In 1973, the right of individual states to set abortion laws was stripped away. The foundation for Roe vs. Wade, the legal precedent adjudicated by the U.S. Supreme Court on January 22, 1973, deemed it a woman’s constitutional right to obtain an abortion.
Across the decades, pro-life advocates have questioned who speaks to the rights of the unborn. The 1973 landmark ruling has divided the nation for over 40 years. Recently, newly enacted legislation in strongly conservative states has intensified a debate that has never stopped.
A key foundation for Roe vs. Wade was how “viability” is determined. In 1973, the scientific ability to determine at what point during pregnancy there was viable life was limited. Advances in medical technology have altered these 50-year-old pretenses about what constitutes life.
With this as one of the primary driving forces behind their decisions to change legislation, states such as Mississippi are rewriting abortion laws. The Mississippi legislation is now in front of the United States Supreme Court.
By all early indications, the fervor on both sides of the abortion debate is still exceptionally intense. One important argument, when medical professionals attempt to determine viable life, is the ability to feel pain in an unborn child.
This issue was introduced during arguments before the court. Throughout the decades-long debate over abortion rights, frequently the liberal left has resorted to unexplainable opinions and cockamamie theories about why everyone should believe in pro-choice.
There are few on the radical left who will honestly consider that abortion may be killing a living human being. If they had their way, abortion would be legal up until the day of delivery. It is not only an insane argument; it is cruel.
As the court considered the phenomenon of fetal pain, one liberal-leaning justice continued the left’s tendency to lean on the illogical. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor chose a rather bizarre path to justify her probable support for striking down Mississippi’s abortion legislation.
The Obama-era appointee compared unborn babies to brain-dead people. Sotomayor’s argument against the ability to feel the sensation of pain, as determination for a viable life, used a ludicrous comparison.
She argued that any ability to feel particular stimuli was also found to be common in patients that have been medically ruled brain-dead. As with virtually every liberal argument to permit widespread legal abortions, the question for the court is not about “sensation to various stimuli”.
The question never fully answered, despite a 7-2 ruling on Roe vs. Wade in favor of legal abortions, is the federal government’s right to make a law about such an issue. This has been the substance of the most heated abortion debates across the last four decades.
States insist that under the U.S. Constitution, each individual state has the exclusive right to set abortion legislation. Most legal scholars have all adhered to this position, despite their political leanings or feelings about abortion in general.
Ethics and theology professor Andrew T. Walker expressed the argument succinctly. Walker said, “The question is not, ultimately, over pain, but whether the Constitution grants the right to terminate innocent life.”
South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham went further. Graham questioned Sotomayor’s insistence that she could override the evidence supported by a majority within the medical community.
Graham argued that “It is well-established medical practice to provide anesthesia to the unborn child regarding medical procedures performed before 24 weeks.” The S.C. Senator astutely asserted that if there is no fetal pain, then why is anesthesia administrated to the unborn?
Again, in this debate, to scientifically establish at what point a fetus should be presented as a viable life, is important. States feel advances in medical science have dramatically changed this. Most believe a pregnancy is far too advanced at 24-weeks to legally kill the living fetus.
Mississippi’s new legislation specifically targets that 24-week question. Under Mississippi law, it will be illegal to get an abortion after 15-weeks. According to liberal U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor, this doesn’t matter. It’s about pain and the definition of brain-dead to her.
Moreover, to some degree, Justice Sotomayor’s opinion might be understandable. Nevertheless, what any jurist on the U.S. Supreme Court thinks about abortion is pointless. The federal government has no cause to allow one human to kill another living creature.
Our constitution explicitly sets distinct parameters on this type of federal government overreach. Roe vs. Wade was an ill-founded federal precedent. Regardless of new medical evidence determining viable life, it still does not matter.
Justice Sotomayor, and the rest of the liberal left, can have whatever opinion they wish about pain inside the womb. One striking fact still remains. The United States Government has no right to exercise control over a state’s right to determine its own laws.
Invariably, the ruling, expected later next summer, should uphold Mississippi’s, and all other states’ abortion legislation. Furthermore, it’s time to erase Roe vs. Wade for what it is; a death sentence, unconstitutionally executed by the U.S. Federal Government against the unborn.
Photo Credit: YouTube/CBS News
The post DISTURBING: U.S. Supreme Court Justice Claims the Unborn Are Like the Medically Brain-Dead appeared first on Steadfast Clash.
Source by [author_name]
