Supreme Court abortion arguments built on foundation of lies

The case of Roe v. Wade and its companion case, Doe v. Bolton, are two glaring instances where our courts have gone amuck.

These two cases are where the U.S. Supreme Court legalized abortion through all nine months of pregnancy. You may ask, “How could something that was decided so long ago and has become so ingrained into the political and social fabric of our country ever change, let alone be reversed?”

Yet, when something is based on a lie, at some point, the truth will be known and the house of cards that lies are built on will come tumbling down.

By Chris Codden

The first two lies started at the very beginning of Roe v. Wade. A young woman, Norma McCorvey, living in Texas, wanted to abort her third pregnancy. She saved up $250 to have the abortion, went to a filthy illegal abortion clinic for the procedure, but walked out due to the conditions. She did not have an abortion, carried her baby to term and went to a lawyer to give her baby up for adoption. Her adoption lawyer gave her information to two freshly graduated law students who were trying to build a case to overturn the Texas ban on abortion. They convinced Norma to lie and say she was raped to heighten their chances of success.

The next set of lies come from the decision itself. First, when the Supreme Court hears a case, it is to decide the fate of that case alone, based on the facts. It is not to impose a broader justification in its decision or go beyond what the original case intends.

In Roe v. Wade, the case was based on a hypothetical situation (remember, Norma never had an abortion), and departed from the court’s required protocol to never “formulate a rule of constitutional law broader than is required by the precise facts to which it is to be applied.”

The decision reached past the purview of the case, imposing a pro-abortion agenda through all nine months of pregnancy, striking down laws in all 50 states, making it impossible to require any regulations or conditions.

The deception continued when the assenting opinion cited a clause in the 14th Amendment that no state can “deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” The court’s ruling used this citation to invoke a “right to privacy,” which held that a woman’s right to an abortion was implicitly connected. Most legal scholars, even those favorable to abortion, do not see any correlation to our forefathers’ intention for this “right to privacy” clause.

Pro-life advocates gather near the U.S. Supreme Court during the annual March for Life in Washington Jan. 19. (CNS photo/Tyler Orsburn)

Justice Byron White, a dissenter in Roe, explained the problem in his dissenting opinion in Thornburgh v. American College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists: “The Constitution itself is ordained and established by the people of the United States. … Decisions that find in the Constitution principles or values that cannot fairly be read into that document usurp the people’s authority, for such decisions represent choices that the people have never made, and that they cannot disavow through corrective legislation.” In short, the decision disregarded the Constitution to impose a political agenda the unelected Court should not be imposing.
Roe also claimed that an unborn child does not qualify as a human person, stating that most references to persons in the Constitution do not apply to the unborn, so “person” must not be meant to include them.

Even though the advanced technology available today that clearly shows the sophistication of the developing baby may not have been available then, the justices completely disregarded the abundant evidence available about the distinctive nature of a living human being at the earliest stages of development, ignoring the identity of the unborn as a person.

When the truth becomes clear and Roe v. Wade is overturned, abortion may still not become illegal. Most likely, the decision on abortion’s role in our society will go back to each state — and to the people of each state — to decide through a legislative process. We will still have to fight to protect the lives of each unborn child.

But it would be our fight to have, not an unelected court.

All these lies have been perpetuated through Planned Parenthood and the deep pockets that fund their campaign to keep the killing of the unborn legal. Do not be fooled by their tactics or the celebrities that align themselves with their deceptive message.

Norma McCorvey was haunted throughout her life for the role she played in Roe v. Wade. She said how difficult it was for her to go by an empty playground knowing that children she had a hand in aborting could have filled the abandoned swings and slides.

Let us participate in prayer and fasting these next weeks for the intention that our U.S. Senate will confirm constitutional judges who will restore our nation to one that protects life, every human life, and does not continue to be haunted by empty playgrounds.

Chris Codden is director of the Office of Marriage and Family of the Diocese of St. Cloud. Contact her at ccodden@gw.stcdio.org.

About The Visitor

The Visitor is the official newpaper for the Diocese of Saint Cloud.

Leave a Reply

*