R v. W to date: 53+ million babies sacrificed at the alter of convenience. Nice. I blame Christian Pastors. I hear sermons I agree with on salt and light but Pastors are silent on the 3K abortions performed every day. Those sermons don't fill seats and pay for flatscreens and microphones.
If I were a secular humanist, I'd be so pleased with Christian Pastors today. It's a gift to their cause. Ask yourself, if a secular humanist does not hate you, you aren't spreading the Gospel.
When was the last time that "author" Andy Stanley or that religionist Beth Moore wrote a book on the sin of abortion? And for the Catholics, yeah, you say you are against abortion but you consistently foist baby killing leftists into office every election.
Thanks for the note Eric, but the sin of abortion is here to stay. God have mercy on us.
If Roe is overturned, some pro-abortion entrepreneurs will be setting up "all-inclusive" abortion junkets from states that ban the procedure after a certain point to ones where abortion is unfettered. Packages will include transportation, meals, two nights lodging, and all medical expenses related to the procedure.
Naturally, no mask or vaccine will be required - nor any self-quarantine.
Ultimately, in a post-modern world lacking a willingness to accept an externally-based morality, it views the "law" as a (not "the", but "a") moral compass. At that point, "legal" becomes the "because, SHUT UP!" answer since it has been declared "right". "Illegal", well, that definition is much more subject to whether one wants it to be wrong or not. Not unexpected, just tragic.
A wise pastor once told me, "We dare not condone that which God seeks to redeem. It confuses the sinner in need of repentance and acceptance of God's grace!"
Human law has supplanted moral law in many people's minds. My conversations with younger people are rife, not with right and wrong, but using "legal" as the standard. As we know, human law contradicts moral law particularly in the case of abortion. Bringing an immoral people back toward the USA's moral underpinnings is nigh unto impossible unless the Lord bring true revival to His Church and we resume the task of being salt and light in a tasteless and dark world.
While you are not making new arguments, you have enunciated the argument better than I have read before—short of a sermon regarding the sanctity and value of life.
You stated this superbly. There simply aren’t enough adjectives for me to describe the way you posed this Erick!
Your analysis of the effects on conservatism hit the target in the ten ring. This is not a pragmatic or political or partisan argument.
This is an apologetic describing our need to follow the truth and uphold the value of life regardless of the cost.
Unfortunately, this case is moving the abortion issue from the wrong direction. There are those few parents who really want children but deal with very difficult genetic defects. These are the rare cases when genetic defects result in severe birth defects. Fortunately they almost always do not result in full term pregnancy or live births. But they can. In the rare case that such a child is carried to a full term live birth, such a child is never able to even walk, eat, or communicate. Yet laws that prevent late term abortions take the decision away from parents in these rare cases. A parent in this situation cannot know what genetic condition the child has until past 20 weeks. If the genes transferred wrong, arms and legs are in the wrong places, joints don't form correctly, the body doesn't work correctly, and the brain doesn't either. The abortions that should be stopped are those done in the first and early second trimesters. Those are the ones that are done without deep thought and introspection.
Call me a simpleton, but I never understood how the INALIENABLE right to life could ever be over riden by the conjured up right of infanticide parsed as a right to privacy.
Not sure if it was an original thought or if you'd heard it elsewhere, but paralleling the arguments for abortion to the arguments for slavery was brilliant and exceptionally apropos. I will certainly use those quotes to bolster my stance the next time the subject comes up.
Well done! I should've clarified that it didn't matter, the point was valid and well worth repeating regardless of the origins. But so many people repeat what they hear (myself included), so an original thought - especially one so on-point - is not only impressive but refreshing.
...and the irony that BLM refuses to decry abortion shows how little they understand the eugenic source of Sanger's efforts. How the blind do lead the blind :-(.
To keep the slaves on the New Plantation, it is first necessary to convince them that all this is done for their own good. Such convincing requires that the silent racism inherent in the arguments of Sanger and other eugenicists that "undesirable populations" (Sanger's words) be limited in their ability to reproduce, lest they gain too much power and dare to start thinking of themselves as worthy of more than the plantation masters are willing to allot to them. It's no surprise, then, that the easiest place to find a Planned Parenthood abortion "clinic" is in a mostly minority, expecially Black, inner city neighborhood.
The road from Roe v. Wade, by way of Euthanasia, to Auschwitz-Birkenau is far shorter and more direct than most people realize.
Thank you for providing clarity… for me at least…on what Roe v Wade actually is and how it became what it is now. I have never understood this until you laid it out . But the result of it is a moral morass of misunderstanding and the biggest opportunity to pick the pockets of the indignant and well meaning that ever was born into our world.
Just as a copy of a copy (of a copy...) loses legibility through a copying machine, so our SCOTUS's judgements regarding law and its relationship to the Constitution and Bill of Rights become mere shadows of intent. As they use second-level precedents to create new precedents (to create further new precedents, etc.), we wander further and further from our moral underpinnings.
As anyone with children understand, the more kids involved in any activity, the greater the likelihood of things going badly at some point - foolishness grows exponentially with number of children involved. In this case, the foolishness has less to do with the number of Justices involved (though that was true of Roe v. Wade), and more to do with how far the "copies" of the precedent have gone down the rabbit-hole. The last 40 years of SCOTUS precedents that "codify" evil will be to our shame in history.
Well said, Erick. The Lord is well pleased. God created mankind in His own image and likeness (we have the Spirit within us, and we have intellect and free will), and then mankind sets about trying to remake God into ours, pursuing our own craven wants and desires. As JPII said, a country that kills its own has no future, at least not a very promising one. God bless those warriors pushing back against the abomination that is abortion.
The trimester system was essentially abandoned in Planned Parenthood v Casey when the Court’s majority assumed honorary medical degrees when they introduced “viability” into constitutional law.
What I find interesting are trimesters and viability have nothing to do with privacy. By framing the abortion “right” around trimesters and viability concepts, there is a tacit acknowledgment of the right to life of the unborn, but the pro-choice can’t quite determine when that rights begin. But it certainly is a subservient right! (As I tie it back to the slavery comparison).
That, of course, reinforces the ridiculosity [sic] of the entire privacy premise vis a vis abortion.
When the murder of babies is brought to light in many books of the Bible before the final ripening of Gods wrath, a sorrow and dread comes for our nation as we continue down this path. Sorrow for our great sin and arrogance, and dread for the sure consequences coming.
And all this at a time of year when we celebrate the birth of a Savior; an event which led the secular powers of the time (Herod) to order a mass infanticide in the hopes of extinguishing the life of He who would be our Redeemer. The mind can scarcely conceive of a greater irony.
Those are bumbershoots, which nothing to do with penumbras. And besides, they only shield one from sunlight (which is a somewhat appropriate comparison in a discussion of light v. darkness). :-)
R v. W to date: 53+ million babies sacrificed at the alter of convenience. Nice. I blame Christian Pastors. I hear sermons I agree with on salt and light but Pastors are silent on the 3K abortions performed every day. Those sermons don't fill seats and pay for flatscreens and microphones.
If I were a secular humanist, I'd be so pleased with Christian Pastors today. It's a gift to their cause. Ask yourself, if a secular humanist does not hate you, you aren't spreading the Gospel.
When was the last time that "author" Andy Stanley or that religionist Beth Moore wrote a book on the sin of abortion? And for the Catholics, yeah, you say you are against abortion but you consistently foist baby killing leftists into office every election.
Thanks for the note Eric, but the sin of abortion is here to stay. God have mercy on us.
If Roe is overturned, some pro-abortion entrepreneurs will be setting up "all-inclusive" abortion junkets from states that ban the procedure after a certain point to ones where abortion is unfettered. Packages will include transportation, meals, two nights lodging, and all medical expenses related to the procedure.
Naturally, no mask or vaccine will be required - nor any self-quarantine.
Ultimately, in a post-modern world lacking a willingness to accept an externally-based morality, it views the "law" as a (not "the", but "a") moral compass. At that point, "legal" becomes the "because, SHUT UP!" answer since it has been declared "right". "Illegal", well, that definition is much more subject to whether one wants it to be wrong or not. Not unexpected, just tragic.
A wise pastor once told me, "We dare not condone that which God seeks to redeem. It confuses the sinner in need of repentance and acceptance of God's grace!"
Human law has supplanted moral law in many people's minds. My conversations with younger people are rife, not with right and wrong, but using "legal" as the standard. As we know, human law contradicts moral law particularly in the case of abortion. Bringing an immoral people back toward the USA's moral underpinnings is nigh unto impossible unless the Lord bring true revival to His Church and we resume the task of being salt and light in a tasteless and dark world.
Come quickly Lord Jesus.
While you are not making new arguments, you have enunciated the argument better than I have read before—short of a sermon regarding the sanctity and value of life.
You stated this superbly. There simply aren’t enough adjectives for me to describe the way you posed this Erick!
Your analysis of the effects on conservatism hit the target in the ten ring. This is not a pragmatic or political or partisan argument.
This is an apologetic describing our need to follow the truth and uphold the value of life regardless of the cost.
Lives, like God, are of eternal value.
Unfortunately, this case is moving the abortion issue from the wrong direction. There are those few parents who really want children but deal with very difficult genetic defects. These are the rare cases when genetic defects result in severe birth defects. Fortunately they almost always do not result in full term pregnancy or live births. But they can. In the rare case that such a child is carried to a full term live birth, such a child is never able to even walk, eat, or communicate. Yet laws that prevent late term abortions take the decision away from parents in these rare cases. A parent in this situation cannot know what genetic condition the child has until past 20 weeks. If the genes transferred wrong, arms and legs are in the wrong places, joints don't form correctly, the body doesn't work correctly, and the brain doesn't either. The abortions that should be stopped are those done in the first and early second trimesters. Those are the ones that are done without deep thought and introspection.
Call me a simpleton, but I never understood how the INALIENABLE right to life could ever be over riden by the conjured up right of infanticide parsed as a right to privacy.
Well done, Erik.
Excellent!
Not sure if it was an original thought or if you'd heard it elsewhere, but paralleling the arguments for abortion to the arguments for slavery was brilliant and exceptionally apropos. I will certainly use those quotes to bolster my stance the next time the subject comes up.
I've made that argument for years and years. I know I'm not alone now, but it isn't something I picked up elsewhere.
Well done! I should've clarified that it didn't matter, the point was valid and well worth repeating regardless of the origins. But so many people repeat what they hear (myself included), so an original thought - especially one so on-point - is not only impressive but refreshing.
...and the irony that BLM refuses to decry abortion shows how little they understand the eugenic source of Sanger's efforts. How the blind do lead the blind :-(.
To keep the slaves on the New Plantation, it is first necessary to convince them that all this is done for their own good. Such convincing requires that the silent racism inherent in the arguments of Sanger and other eugenicists that "undesirable populations" (Sanger's words) be limited in their ability to reproduce, lest they gain too much power and dare to start thinking of themselves as worthy of more than the plantation masters are willing to allot to them. It's no surprise, then, that the easiest place to find a Planned Parenthood abortion "clinic" is in a mostly minority, expecially Black, inner city neighborhood.
The road from Roe v. Wade, by way of Euthanasia, to Auschwitz-Birkenau is far shorter and more direct than most people realize.
Thank you for providing clarity… for me at least…on what Roe v Wade actually is and how it became what it is now. I have never understood this until you laid it out . But the result of it is a moral morass of misunderstanding and the biggest opportunity to pick the pockets of the indignant and well meaning that ever was born into our world.
Just as a copy of a copy (of a copy...) loses legibility through a copying machine, so our SCOTUS's judgements regarding law and its relationship to the Constitution and Bill of Rights become mere shadows of intent. As they use second-level precedents to create new precedents (to create further new precedents, etc.), we wander further and further from our moral underpinnings.
As anyone with children understand, the more kids involved in any activity, the greater the likelihood of things going badly at some point - foolishness grows exponentially with number of children involved. In this case, the foolishness has less to do with the number of Justices involved (though that was true of Roe v. Wade), and more to do with how far the "copies" of the precedent have gone down the rabbit-hole. The last 40 years of SCOTUS precedents that "codify" evil will be to our shame in history.
By my quick count "woman" is used about 54 times in the Roe v Wade text...not one reference to birthing person
Well said, Erick. The Lord is well pleased. God created mankind in His own image and likeness (we have the Spirit within us, and we have intellect and free will), and then mankind sets about trying to remake God into ours, pursuing our own craven wants and desires. As JPII said, a country that kills its own has no future, at least not a very promising one. God bless those warriors pushing back against the abomination that is abortion.
The trimester system was essentially abandoned in Planned Parenthood v Casey when the Court’s majority assumed honorary medical degrees when they introduced “viability” into constitutional law.
What I find interesting are trimesters and viability have nothing to do with privacy. By framing the abortion “right” around trimesters and viability concepts, there is a tacit acknowledgment of the right to life of the unborn, but the pro-choice can’t quite determine when that rights begin. But it certainly is a subservient right! (As I tie it back to the slavery comparison).
That, of course, reinforces the ridiculosity [sic] of the entire privacy premise vis a vis abortion.
When the murder of babies is brought to light in many books of the Bible before the final ripening of Gods wrath, a sorrow and dread comes for our nation as we continue down this path. Sorrow for our great sin and arrogance, and dread for the sure consequences coming.
And all this at a time of year when we celebrate the birth of a Savior; an event which led the secular powers of the time (Herod) to order a mass infanticide in the hopes of extinguishing the life of He who would be our Redeemer. The mind can scarcely conceive of a greater irony.
So well said. Pnumbras. My whew word of the day.
Had to look it up as well! Glad I did...I thought it was something to shield you from the rain ;)
Those are bumbershoots, which nothing to do with penumbras. And besides, they only shield one from sunlight (which is a somewhat appropriate comparison in a discussion of light v. darkness). :-)
Apparently Christian Penumbra guided the legal application of penumbras, as there appear to be at least 50 shades of it!
(I realize I am only funny in my own mind…)
Awesome article, Erick, as usual. Thanks.