A view on the law of abortion in the USA

Christians and deists are called, by faith in moral absolutes, to walk against the winds that set the Winter in challenge against the Spring.

For, from the beginning, we were Created to pro-create. This is the primordial, elementally ancient deep-nature of mankind: we exist to protect, foster, love, and nurture each God-blessed spark of innocent human life.

In 1976, three years after Roe vs. Wade, the United States Supreme Court handed down a pro-abortion decision for a case called Danforth vs. Planned Parenthood.

The Danforth case centered on the legal right of fathers to prevent the violent abortion-death of their own children. In the Danforth decision, despite laws in many states which upheld and supported that right, the Court declared that every father's natural right to protect his own preborn infant was to be rendered legally null and void.

In effect, they declared that no father's child could ever be held safe while the Court's decision stood, and that even the best of men were to be stripped of the right to protect their own pre-natal baby daughters and sons from death by abortion.

A father's child should not be killed by anyone. It is just plain wrong.

Justice William Rehnquist expressed exactly that position in his dissent from the Danforth decision. Referring to the state law that the Supreme Court had just struck down, Rehnquist wrote:

"The Act provided that a married woman may not obtain an abortion without her husband's consent. The Court strikes down this statute in one sentence. It says that 'since the State cannot proscribe abortion the State cannot delegate authority to any particular person, even the spouse, to prevent abortion'."

"However, the State was not delegating to the husband the power to vindicate the State's interest, it was instead recognizing that the husband has an interest of his own, which should not be extinguished by the unilateral decision of the wife."

"A father's interest in having a child may be unmatched by any other interest in his life."

Truer words have never been spoken.

It is no small irony that the federalization of child-support collection was instituted exactly one year before the Danforth decision. It is in no small measure incongruous that the two have co-existed ever since:

How can a rational legal system contend that a father is liable for eighteen years of financial obligation by virtue of his procreative role in conception, while simultaneously disenfranchising his right to save his own pre-born child's life, a right also rooted in his procreative role in conception? Having both conditions co-exist in law is not only unparalleled hypocrisy, but is a violation of the USA's most central principle, that rights and responsibilities must be wed and inextricable.

In 1776, this principle was encapsulated by the phrase that the Founding Fathers used to launch the Revolutionary War:

"No taxation without representation."

Additionally, fathers simply love their sons and daughters and want them to live. Fathers have an innate need to protect their children's lives. This core fact of fatherhood, this immortally deep paternal instinct, is the foundation of civilization itself. The United States Supreme Court has wrapped judicial chains around that instinct, which is the most devastating thing it could have done to the human race.

A nation that tells fathers not to protect their daughters and sons is a nation telling fathers not to love their daughters and sons. Such a nation is proactively engineering its own social collapse, an assertion to which observers of the devolution of America's moral character over the last three decades bear regretful witness.

The Danforth decision must be overturned.

Abortion is the ultimate cruelty. We have, thanks to ultrasound technology, full-motion video of adorable prenatal babies very humanly sucking their thumbs, sleeping, stretching, reaching out ... again thanks to modern ultrasound technology, we have full-motion video of those babies being dismembered until dead: "abortions", the artificial termination of the babies' innocent, defenseless lives in the most unspeakably violent way.

I doubt that any of the tens of thousands of young people reading this essay would ever subject themselves to such a painful fate. If empathy lives yet in this world, they would not subject a baby to it either.

With that fact in mind, kindly look deep into the faithful, angelic eyes of an innocent little baby and ask yourself the critical question:

"Is the baby's life worth less than your own life is?"

Infants are without fault of character. They deserve to be held, fed, rocked, kept warm, and protected from any who would do them harm. Their lives began with their conception, and developed day by day ever since. As pre-natal infants in the first nine months of their lives, from their conceptions to their births, their right to life is the most basic of all civil rights.

Protecting their right to life is humanity's most sacred trust.

Abortion cruelly breaks that trust. betraying the gentle innocence and perfect goodness of the prenatal baby who simply wants to continue living. America must set right this deepest of wrongs.

Empirically, the life cycle of every human child begins at conception, when the 23 chromosomes of the father conjoin with the 23 chromosomes of the mother to form a new human being with a unique 46-chromosome DNA sequence. That sequence both defines the newly-conceived baby as a human being and differentiates her or him from every other human being on Earth.

Some of you may look more like your father; some of you may look more like your mother. Either way, it was determined at your conception.

In the expert testimony of Dr. Jerome Lejeune, known as "The Father of Modern Genetics":

"Each of us has a unique beginning, the moment of conception. The human nature of the human being from conception to old age is not a metaphysical contention. It is plain experimental evidence. Life has a very, very long history, but each individual has a very neat beginning: the moment of conception."

Prenatal babies, from conception forward, deserve legal protection.

Isaiah Flair of the USA