Abortion is not mentioned in the United States Constitution. It is not an issue granted to the federal government, nor one prohibited to the States. That means, according to the Constitution, abortion is a local issue, a State issue, and therefore it is unconstitutional for federal courts to even be ruling on the subject.
The Constitution established the federal government to handle the external issues. Internal issues belong to the States. The central government was not given authority over internal issues in order to protect us from a central tyranny trying to micromanage our lives.
Based on original intent, all federal intrusion into the issue of abortion is unconstitutional. . . including Roe v. Wade.
In North Carolina, the State decided to take a local action on the issue of abortion by passing a law requiring women seeking an abortion to have an ultrasound of the baby in her womb before making the choice.
The federal court said the law is unconstitutional because it forces doctors to voice the State's message discouraging the procedure. But by striking down the law, the federal court not only acted unconstitutionally against a State law on a State issue, but is forcing the State to voice the federal government's message encouraging abortion. Based on their own line of thinking, isn't that also an intrusion by government that should not be allowed?
The court in question is the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, who upheld another federal judge's ruling, a district judge's decision that originally unconstitutionally struck down the 2011 law.
"The state freely admits that the purpose and anticipated effect ... is to convince women seeking abortions to change their minds or reassess their decisions," Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III wrote in a unanimous ruling by a three-judge panel in Richmond, Virginia.
"The state cannot commandeer the doctor-patient relationship to compel a physician to express its preference to the patient," the appeals court ruled, stating that "this compelled speech provision" violates the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment.
Let's think about what the judge said, for a moment. Using ultrasounds is to try to convince women seeking abortions to change their minds or reassess their decisions. Well, yes. The ultrasound shows that the life inside the woman is indeed a baby, a person, and the reality of her decision that it is murder becomes apparent. . . and the judge, and the pro-abortion crowd, does not want ultrasounds to be used so that women won't realize the reality of the life inside them. That just seems downright sinister, and also tells you that the issue is more about the issue, and less about the person inside that woman. They are willing to do whatever they can to protect the practice of the slaughter of the unborn, even if it means using the courts to help hide from the people seeking abortion the reality of the sickness of what abortion is all about.
The court ruled against the North Carolina law because it compels the doctor to reveal to the woman with visual evidence that she is asking a doctor to commit murder against her child.
If abortion is just fine, why hide what it is?
The reality is, abortion kills babies. It is bloody, it is disgusting, and ultrasounds reveal that truth to these women before it is too late. Ultrasounds uses truth, and reality, to break through the propaganda, and the life-long brainwashing these women have received by a progressive-controlled media and education system. And the judge in North Carolina wants to hide the reality, hide the truth, so that mothers won't realize that the life inside them is a baby, a person, a precious little part of them.
A spokeswoman for the state’s attorney general said North Carolina will appeal the ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court, noting that another federal appeals court earlier upheld a similar ultrasound requirement in Texas. What the State of North Carolina ought to do is tell the federal court system they don't have the authority to dictate to them what they can do, nullify the decision, and keep the law in place anyway. Defy the courts because the federal court system has no constitutional authority to even be hearing the case. The States are the final arbiters of the Constitution, not some liberal left lacky in a black robe being paid by the federal government to decide for the federal government what its own authorities are.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
No comments:
Post a Comment