The following comes from an Aug. 8 story by Wesley J. Smith on LifeNews.com.
I have come to believe that if Roe v. Wade is ever overturned–a big if–it will be from the other side. That is, I think it is more likely that a future Supreme Court will find Roe and its progeny to be too restrictive and overturn the case in the cause of forging an all-encompassing right to abortion, instead of returning abortion to state regulation. From a piece I wrote about that in First Things, “A Pro-Abortion Reversal of Roe v Wade?”:
[Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader] Ginsburg believes adamantly that women are denied “equal citizen stature” by boundaries placed around access to abortion. Not only that, but in an angry dissent to the 2007 Supreme Court ruling upholding the federal ban on partial birth abortion, she (joined by Justice Breyer among the current justices) railed against the majority allowing “moral concerns” to “override fundamental rights.”
That sounded to me as advocacy for an unfettered right to abortion at any time and for any reason. So, I asked expert anti-abortion attorney Clarke Forsyth, the senior counsel for Americans United for Life. whether Ginsburg’s view would abolish all abortion regulation. Yes, he told me: If the right to an abortion were based on “equal protection of the law,” as opposed to other constitutional standards, it would “permit no regulations at any time,” perhaps even, “requiring [government] abortion funding.”
Now, the New York Times’ legal reporter Linda Greenhouse–who makes little pretense about objectivity in her journalism–provides more fuel for my fire. Lamenting the successful restrictions on abortion in states such as Texas, she lauds a recent Federal Court of Appeals ruling that the right to abortion is equivalent to the right to keep and bear arms. From her piece:
Guns and abortion? That’s a pairing no previous judicial opinion has made. “At its core, each protected right is held by the individual,” the judge explained. “However, neither right can be fully exercised without the assistance of someone else. The right to abortion cannot be exercised without a medical professional, and the right to keep and bear arms means little if there is no one from whom to acquire the handgun or ammunition.”
Do I have to point out how delicious this analogy is? Of course, it’s unthinkable that Alabama would regulate firearms dealers to the point of extinction. But recall the June day 22 years ago when the Supreme Court, to the surprise of nearly everyone, reaffirmed the right to abortion in Planned Parenthood v. Casey. It was unthinkable then that nearly a generation later, states would flagrantly be regulating the practice of abortion (in the name of women’s health and safety, no less) out of business — a goal that Texas, enabled by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit is close to achieving.
Except that gun ownership is an express right, protected by the Second Amendment to the Constitution. In contrast, the right to an abortion was invented by Justices based on implied so-called “penumbras and emanations”–but never mind.
No right is absolute, or course. We aren’t allowed to own machine guns, for example.
But I think that advocates like Greenhouse–and certainly Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg–want abortion to be. Indeed, check out Greenhouse’s last paragraph:
Still, judges’ willingness to step outside the abortion frame and to weigh, from that broad perspective, whether the abortion right has become unduly burdened is something new and potentially of great value in the struggle to preserve women’s reproductive freedom. Even in the face of cynical and unrelenting political attack, the right to abortion can become stronger the more tightly it is stitched into the constitutional fabric, the more that smart and gutsy judges are willing to treat it as what it is, a right like any other….
To read the original story, click here.
Perhaps Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has never heard of abstinence for those who do not wish to become pregnant.
But then again perhaps she will only believe there is equality when men get pregnant and give birth.
These are the kind of goof-balls who get appointed as Judges when Catholics and others of good will vote for the Democratic Party of death.
Evil politicians appoint people of like mind to Courts and high Administrative positions.
When will the Bishops, Priests, and Laity wake up?
ALL actions have consequences and that includes VOTING.
Never vote for politicians/candidates who support the INTRINSIC EVILs of: ABORTION, CONTRACEPTION, HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGE, CLONING, EMBRYONIC STEM CELL RESEARCH, and EUTHANASIA.
What about the Constitutional right to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?” Doesn’t an unborn baby, a person, have a right, first of all, to life? Without that, the baby, a person, will have no right to liberty or the pursuit of happiness. Is my thinking too simplistic?
How many ways is Justice Ginsburg wrong? And how was she ever confirmed, given that Ginsburg is (1) pre-determined and outcome determinative on all abortion cases, meaning no due process for any opponent of same before the Supreme Court, and (2) intellectually weak. Her views, if taken to their logical extreme, is that all people, however constructed physically or emotionally, have a non-touchable right to do as their nature dictates. Women, by their nature as the sole potentially “adversely affected” person in any sexual congress, and whose right to sexual expression is prejudiced by any controls on individual ethics, could be matched by, for example, homosexuals, or persons with a yen for children, or their sisters (or brothers or parents), or dogs, or multiple partners, or having sexual expression only in public or churches; the list is endless. Forgotten is the right, recognized by only a few judges, of a society controlling sexual morality in the name of the common good. This societal good, of course, could be changed by the vote, but not by courts. Greenhouse engages in intellectual silliness, and she knows it; just say no. Let women do want they want, but make pregnancy, however caused, as the “red line” by which society can say: “No abortion, a greater good results in keeping a pre-born until it is born naturally. Perhaps society can offer a free right to adoption, or natal care, all of that. That will do the profit line at Planned Parenthood no good, though, so it is likely to be opposed. This concern, and only this concern, forms Ginsburg’s concern (and her allegiance to a few lesbian groups, too). Not hard to see through this — why not Man-Up and say “no”.??
Tragically, the country we call “America” today, is not at all the true, authentic, God-worshipping, Bible-believing America, of our forefathers! Today’s America is morally and religiously illiterate, selfish, and materialistic, to the point of a total religious, moral, and social collapse! These selfish, “me”-gratifying people have no regard for others, or for self-control of any kind! They go to horrible “hippie parties,” have irresponsible ” free sex and dope,” — and demand their selfish “right” to kill a helpless, unborn child! With NO RESPECT, and NO RECOGNITION OF ADULT MATERNAL/PATERNAL RESPONSIBILITY, for the welfare of that child!! No– this is NOT the America of our Founding Fathers!! And without strong leadership of the Nation’s churches (and synagogues) to re-establish and live daily, by our solid Judeo-Christian heritage– our country will not survive! No more privileges, for immature, immoral, subversive “liberals” and activists, seeking to destroy our Nation! Put them in jail!
Linda Marie, I’m sure that you meant well when you said, “the country we call “America” today, is not at all the true, authentic, God-worshipping, Bible-believing America, of our forefathers!”, however, please consider that our country is precisely in the horrible mess of that it is today precisely BECAUSE the majority of our forefathers were NOT “true, authentic, God-worshipping, Bible believers”!
I don’t recall who said it but this statement is true. “The logical conclusion of Protestantism is Atheism”. Our culture has now declined to such point that even I must admit that I am tempted to believe that the Protestant Heresy is far better than what we are now dealing with. But this is a trap, because the heresy of protestantism IS why we, and Europe for that matter, are in such a state of cultural decline.
You may be interested in this outstanding essay posted by Michael Baker. In which he concludes, “A Protestant who studies his ‘faith’ critically will either return to its source, the Catholic Church—and find peace, or he will abandon all belief in God, and any hope for his soul.” https://www.superflumina.org/protestantism.html (For the sake of this discussion, I will add that unless a Protestant nation returns to it’s source, the Catholic Church—it will abandon all belief in God and never find peace.)
Another great post Tracy!
Unfortunately, this is basically true. America, however, could never have been formed, under a theocracy, or with the dominance of only one religion– such a thing would have been rejected immediately, by he Founding Fathers! However, even worse– in Vatican II, our Church insisted on “Protestantizing” itself, for ecumenical and political reasons, I think– and it has been a great disaster! Church leaders will never admit to their tremendous blunder! Personally, I agree with the Society of St. Pius X, on this subject! I, too, have read that the logical conclusion of Protestantism is Atheism, and that is often where extreme, modern Protestant sects end up, such as the Anglicans– a complete, heretical rejection of God, the authority of Christ, Biblical truths, and Christian way of life, and living a self-centered, “pragmatic” kind of life, that quickly degenerates into a life centered around “self,” eventually devoid of even altruism , the “Golden Rule,” or ethics! I know the history of all of this is more complex, and I do not want to overly-simplify things. But if we do not submit to Christ, who does mankind really follow— the Devil, and his or her own pitiful, misled, self-centered desires?? “All we like sheep have gone astray!” With the proverbial wolf waiting! So pitiful! Mankind is so hopeless– without Christ!! I think that is the bottom line!
Linda Marie, I mostly agree with you. :) Let me say, that I wasn’t trashing the Declaration of Independence nor the Constitution. I understand that our forefathers restored our God given rights of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” which the protestant revolutionaries in England had stolen from the common “Catholic” man centuries before them. On that account they had it right. My critique was mostly to clarify that, while our founding fathers did return to a basic Catholic principle, our nation, by hanging on to protestantism, has had nowhere to go but backwards into the tyranny of protestant Europe, which our forefathers were seeking to free future generations of Americans from.
As to the issue of Vatican II. I do not see anything what-so-ever wrong with those documents. My understanding is that the so called “committees” set up to “implement” the statements of Vatican II is where the mischief and destruction ensued, culminating in the failure of the magisterium to thus far successfully reign it in.
Mainline Protestantism is in freefall, with churches changing their names and or dropping denominational titles. It’s all in a great race to present to church goers something more exciting. But without the sacraments, especially the Eucharist and confession, without Mary or the saints, without Christ’s presence in the Adoration Chapels, without apostolic succession, they are left with an altered bible and no authority on which to rely for a correct interpretation. The Catholic Church is waiting but, sadly, millions do not heed the call. Let us continue to pray for their return.
I certainly wish that was true, John and it’s a lovely thought! I felt the warm embrace of Mother Church seven years ago and there is a whole family of Catholics that share that view. Unfortunately, as Michael Voris is trying to awaken in this warm and loving throng is that one out of ten Americans is an ex-Catholic. Only about 30% of baptized Catholics attend weekly Mass. Many of the Catholic faithful don’t know their faith, etc. etc. and my feeling is that had not God led Mother Angelica to begin EWTN and taught literally millions of people around the world the true tenets of the faith, the Catholic Church in America would be what it has become in Europe…weak, tottering and luke warm. If anyone is a saint it is she and she has remained faithful to the end. What a life! What a testimony! She would hate that I wrote that, but we need to learn from her…to speak the truth and shame the devil. She was not some namby pamby ‘nice’ little nun, but an outspoken and feisty warrior. The next time you fear hurting feelings when your truthful words might make you seem mean, remember Mother Angelica and Catherine of Sienna!!!
This is what the New Evangelization is.
This is what Pope Francis is trying to do.
Prayer is the answer.
We have gone from a family where only 20% attended Mass weekly to 100% attendance.
My in laws have gone from 50% attendance to 95% attendance. It took several years. Persist in prayer.
Some of the greatest Catholic evangelizists, including Michael Voris, are people who have returned to the Church after a long absence.
And most US Bishops and their parish Priests are not helping.
They do not tell the LAITY in the pews to read the Bible or the “Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition”.
If there truly is the right to murder, then the right to own a machine gun, grenade launcher, anti-tank missiles, and surface to air missiles makes sense. Why should women get to do all of the killing?