One favorite and generally accepted definition of insanity is to do something the same way over and over again expecting different results. And so it has been with the pro-life movement.
For the past 30-years the basic strategy to end abortion has been to elect "pro-life" Republicans who, we are frequently told, will put more "pro-life" judges on the courts culminating in the ultimate "overturning" of Roe v Wade-- the 1973 Supreme Court decision which many have speciously claimed "legalized abortion in all fifty states."
Subsequently, Republicans have been responsible for appointing 60% of the federal judiciary including 7 of the 9 Supreme Court justices who handed down Roe and her progeny in the first place, and not one of those justices ever argued that the right to life is an unalienable right which neither the federal nor state government may violate.
Under President Bush $2.2 billion in federal funding went to the nation's largest abortion provider, Planned Parenthood. Funding also increased year after year during Bush's two terms in office- a slightly greater increase than under President Clinton.
So here we stand with the same 30-year strategy with the same results, proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the establishment strategy of electing more Republicans to put more "pro-life" judges on the bench has been an unmitigated failure.
As such, perhaps it would be wise at this point to examine whether or not this strategy was designed, inadvertently or not, to actually end abortion or regulate it; and more importantly, whether or not the tangible actions of those who so gratuitously slap the "pro-life" title on their organizations reflect that strategy.
To end abortion is to do just that--to believe that all life, both born and unborn, is an unalienable right and protect it at all cost. To regulate abortion is to do just that…to arrogantly decide whose life has value and whose does not and thus making it "lawful" to eliminate them accordingly. I would submit here that we have tried the latter and after 40 million innocents slaughtered, logic dictates that we cannot end abortion by "regulating" it.
Still, there are "pro-family" and "pro-life" groups who are now actively engaged in opposing state personhood amendments and supporting pro-abortion politicians and presidential candidates who support tax-payer funded embryonic stem cell research and the Stephen Douglas slavery position that abortion is a "states rights issue."
And self-styled "conservative" and "Christian" legal organizations perpetually concede the liberal lie that courts can "revoke," "overturn" and "strike down" laws despite the fact that the judiciary possesses no such enumerated constitutional authority.
While the leading pro-life and pro-family organizations have raised hundreds of millions of dollars to advance the pro-life "cause" including a quarter of a billion dollars to end the procedure known as "partial birth abortion" (which according to Dr. James Dobson of Focus on the Family, hasn't saved one single life), 1.5 million babies per year continue to be dismembered and discarded in trash receptacles (4,000 babies killed per day).
Isn't it time we rightfully acknowledge what many pro-life and pro-family activists have been saying privately for quite some time now--that the old incramentalist strategy of regulating abortion has failed?
While I support state and federal "human life" and "personhood" amendments, the fact of the matter is that we don't need to amend any constitution to protect human life because the inalienable right to human life is already guaranteed in our founding documents including our founding national charter which is part of the Organic Law of the United States of America, the Declaration of Independence, as well as the Supreme Law of the Land, the Constitution (see Preamble, 5th and 14th amendments).
So instead of wasting precious time and financial resources attempting to pass human life and personhood amendments that leading "pro-life" organizations such as National Right to Life (NRTL) have actively thwarted (oddly claiming that "it's not the right time" to pass personhood/human life amendments to state constitutions) we should instead focus our efforts on demanding that our elected representatives uphold their constitutional sworn oath to protect and defend the inalienable right to life. It's that simple.
President Bush claims to be pro-life.
So, I propose that all conservative pro-family and pro-life organizational leaders, lawyers and media pundits unify and call on President Bush to uphold his constitutional oath to protect and defend the inalienable right to life by issuing an executive order in his last remaining month of his presidency to close down every abortion clinic in the country and to call on the Congress (under Article 1 Section 8) to use the national guard if necessary to enforce the Supreme Law of the Land. President Kennedy used the National Guard to ensure the safety of two black students who Governor George Wallace barred from entering the University of Alabama in June of 1963. President Bush could certainly do the same to close down the nation's abortion mills.
President Bush swore to uphold and defend the Constitution which guarantees the unalienable right to life for every American citizen. If that unalienable right to life is being violated at the state level, the president has the solemn constitutional obligation to protect and defend the right to life of each individual citizen of each state.
Ok, if President Bush did issue such an executive order wouldn't President Obama reverse it as one of his first official acts?
Of course he would. After all we are talking about Barack "when babies possess human rights is beyond my pay grade" Obama.
And if he did, every pro-life constitutionalist should call for his impeachment and removal from office for violating his oath.
Continued... |