Posts

Democrats Admit It’s Women Who Get Abortions After All

/0 Comments/in , /by

Democrats made an admission about what type of people can actually get abortions in the wake of a leaked Supreme Court draft opinion showing justices could potentially overturn Roe v. Wade.

After many liberals pushed for gender-neutral terms surrounding pregnancy and abortion such as “birthing people” instead of “women,” prominent Democrats made statements appearing to suggest only women can get pregnant and have abortions.

President Joe Biden characterized abortion as a women’s rights issue in a Tuesday statement that emphasized women’s reproductive freedom.

“I believe that a woman’s right to choose is fundamental,” he said. “[I]f the Court does overturn Roe, it will fall on our nation’s elected officials at all levels of government to protect a woman’s right to choose.”

Hillary Clinton also painted abortion as a women’s issue.

(Read more from “Democrats Admit It’s Women Who Get Abortions After All” HERE)

Photo credit: Gage Skidmore via Flickr

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

Supreme Court Set to Overturn Roe v. Wade, Leaked Draft Opinion Shows: Report

/0 Comments/in , /by

The Supreme Court is poised to strike down Roe v. Wade, according to an unprecedented leak of a draft opinion written by Justice Samuel Alito.

The draft leak obtained by Politico was written in early February. It was not immediately clear if it has been rewritten or revised. The Court has declined to verify or disavow the document. Analysts have suggested the leak may represent an attempt to pressure a Supreme Court justice to change his or her vote on the pivotal case.

Until an official opinion is signed and released by the Court, Roe v. Wade remains the law of the land. Drafts circulate and change, as do votes.

Should Roe v. Wade be overturned, abortions would be left for the states to decide.

“We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled,” Justice Samuel Alito writes in the document, labeled the “Opinion of the Court” for the case Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. “It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.” (Read more from “Supreme Court Set to Overturn Roe v. Wade, Leaked Draft Opinion Shows: Report” HERE)

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

Dems Threaten to Pack Supreme Court Over Roe v. Wade

/1 Comment/in , /by

Democratic senators are warning that if the Supreme Court upholds a Mississippi law, striking a blow against Roe v. Wade, they will move to expand the court.

The ruling in favor of the Mississippi law would curb abortion rights by allowing states to ban the deadly procedure after 15 weeks of pregnancy.

“It will inevitably fuel and drive an effort to expand the Supreme Court if this activist majority betrays fundamental constitutional principles,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, the Hill reported. . .

Democrats may not pack the court immediately, Blumenthal said, but “[c]hipping away at Roe v. Wade will precipitate a seismic movement to reform the Supreme Court.”

The reform, he said, could amount to changing the court’s jurisdiction or “requiring a certain numbers of votes to strike down certain past precedents.” (Read more from “Dems Threaten to Pack Supreme Court Over Roe v. Wade” HERE)

Delete Facebook, Delete Twitter, Follow Restoring Liberty and Joe Miller at gab HERE.

Supreme Court’s Voting Rights Decision Shows Roe Should be Overturned

/2 Comments/in , /by

Photo Credit: APWhen the Supreme Court struck down part of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 on June 25, Chief Justice John Roberts explained that Congress’s actions may not be “based on 40-year-old facts having no logical relationship to the present day.”

“Our country has changed,” he wrote. “While any racial discrimination in voting is too much, Congress must ensure that the legislation it passes to remedy that problem speaks to current conditions.”

Ironically, Roe v. Wade turned 40 this year.

And in the decades since the decision was handed down, our medical knowledge — particularly that which is prenatal in nature — has changed. In fact, that knowledge has changed so much that much of what was regarded as “fact” 40 years ago has “no logical relationship to [prenatal knowledge in] the present day.”

For example, 40 years ago, many Americans were able to abide the legalization of abortion by thinking of the unborn child as a mass of DNA or a bundle of cells that felt no pain and lacked cognition.

Read more from this story HERE.

Washington State Considers Mandating that Insurance Plans Pay for Killing Unborn Children

/0 Comments/in , /by

Photo Credit: Ted S. Warren, AP

In 1970, Washington became the first — and remains the only — state in the country to legalize elective abortions by a popular vote.

A generation later, and 40 years removed from the landmark United States Supreme Court Roe v. Wade ruling that extended abortion access nationwide, Washington is once again poised to stand out.

With 21 states having adopted bans or severe restrictions on insurance companies from paying for abortions, Washington is alone in seriously considering legislation mandating the opposite.

The Reproductive Parity Act, as supporters call it, would require insurers in Washington state who cover maternity care — which all insurers must do — to also pay for abortions.

The bill passed the state House earlier this month by a vote of 53-43, though it faces an uncertain future in the Senate. A similar bill in the New York state Assembly has been introduced each session for over a decade but has never received a public hearing.

Read more from this story HERE.

DePaul Punishes Student Who Exposed Vandals Of Memorial For Aborted Babies

/0 Comments/in , , /by

Photo Credit: Daily Caller Back in January, on the 40th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, a group of 13 students destroyed a makeshift memorial for aborted babies on the main campus of DePaul University. The display — 500 pink and blue flags — was set up by DePaul’s chapter of Young Americans for Freedom. (RELATED: Abortion display destroyed on campus)

Senior Kristopher Del Campo, who chairs the DePaul YAF chapter, contacted public safety officials after pro-abortion thugs tore the flags from the ground and threw them in trash cans around campus.

About a week later, as The Daily Caller reported, Kevin Connolly, an investigator for DePaul’s public safety department, produced a brief report listing the names of 13 students who flatly admitted to wrecking the display. The reports said the vandals “had seen anti-abortion posters around campus earlier in the day that they found offensive.” (RELATED: Students admit vandalizing display)

DePaul’s assistant dean of students, Domonic Rollins, provided Del Campo a copy of the report. The national website for Young Americans for Freedom then published it online.

Take a wild guess which student the nation’s largest Catholic school has now singled out for punishment.

Read more from this story HERE.

Roe’s Multiplier Effect: Generations Dead From Abortion

/1 Comment/in /by

Photo Credit: JlhopgoodThis year’s marking of the 40th anniversary Roe v. Wade included, naturally, much regret over the growing death toll caused by the scourge of abortion. The number is now over 55 million. That’s 55 million abortions of children who never became Americans.

That number, however, doesn’t begin to do justice to the total loss. 40 years of Roe v. Wade now equates to the loss of multiple generations of Americans, thus producing an even worse multiplier effect, one that must be considered in counting up the casualties. Think about it:

A huge number of those 55 million would have gone on to have their own children. Those aborted in 1973, would be 40 years old this year. Some of them would even have grandchildren.

In fact, just imagine—a conservative estimate—if those 55 million abortions had all been born, and, in turn, had each produced, on average, just one or two or three or four descendants. If that had happened, there would be another 100 to 200 million Americans right now.

Read more from this story HERE.

Alabama Supreme Court Delivers Blow to Roe v. Wade

/5 Comments/in , /by

Some pro-lifers think that the Alabama Supreme Court dealt a massive blow to Roe v. Wade by specifically stating that the preborn child is a person (and therefore protected by the 14th Amendment). The Court’s ruling exposes 40 years of hypocrisy and delusions in American law resulting from the most diabolic decree ever issued by an institution of man.

The case involved two women tried for placing their preborn children at risk through the use of illegal drugs during pregnancy. One newborn tested positive for cocaine, the other actually died 19 minutes after birth of “acute methamphetamine intoxication.” Alabama law makes it a crime to endanger a child by exposing him or her to a controlled substance. The defense argued that the chemical endangerment law does not apply to preborn children.

However, the court disagreed, ruling, “The dictionary definition of the term ‘child’ explicitly includes an unborn person or a fetus. In everyday usage, there is nothing extraordinary about using the term ‘child’ to include a viable fetus. For example, it is not uncommon for someone to state that a mother is pregnant with her first ‘child.’”

By definition, fetus and child are interchangeable. And in Alabama, a child is defined as a person under the age of 18. Thus, since a preborn child is a person, the fetus is protected under the law like all other persons. Alabama attorney general Luther Strange describes the ruling as a “tremendous victory” for the “value of all life.”

Widespread legal recognition

The court said its ruling was “in keeping with the widespread legal recognition that unborn children are persons” and again exposed the indefensible legal noose that Roe artificially imposes upon our justice system undercutting our Constitution, our liberty, and our lives.

Read more from this story HERE.

Women Behind Legalization of Abortion Now Want Decisions Reversed

/9 Comments/in , /by

WASHINGTON, D.C.(LifeSiteNews.com) – In the debate over abortion in the United States, two women’s names appear more frequently than any others: Jane Roe and Mary Doe, the plaintiffs in the companion 1973 Supreme Court cases that legalized abortion in the country.

As the 40th anniversary of those two cases – Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton – approaches later this month, news media is already filling up with retrospectives from leaders on both sides of the issue about the past 40 years and the state of the abortion debate.

In the midst of this flurry of media coverage a woman named Sandro Cano has quietly issued a media release on a Christian newswire service calling for the two Supreme Court cases to be overturned. This in itself might seem unremarkable, until you learn Cano’s other name: Mary Doe.

Yes, that Mary Doe.

Sandra Cano is none other than the plaintiff in Doe v. Bolton, the lesser known of the two Supreme Court cases that opened the floodgates of abortion in the U.S.

In 1970, a 22-year-old Cano was pregnant with her fourth child, after having lost custody of two of her children and adopting out the third. Abortion was illegal in Georgia, the state where Cano was living, except in extreme circumstances, but lawyers argued that she should be allowed to abort. In a decision released on the same day as Roe v. Wade, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed.

Read more from this story HERE.

Liberalism’s ‘Anti-Science’ Problem

/3 Comments/in , , /by

photo credit: curiousexpeditions

Millions of Americans born around the time of the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision are about to turn 40. They don’t realize what it was like to live before the Supreme Court ruling. Back then, most liberals had an open-minded view of abortion due mostly to a lack of medical knowledge. Early-term fetuses were thought to be hardly more than cellular formations, which doctors called “products of conception” or “blobs of tissue.” Lacking any real science on early fetal development, the main arguments against abortion tended to be religious. Things have changed.

Now four decades later, anyone can own beautiful videos that show every stage of the gestation process. Thanks to state of the art 4D Ultrasound scans, scientifically accurate special effects and microscopy footage, we can witness the unborn child forming fingers and toes. We can learn how science knows its gender, when its heart starts to beat, when it smiles, when it feels pain and much, much more. Plus, we can watch it all happen from the comfort of our living rooms.

I don’t think the abortion debate has caught up with the moral significance of this cataclysmic shift. The science of the unborn child isn’t just settled – it’s on TV!

And yet, there is still a great deal of ignorance on the meaning of it all. Liberals say they’re personally against abortion but believe that once impregnated, women have the right to decide whether or not to keep the child. But here’s the logical problem: An unborn child cannot be two things at once. It cannot be something precious and at the same time something worthless. When the British Royals announce a pregnancy, people celebrate “the baby”; they don’t celebrate “the choice.”

Common sense and reason tell us that a mother’s decision can’t change her baby’s reality any more than she can change a chair into a table just by wishing it so. This presents another problem for liberals: They know an unborn child isn’t worthless, but if they call it precious, that compromises their “abortion rights” position.

Read more from this article HERE.