Larry Hogan is falling all over himself to state that he now supports "restoring Roe as the law of the land" and now calls himself "pro-choice". He is showing himself to be quite the chameleon. The usual pro-abortion cabal look askance upon Hogan's statements, and quite frankly, I can see their point. See here and here, for example. This seems to be a clear case of him trying to please everyone but in the end, pleasing no one.
Regarding Roe v Wade, a little history lesson might be in order here. That decision was handed down on January 22, 1973. Five days later, a congressman from Maryland condemned the decision and introduced a Human Life Amendment in Congress. He also gave one of the speeches at the 1974 March for Life. The name of that MD congressman? Lawrence J. Hogan Sr., father of the present-day turncoat who is now doing everything possible to trash his father's legacy. Hogan Sr. was assisted in his efforts by his obstetrician brother, William Hogan MD. Lawrence Sr. is pictured at the left.
Larry Hogan is a disgrace to his father's memory. I certainly cannot support his campaign and I may well not cast any vote for the US Senator come November.
By the way - Hogan Jr, owing to his public espousal of the "right" to slaughter babies, needs to be denied Holy Communion until he repents and recants his errors.
On Saturday June 24, 2023, I attended the National Celebrate Life Day on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in celebration of the first anniversary of the Dobbs decision that ended Roe v Wade. Almost 60 years ago, Martin Luther King delivered his "I Have A Dream" speech from those same steps, although he was higher up on the steps than Saturday's speakers were.
I arrived late, but fortunately the video of the entire thing is online. I was able to collect some photos of my own. I will report off the official video and will post it below my remarks. Speakers included Alveda King, Lila Rose, Kristan Hawkins. Rose, in her remarks, opined that protection for the unborn child does not require another constitutional amendment for protection as that already exists under the 14th Amendment. That would be true, IF all agreed upon the definition of personhood. They don't. That is why a constitutional amendment that spells out when personhood begins, namely, when sperm enters the ovum, is needed.
I arrived just as Mike Pence was introduced. My immediate reaction was disappointment, and as his talk progressed, my misgivings were confirmed. He remarked on the Dobbs ruling, giving credit and thanks to pro-lifers' prayer and work for that ruling. He also gave credit to pro-life leaders. Most conspicuous, though, was any lack of mention of Donald Trump's pivotal role in that victory. It was Trump who nominated three of the five justices that voted to overturn Roe. He suggested that we work and pray to advance the cause of life. That is precisely what he should have done, when he, as Vice President, had the opportunity and responsibility to thwart the obviously bogus presidential election of 2020. His words ring hollow, especially when he said that we will work every day to elect leaders that will stand without apology for the unborn. In fact, he undermined the presidency of the man who made the Dobbs decision possible.
Marjorie Dannenfelser, in her talk, made mention of a president who kept his promises. It's a pity that she couldn't utter the word "Trump". Linn Fitch, the Attorney General of Mississippi, started by saying that she and her team argued for returning the matter to the states. Given the parameters put forth in the Dobbs legal action, that may have been all that they could argue. That doesn't mean that generally we must settle for that.
Sometime later, Penny Nance, president of Concerned Women for America, offered her remarks. She stated that "we are going to end abortion because we are going to take away the need for it". Stop right there! One cannot talk about a "need" for an intrinsic evil. That is an oxymoron. There might be a warped desire for it, but never a need for it. We simply must stop being sloppy with language and terminology. Our use of language must be precise and disciplined at all times.
When Chad Pechnold, a professor at Catholic University of America, took the stand, he stated that we could not return the abortion matter to the states, disagreeing with what the MS attorney general stated shortly before he took the stand. He stated that the President must recognize the personhood of the child and afford that child the protections due under the 14th Amendment. Again, this to me only solidifies the need to set in stone the definition of personhood. He evinced what I believe to be an overly confident attitude towards the courts. The courts can only act within their constitutional bounds, and that action is largely dependent on the judges that sit at those benches. I will say this, though, for Dr. Pechnold; he seemed to be the only speaker who might have been older than 40 years of age. I'll have more to say on that later in this post.
Nicole Hunt of Focus on the Family took the podium. She repeated a common misunderstanding in stating that babies' status as human beings begins in the womb. That's not quite so. A human person comes into existence when sperm fertilizes ovum, but that usually occurs in the Fallopian tubes. Then the new person, in his/her zygote stage, travels to the uterus to implant there. The child's cell count is already increasing as the migration takes place. A human life amendment to the Constitution would have to specify the exact stage of the beginning of personhood - the meeting of sperm and ovum.
All in all, this rally left me with quite a few misgivings. With the exceptions of the professor from CUA and Micheal Henney, most of the speakers seemed to be on the younger side. They projected exuberance, to be sure, but they didn't advise the attendees that the struggle is going to increase in intensity that can be disconcerting and even frightening. Why was no mention made of the Red Rose Rescuers who, even today, are facing jail sentences? Why no mention of Mark Houck and the persecution that he underwent last winter? Why no mention of Dick Schaefer and Mark Crosby who were severely beaten up as they witnessed in front of the Baltimore Planned Parenthood two months ago? Where were older, more "battle-hardened" leaders like Randall Terry, Monica Miller, Troy Newman, Brian Gibson? I realize that they may have distracted from the appearance of a happy-clappy celebration, but is that appearance realistic?
How did all this de facto cheer-leading prepare the attendees for the hard-scrabble fight that is ahead of us? As we tell the truth, we will make others uncomfortable - not just the hard-boiled pro-aborts, but also those who would rather keep their heads buried in the sand.
I think I know now why Donald Trump, who placed an essential role in the Dobbs case, was unmentioned. For all his faults, he is not afraid of a fight. He is ready to get in there and mix it up as the need arises. His example is a stark reminder that we pro-life people have to be similarly prepared to do so. Many are, but by and large, they were not represented on the podium of the Celebrate Life Rally. If we are to bring about protection for the babies, we pro-lifers must harden our noses, put some calcium in our backbones and thicken our skins. We must cease being afraid to get some dirt under our fingernails, get a little scrappy, to raise our voices and firmly rebuke the proponents of death.
One incident that happened just after the rally broke up brought these points to crystal clarity in my mind. A young pro-abort strolled through the crowd with a pro-abort poster that said something to the effect of "protect women's rights, keep abortion legal". I watched this for a few minutes. No one stopped him to take issue with his statements or to refute his logic. In fact, they were all smiley with him as they took pictures of him and his sign. Finally I chimed in, saying "protect slave-owners' rights, keep slavery legal". I was using his own logic, using slavery instead of abortion as the topic. He then said, they weren't the same as he scurried away. I followed him for a little bit and challenged him. He just tried to get away.
Finally other pro-lifers decided to pipe in - by rebuking me, not the pro-abort. They claimed I was racist because I'm white and the guy was black. So I fired back at them and they too scurried away. If this is the kind of nicey-nice lack of mental acumen that our young pro-life activists are expected to demonstrate, babies are going to pay the price, as will western civilization and Christianity.
It is way past time to knock the stars out of our eyes, act like adults and get serious about ending abortion and bringing about a Godly culture in our country.
Several years ago I and some other sidewalk counselors gave a training seminar that was hosted by Capitol Hill Crisis Pregnancy Center in Washington DC. It was clear to me that this was a place truly dedicated to helping women who choose to let their babies live, as opposed to subjecting them to grisly deaths. The place abounded with all manners of baby care items, etc.
I therefore immediately recognized the place as I saw its picture on this LifeSiteNews piece. The overgrown brats who did this cannot deal with the fact that some areas of the country will once again be able to protect children. Ironically, Washington DC, where this happened, will remain a locale where babies will be in mortal danger. But think of it. If Roe does go down, the progressives will not be able to destroy as many babies as they have done, so they will look for any decent thing that they can destroy, be it pregnancy centers or churches.
Such destructive temper tantrums are coming in many forms. Resurrecting tactics that NARAL tried in 2009, the New York state legislature passed legislation that will allow them to "investigate" pro life pregnancy centers for not slaughtering babies. That's like investigating the American Cancer Society for not selling cigarettes. I trust this will go down in flames just as the other NARAL tactics did in 2009.
Again, in related news, the Department of Homeland Security warmed the nation's Catholic bishops that their churches could be targeted for vandalism if Roe is scuttled, and clergy could be targeted for personal violence. Please notice something. The threats seem to be centered on Catholic establishments. They aren't threatening Protestant churches or other houses of worship. Whether the progressives realize it or not, they areacknowledging that the Catholic Church is the one true bulwark for Godly moral truth. At any rate, we will have to be on the alert and be prepared to physically stop anyone from desecrating our churches and the Blessed Sacrament.
In the wake of the leaked Supreme Court draft regarding Jackson vs Mississippi, a leftist anarchist group called "Ruth Sent Us" is planning to disrupt Mass at various Catholic churches this weekend. This Sunday is Mothers' Day, to add to the irony.
Whether you’re a “Catholic for Choice”, ex-Catholic, of other or no faith, recognize that six extremist Catholics set out to overturn Roe. Stand at or in a local Catholic Church Sun May 8. #WarOnWomen#MothersDayStrikepic.twitter.com/v2vtpd12Gp
Now ponder this. Why are these pro-murder people targeting Catholic Churches? I don't think it's simply because some of the justices are Catholic. These pro-murder people are targeting the One True Church because she alone has the full deposit of faith. She has the actual sacraments. The Blessed Sacrament is housed in Catholic Churches and not protestant ones. Abortion has always been a satanic attack on the innocent person made in the image and likeness of God. In attacking Catholic Churches, they are violating God Himself.
If nothing else, maybe this situation will wake some of the laity out of their oh-so-blissful ignorance and apathy.
The recent revelations that Roe may finally be relegated to history's dung-heap seem to have rankled the feathers of Rebecca Bratten-Weiss, one time head of an organizational flop known as "New Pro-Life Movement". I have written a bit about them in the past: see here, here, here.
Today she plopped this stinker on Twitter.
Just a reminder that some of Germany's most severe laws criminalizing abortion, which still exist today, were created by the Third Reich.
By the way, RBW, if you're reading this, please note that I (and most likely others) have screen-shotted that tweet. You'll only look silly if you take it down.
So now the mask is off and we see the erstwhile "New Pro Life Movement" for what it was - a sham. I use the past tense because I see no current sign of the NPLM on the web.
Any dalliance with liberalism by pro-life activists usually will have a diluting effect on their pro-life convictions, leading them to issue bird-brained statements such as you saw above or promoting pro-abortion political candidates. Father James Altman has some things to say about this matter, also.
He said, among other things, that the "greatest tragedy in the Church is the ignorance of the laity". That will be the subject of a post soon to follow this one.
That is what the buzz seems to be, after a draft of the opinion was (ahem!) "leaked" to the public. While I hope that to be the case, I'm not quite ready to start celebrating yet. As the saying goes, "it ain't over till it's over". The decision has not been formally announced. Many things could happen between then and now. Perhaps that is why the draft was leaked - to prevent the actual reversal of Roe. Some of the justices have displayed rather timorous streaks in the wake of angry BLM and Antifa types. It's quite possible the leak was designed to motivate some unscrupulous and violent leftists into bullying the justices into upholding Roe. I wouldn't put it past them - and I mean both the bullies and the bullied.
But let's say that Roe does go down. Does that mean that pro-lifers can quit the fight and rest on their laurels, as it were? By no means. Roe only stymied the enforcement of state-level anti-abortion laws. Therefore, by and large, our struggle will be on state-wide levels, with the landscape varying greatly between the states. In my state of Maryland, for example, the pro-abortion populace and their elected leaders have rendered the state to be an abortion mecca. Abortion-minded people from more sane states will come flocking here to kill their babies. That will the state of affairs for other progressive hell-holes.
There will be much work to be done and much praying to do. This is no time to slack off.
Note: Although I wrote the below article for a local Maryland publication, the same ideas are applicable for many areas of the United States.
(begin article)
On January 22, 1973, the US Supreme Court handed down two
decisions that paved the way for the slaughter of millions of babies in the US
alone: Roe v Wade and Doe v Balton.Roe
v Wade basically rendered unenforceable all state laws that either limited or
banned abortion.Roe removed all limits
during the first trimester of pregnancy and Doe removed them in later parts of
the pregnancy “to protect the health of the mother”.However, Doe’s definition of “health of the
mother” included all factors such as “emotional, familial” etc.This definition therefore included any
factors desired by the mother.Both of
these combined amounted to abortion on demand with no restriction
whatsoever.
The premises of Roe were acknowledged by both sides of the
abortion controversy to be constitutionally flawed.First, there is the false premise of
“privacy”.It is based on a faulty reading
of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution that barred “unreasonable
search and seizure”.The operative word
there is “unreasonable”, for the usage of that word admits the existence of
reasonable searches and seizures.The
false premise was utilized in the 1965 case known as Griswold v Connecticut;
that ruling allowed for the usage of contraceptives.It’s interesting that even here we see how
the usage of contraceptives paved the way for baby-slaughter, but I digress.
Built into the Roe decision was the acknowledgement that if the
fetus were indeed a person, all abortion bans would be constitutional as the
unborn child would enjoy all constitutional protections per the 14th
Amendment to the Constitution.Since
1973, medical advances have been made that demonstrate beyond reasonable doubt
that the unborn child is as fully human as any adult.We have the sonogram, for instance, that
shows a very human face on the unborn child in his/her mother’s uterus.We also have seen many advances that have
decreased the age at which the unborn child can survive outside of the womb,
resulting in the arbitrary benchmark of “viability” being decreased.
With the acknowledgement of Roe’s eventual demise, both
pro-abortion and pro-life advocates have been struggling to enact legislation
that would either codify Roe v Wade on state books or reinforce protections for
unborn children.On the federal level,
pro-abortion activists were successful in having enacted the Freedom of Choice
Act after Bill Clinton took office.Many
of us in Maryland will recall the epic battle over SB162 that was enacted to
liberalize abortion laws in Maryland, going even beyond the federal Freedom of
Choice Act.Not too surprisingly, that
passed, making Maryland a veritable abortion bonanza – more on Maryland later.
A few abortion regulation cases over the years made it to the
Supreme Court, only to have the cases decided for the pro-abortion positions
owing to the make-up of the Supreme Court.However, after Donald Trump took office, he replaced Antonin Scalia,
Anthony Kennedy, and Rita Ginsberg with Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy
Comey-Barrett respectively, giving a different tilt to the Court.
On
Dec 1, the Supreme Court heard arguments for the Mississippi case called Dobbs
v Jackson Women’s Health Organization.Jackson
Women’s Health Organization is Mississippi’s lone abortion mill.They bristled at the 2018 legislation called
the Gestational Age Act that limited their baby-slaughter to the first 15 weeks
of pregnancy.Note that this law
directly contradicts Roe v Wade; the latter stated that abortion in the first
trimester could not be limited.I want
to reiterate that Roe is a court ruling, not enacted law.
I
won’t go into any particulars of the discussions during that Supreme Court
hearing.Suffice it to say that the Trump
appointees gave indications that they were seriously considering the scientific
and constitutional issues underlying the Dobbs case while some Obama appointees
displayed quite the opposite.There is
hope that the Mississippi law will stand, meaning the overthrow of Roe v Wade.
The
demise of Roe would mean that the anti-abortion laws that several states have
would now be enforceable.In other
words, babies would enjoy some safety depending on their location.Therefore, in some states they would be safe,
while still threatened in other states.
Maryland
is among that latter group.Some of us
will remember the big abortion battle in Maryland during the 1992 elections,
where we fought against SB 162 that legalized abortion in Maryland for any
reason and any stage of gestation.We
lost that battle and as a result, Maryland is seen by abortionists as a mecca
for baby-slaughter.Hence we have the
likes of Leroy Carhart setting up shop in Montgomery County, a locale that is
particularly friendly to abortionists.
We
can glean some lessons from this scenario.As noted earlier in this article, President Trump appointed three
Supreme Court justices who are now hearing this case.Had Hillary Clinton won that election, we
know for a fact that she would have appointed pro-abortion justices; she loudly
proclaimed that herself.Under her
court, this case would never have been allowed to see the light of day.
Another
lesion we can learn is the importance of local-level elections.If Roe is scuttled, the abortion conflict
descends to state levels.Therefore we
now see that we must elect pro-life candidates in all levels of
government.
I
will now take a moment to address a regrettable tendency among pro-life people
that was on display during the 2016 presidential elections.Then we were presented with two
candidates.Neither one could have been
held as a paragon of virtue.However,
one candidate made very clear her intent to promote baby-killing, the
normalization of sexual perversion and a host of other evils.The other, with his admittedly chequered
past, promised the opposite.Misguided
pro-lifers trumpeted their disdain in voting for the “lesser of two evils” and
decided not to vote at all.Well, since
Our Lord is never a candidate for election, it will be safe to assume that only
flawed human beings will seek election.Such are our options.To not vote
is itself a dereliction of duty to at least mitigate any harm to be done to
civic life.Again, had Trump not won, we
would not be presented with this opportunity at all.
There
have always been hopes of passing a human life amendment to the US
Constitution, guaranteeing constitutional protections to unborn people.In order for that to happen, the amendment
must receive 2/3 votes from both houses of the US Congress and be ratified by
3/4 of the state legislatures.This will
require much political activism on our parts.To those who claim that the abortion matter will not be solved by
politics, I reply that they are correct in saying that politics itself will not
be sufficient.However, politics will be
necessary as we strive for protection of the unborn child.
For
Maryland, an immediate consequence of Roe’s demise would be an uptick in the
numbers of abortions committed here.The
bordering states of Virginia and Pennsylvania do have abortion restrictions on
their books that would become enforceable.Once that happens, abortion-bound persons would be crossing into
Maryland to murder their children.Therefore, pro-life people, more than ever, will be needed in front of
the abortion centers to pray and to offer assistance to abortion-bound women.
Will
you accept the opportunities and challenges that a Roe reversal would bring to
Maryland?
Today the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case Dobbs V Jackson Women's Health. It will address specifically the ridiculous notion that abortionists are qualified to determine the viability of a child who is targeted for abortion. This will be the first abortion case to be decided by a Supreme Court without Ruth Bader Ginsburg and with Amy Comey Barrett. Please note that the abortuary did not want the Supreme Court to take the case.
Former President Trump appointed three justices: Kavanaugh, Gorsuch and Barrett. As LifeSiteNews points out, their votes are still largely unknown. Had Hillary Clinton appointed three Supreme Court justices, those votes would be very well known - to be deadly, that is.
I do not know when the Court will begin to hear arguments with regard to that case, nor when judgment will be handed down. We're certainly looking at several months. Between then and now we must pray that God will enlighten and embolden these justices to pursue the right to life for all.
What else can his position be called when his published words include, "What is pro-life about forcing the birth of a child, if that child will enter a world of rejection, deprivation (etc)"? The entire screed can be found in this New York Times op-ed piece that he penned. Of course the NYT published it with joy - the same kind of "joy" that Caiaphas experienced when Judas betrayed Our Lord to him. Forcing the birth of a child? So the preferred alternative, according to him, is to allow the murder of that same child? Apparently so.
While this saddens me greatly, it does not surprise me in the least. Last August he was making pro-abortion noises. He also had been making other liberal/progressive noises in regards to gun control, amnesty for border-crashers, etc. His posts on facebook have focused more on these progressive pet causes than baby-slaughter. These positions have as common factors the absolving of crime perpetrators of any moral responsibility for their crimes. Perhaps therein lies some cause for his fuzzy thinking on baby-slaughter. He is not the only one in whom I've noticed this phenomenon.
Let's return now to Schenck's announcement of his betrayal. Many prolifers have been giving him well-deserved rebukes. Ryan Bomberger, founder of the Radiance Foundation, is a pro-life leader who was himself conceived in rape. He penned an open letter to Schenck that is well worth the time to study it. In it is truth that Schenck (and any other "woke" people enamored/seduced by "social justice" clap-trap) would do well to take to heart.
I myself might suggest that he read Ezekiel 18:24 and take warning and repent while he can. In the meantime we shall all pray for that repentance, and for wisdom and humility so that we too don't fall into those sins.
Hats off to Alabama Governor Kay Ivey and both houses of the Alabama State Legislature for passing the Alabama Human Life Protection Act. This bill outlaws virtually all abortions (no more rape-and-incest nonsense) and comes complete with jail terms for those committing baby-murder.
Of course this will be challenged in court, but that allows for the real possibility of the overturn of the Roe v Wade ruling. Let us pray that this happens. The demise of Roe won't be the end of the battle, but it will be a decisive win in our efforts to restore protection to the babies.
Today the United States of America disgraced itself almost beyond recognition and (I pray not!) perhaps beyond repair with today's Supreme Court ruling in the Obergefell v Hodges ruling. In a 5-4 ruling, they basically mandated that so-called "gay marriage" must be recognized by all 50 states. In other words, they attempted to redefine marriage to mean something other than what God intended. The very first line of the US Declaration of Independence invokes "the laws of nature and nature's God". Now the United States Supreme Court has set itself - once again - above God and His immutable laws.
An earlier occasion, of course, was the Roe v Wade decision of 1973. At that time, the Court decreed that the individual states did not have the ability to protect unborn babies from the barbaric practice of abortion. 42 years later, this nation is awash in the blood of over 60 million murdered babies - blood that is on our hands as a nation. Now, once again, we have made a paradigm leap into godlessness and barbarism.
Ladies and gentlemen, both these ills (and many more) are the direct result of rejecting God's teachings regarding marriage, sexuality and family life as found in Casti Connubii and Humanae Vitae. Much of that rejection came from those who called themselves Catholics - including clergy. A careful reading of Humanae Vitae reveals a list of all the evils that would befall society if contraception were accepted. As I read through that list, it's hard to realize that this was written almost 50 years ago; it could have been written 5 years ago, given its accuracy.
Much of the blame for the degradation of society, particularly western culture, can be laid squarely at the feet of Catholic leaders. Instead of sticking to their God-given mission of saving souls, that is, preaching the truths of faith and morals, they've been scurrying about and spreading tripe about "social justice". To fund all their "social justice" hogwash, they silenced themselves regarding morals in order to curry the favors of those who are wealthy and influential. Now we all reap the bitter fruit of their betrayal of the Faith.
Before I was able to sit down and compose this post, I read other Catholic commentary on today's unmitigated disaster. Some of the commentary was written by well-meaning and very faithful Catholics with the laudable but mistaken intention of trying to soften the blow to us. One went so far as to opine that "this is not a time for mourning". I respectfully disagree. The book of Joel does call for "weeping, fasting and mourning" as the prophet spoke of response to the sins of a nation. We received a wake-up call today - at least I hope we have. These calls can - and should - leave us shocked and disturbed and even angry. The real question is, "will we allow our profound sorrow to finally motivate us into decisive prayer and action"? That question remains to be answered by each and every one of us.
I will say this much for some hope in the face of this calamity. Whereas the Roe v Wade vote was a 7-2 vote, this was 5-4; had it not been for Kennedy's faulty "katholycism" this vote might have been a narrow victory. Moreover, when Roe v Wade happened, I don't recall it garnering as much outrage as this vote has. Granted, I was in high school when Roe happened and I do think at the time news of Lyndon Johnson's death on the same day overshadowed the news of the vote, and there was no internet in 1973, but still very few noticed Roe v Wade when it happened. Now we know and we are able to mobilize.
As our Catholic leaders helped to grease the skids to national perdition over these past few decades, theirs' is the responsibility to lead the way to repentance and restoration. They must start by devoting themselves to proclaiming God's teaching regarding marriage, sexuality and family life - starting with the Sunday sermons. When did you last hear a Sunday homily that stated the truth that the usage of contraception is mortally sinful? I can't remember, either. They need to start obeying Canon 915 - that means you, Cardinals Dolan and Wuerl!
Meanwhile we are not going to cease speaking out and defending the teachings of Jesus Christ, tyrannical court ruling notwithstanding.
We do need to address contraception as the fundamental evil that it is. The pro-life movement, following a misguided "ecumenical" impulse, looked the other way on this. No longer can we do so.
If the Salon article (from the previous post) wasn't enough to illustrate the intellectual and spiritual vacuity of the pro-abortion mentality, perhaps the following clip from the Center for Reproductive Rights will suffice. As you watch it, you'll see why some think that pro-lifers put it up as a spoof on the pro-choice embrace of Roe v Wade. But no, this is indeed the slop-job of pro-abortion proponents
Below that clip I will post one from Day Gardner that lends some perspective to the CFRR clip. I'll put both of them below the jump break.
Washington, DC -- Operation Rescue and Pro-Life Nation encourage all pro-life activists to join Nancy Tanner and the Northern Virginia Chapter of the Silent No More Awareness Campaign on Thursday, January 26, 2012, as they pray and protest NARAL's annual macabre "celebration" of the deaths of millions of innocent babies through abortion.
Pro-life activists will meet at 5:30 p.m. outside the Washington Hilton, where the NARAL event will be held and will stand outside until 7:00 pm. Pro-lifers will then adjourn to a nearby restaurant, but be back outside the hotel before the NARAL party is over.
Please help spread the word!
Event details:
What: Pray and peacefully protest outside NARAL Pro-Choice America's Roe v. Wade 39th Anniversary Dinner with Silent No More Awareness Campaign
When: 5:30 p.m., Thursday, January 26, 2012
Where: Outside the Washington Hilton, 1919 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Washington, DC
Please forward this and post to your social networks!
Yesterday I wrote about the Supreme Court decision that struck down in part the 2002 campaign finance "reform" laws. In addition to ACORN and mainstream media no longer having a monopoly on political conversation, there's yet another reason why culture-of-death devotees are having snit-fits. Lifesite News published this analysis. I urge you to read it, but I'll point out a key point here.
Stare decisis is a principle that American jurisprudence had, up until now, religiously followed. It holds that judges should follow precedent established by prior decisions. Therefore, in the minds of many, the two twin decisions of January 22, 1973, namely Roe v Wade and Doe v Balton were held to be law written in stone. However, this week, Chief Justice Roberts wrote that stare decisis is "not in exorable command."
"When considering whether to re-examine a prior erroneous holding, we must balance the importance of having constitutional questions decided against the importance of having them decided right," he continued, adding that “stare decisis is not an end in itself."
Pro-aborts see where this could head. The Center for Reproductive Rights called this "terrifying." Let that "terror" begin!
