Roe v. Wade is a Legal Dinosaur That Needs to Become Extinct

0

prolife-march-wsj-poll-frc-620x413

Recently, the Supreme Court of the United States refused to hear a case that dealt with abortion and ultrasound.  The case was based upon a challenge to an Oklahoma state law that required doctors to perform an ultrasound and explain to the mother what exactly she would be seeing on the screen.   I was astounded to hear that the highest Court in the land would not hear a case about abortion based upon the modern technologies that can be applied to understanding what for most of human history has been a great mystery.  We now know more about fetal development than ever before, and yet the Supreme Court insists on sticking with the dictates of precedent established in 1973 in the case of Roe v. Wade.

Think about that – the case was heard in the year 1973, making it forty-one years old this month.  That is the Stone Age in terms of medical technological advances.  Why on Earth are we allowing the termination of the lives of human beings based upon ancient science?

The Supremes discussed that abortion has been practiced throughout history, including in such hallowed places as Rome.  They talk about “viability” which equated with “quickening”  — quickening!  That is an ancient concept that claims that life “begins” when the mother can first feel the baby’s movements.  We now know that babies begin to move around 7 weeks while their mothers don’t begin to feel these movements until around the 15th week!

Out of thin air, they developed the whole “three trimester rule” – the first trimester, the kid’s life is game for its mother; in the second trimester, there is a rebuttable presumption that the mother can choose to end the baby’s life; and the third trimester, there is a rebuttable presumption that the state has the right to prevent her from “aborting” her child.  Ironically, when a woman wants to keep her baby, and someone else causes the death of the fetus, the person causing the harm is liable in almost all instances of — guess what — “fetal homicide.”

The bottom line regarding Roe v. Wade is that modern technologies make the case irrelevant.  And with widely-available means of birth control, there is simple no logical reason that ultrasound should not be used routinely to protect vulnerable women from falling victim to this racket.   For every other medical procedure, the law requires a physician to obtain “informed consent,” meaning that the patient must be fully cognizant and educated about what exactly is going to happen during that procedure.  To do so otherwise is a violation of the law – except with abortion, whose proponents have consistently blocked attempts to apply the same rules to pregnancy termination, which is a very serious medical procedure.

It never ceases to amaze me that a person can be fanatical about science vs. religion or support wholeheartedly the “science” of global warming while having a complete disregard for the medical science of fetal development.

The fact is that abortion is horrible for women.  The vast majority do not just go on with their lives, never to think of it again.  Most a plagued by depression and they never stop wondering about what that life would have been like had it not been terminated.  From conception, you are no longer talking just the mother’s body – there are two or more, each with their own DNA and each – including the mother — in some stage of the life cycle, which will continue if there is no artificial or natural termination.

The Supreme Court noted that the Romans practiced it so it must be alright, correct?   Yeah, well they practiced crucifixion, too.

Send this to friend