This post is taken in part from “Is There Life After Roe v Wade?” published in Eagle Forum Report, Vol 4/Number 1 in January, 2020; written by Allan E. Parker, President of The Justice Foundation, and Philip Jauregui, J.D., the President of Judicial Action Group, which monitors the federal judicial selection process.
Is there life after Roe v. Wade? Can such a thing be possible? Will there come a time when abortion is no longer a constitutional right in America?
Yes, it is not only possible, but it could happen soon. This crime against humanity—the legalization of abortion by the Supreme Court—can and should soon be reversed by the Court itself.
As the Supreme Court goes about reversing Roe v Wade, here are factors they will likely consider…
Abortion is more than simply wrong; it is gravely, seriously wrong. It is in fact a crime against humanity. Crimes against humanity occur when the government withdraws legal protection from a class of human beings resulting in serious deprivation or death. One example is the Dred Scott case wherein the US Supreme Court made slavery a supposedly permanent part of the Constitution; resulting in the Civil War. The Supreme Court also committed a crime against humanity in 1896 when it legally approved segregation in the decision Plessy v. Ferguson. In this case, serious criticism led the court to change course. Forty-six years after Roe, the criticism against it is not only gravely serious but increasing. It is time for the Court to follow its own example of ending segregation by reversing Plessy v. Ferguson with the historic Brown v. Board of Education and today reverse Roe and end this present crime against humanity. Plessy was 58 years old when it was reversed.
In 1973, in Roe, the Supreme Court said: “We need not resolve the difficult question of when life begins. When those trained in the respective disciplines of medicine, philosophy, and theology are unable to arrive at any consensus, the judiciary, at this point in the development of man’s knowledge, is not in a position to speculate as to the answer.”
The US 8th Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled there is adequate scientific evidence to support a requirement that abortionists disclose to women that abortion is the “termination of the life of a separate, unique, living human being.” Under the Law of Precedent, when science changes, the law changes. Precedent does not require that Courts adhere to the lack of scientific knowledge of 1973. The Court itself called the child in the womb “infant life” in Gonzales v. Carhart and it is past time to adequately protect this scientifically proven life.
Abortion Hurts Women.
In 1973, the Supreme Court claimed it was helping women by giving them freedom from unwanted child care, but surely the Court did not know that millions of women would suffer the terrible tragedy of “devastating psychological consequences,” and “depression and severe loss of self-esteem” by killing their own child. We now know that abortion hurts women, and it is time to better protect all women from the lie that abortion doesn’t hurt women.
A Better Alternative to Abortion.
There is now a better way to give women freedom from unwanted child-care without killing the child. Safe Haven laws in all 50 states allow a woman, at no cost, to drop her child off at all hospitals, fire stations or other locations within a certain period of time following birth and the state or adoptive parents will take care of the baby. Unlike abortion, it is free—equally available to the rich and the poor. There is no required legal procedure and the mother does not have to travel to another state. “Coat hanger” abortions remain unnecessary and this change in circumstances warrants that Roe be reversed.
Millions of People Want to Adopt Newborn Babies.
What will happen if women choose Safe Haven laws and give life to their babies? Those babies will be welcomed into loving homes. Over a million people in America are waiting to adopt newborn children partially because we have a huge infertility problem in America. They are praying for a child. A change in circumstances of the availability of adoptive parents is a factor that weighs heavily in favor of reversing Roe.
At long last, the abortion war can end because every child in America is “legally” wanted and the demand for the abortion of “unwanted” children can be stopped. Consensus is possible. The reversal of Roe, Doe and Casey is legally warranted. Moreover, it is a win-win for society as a whole; for any individual woman who is not yet ready or able to care for her child; and for unborn women (and men) who deserve for their lives to be recognized and protected by the Highest Court in our Land.
~ D. Norris