to unprotected sex is exactly that. At least for educated people. Unprotected sex is what causes pregnancy. Did you not ever have a sex education class? Are you 100 years old, or what? You can't justify baby killing in a expectant's mother's womb, no matter how hard you try. It is amazing how naive you are about pregnancy, and women's responsibility in allowing themselves to become pregnant. Yeah, 100 years ago they couldn't do much about it, but with today's methods of contraception, a women is just irresponsible to get pregnant, and then wait until it is a VIABLE baby to decide to KILL it for her convenience. The overturn of that baby killing law, Roe v Wade, is coming. Even back when the Supreme Court decided abortion was a constitutional "right," they erred. There IS no right in the constitution for an abortion (have you read the constitution?) The justices had to find one that wasn't there. You should study that ill-conceived (no pun intended) decision and see why they were in error. It just wasn't a decision based on a reading of the constitution, or what our founding father's put in there. Congress could have passed a law making abortion legal everywhere, oh that's right, they couldn't because there wasn't support for abortion nationally, so SCOTUS stepped in to "legislate" what Congress was unable to do. That is not what the SCOTUS is there for. They divided the country for the last 46 years with that decision, and cost millions of innocent's lives for a woman's convenience. The pendulum has gone far enough, and is going to swing back to the center. Get used to it.
.
May 25, 2:54
DeleteThank you. It really is quite that simple. But those like 2:11 will try to justify murder anyway they can and expect everyone to agree with their sorted views.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that ALL men (souls) are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." All includes the third party here, the unborn child.
ReplyDeleteWhat are you using a basis to establish "personhood"? The splitting of 2 human cells? A heartbeat? Being independently viable?
Delete