Forty-four years ago, Republican Chief Justice Harry Blackmun and his mostly Republican Supreme Court colleagues used their high office to open the door to the slaughter of tens of millions of innocent, helpless, defenseless little boys and girls.
They did it by using a fig-leaf of denying the self-evident natural humanity, the personality, of the child after conception, but before birth.
They did this because — as they themselves admitted in both their oral remarks and in their heinous written majority opinion — the Constitution of the United States, the supreme law of our land, absolutely, explicitly, imperatively REQUIRES equal protection under the law for EVERY innocent person. If the “fetus” is a person, they said, “of course” they are protected.
Today we have a large mass of people who call themselves “pro-life” who readily admit to the self-evident natural fact of the personality, or humanity, of the child in the womb, from conception, and yet again and again support “pro-life” legislation that fails to provide the equal protection that God and our nation’s supreme law explicitly require.
They stand morally, constitutionally, legally, buck naked, without even a fig leaf to cover the shame of their support for such immoral, unconstitutional statutes.
What I’m going to say is going to ruffle some feathers, but it’s true nonetheless:
Those who try to regulate abortion rather than stop it, knowing the unborn child is a person, from conception, are WORSE than Harry Blackmun.
Of course, the result is the same, either way. The slaughter, the genocide, continues.
Without the twin principles of God-given, unalienable individual rights, and equal protection under the law, you have no moral, constitutional, legal, or political argument left to use against the continuing practice of abortion on demand.
These regulatory bills surrender those two essential arguments, every single time. They governmentally-license the murder of the children, all of the children, as long as the atrocity is done on schedule, or by some arbitrary set of man-made rules.
“The appellee and certain amici argue that the fetus is a ‘person’ within the language and meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment … If this suggestion of personhood is established, the appellant’s case, of course, collapses, for the fetus’ right to life would then be guaranteed specifically by the Amendment.”
– Justice Harry A. Blackmun, Roe vs. Wade, 1973