is the End of Roe In Sight???

Several things over the last few days have fueled hope that we may be seeing the start of a turn arround in the battle to put an end to abortion as the law of the land. Before I go on, I want to say that nothing of what I am about to say means we should relax in our battle, esp that battle as it is fought on our knees in prayer. I am just saying that the pro-abortion gang is concerned that things aren't going their way for some good reasons. & because they are, we can be sure that now, even more than ever, they will try & push through a health care bill that ensconces abortion as the law of the land.

The 1st thing is a ruling from the Supreme Court that, on the surface, would seem unrelated. But upon further reflection it isn't as unrelated as it may seem. I am talking about the ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission that overturns key provisions of McCain-Feingold. As a part of that ruling it also also overturned a law that had been on the books for more than a century.

Chief Justice John Roberts joined Justice Samuel Alito to issue a separate concurrence “to address the important principles of judicial restraint and stare decisis implicated in this case.” Roberts conceded that “departures from precedent are inappropriate in the absence of a ‘special justification’”. But "At the same time, stare decisis is neither an ‘inexorable command’… nor ‘a mechanical formula of adherence to the latest decision’ … especially in constitutional cases. If it were, segregation would be legal, minimum wage laws would be unconstitutional, and the Government could wiretap ordinary criminal suspects without first obtaining warrants.”

“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 added, “stare decisis is not an end in itself.”

He also mentions a need to “curtail the precedent’s disruptive effects” & imagines instances in which a “precedent’s validity is so hotly contested that it cannot reliably function as a basis for decision in future cases."

Roberts also says precedent could be reversed if its “rationale threatens to upend our settled jurisprudence in related areas of law, and when the precedent’s underlying reasoning has become so discredited that the Court cannot keep the precedent alive without jury-rigging new and different justifications to shore up the original mistake.”

He makes an excellent point. & 1 that pro-aborts & the liberal left are not too happy with. yet, in 2 of the 3 cases he cites, ending segragation & minimum wage laws, those changes are things they applauded.

It is his last statement about jury-rigging new justifications that gives me hope. It is clear that Roe & Doe were both mistakes, just as "seperate but equal" & "Dred Scott" were wrong. I would like to ask those abortion supporters like Nancy Northup of the Center for Reproductive Rights, who complained: “Yesterday’s Roberts court decision, which exhibited a stunning disregard for settled law of decades’ standing, is terrifying to those of us who care deeply about the constitutional protections the court put in place for women’s access to abortion," if she felt it wrong for the Court to overturn its previous ruling upholding 'seperate but equal" & Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka in particular were similar "stunning disregard for settled law of decades’ standing" & thus just as wrong? After all Brown came in the 50s & the original "seperate but equal" ruling came at the end of the 19th Century. & does she feel the Dred Scott ruling should still be followed as well?

Actually this again shows that ultimately we must have a "personhood" amendment to the Constitution to provide an even more future court overturning a potential future court ruling recognizing that personhood of the unborn.

The other good news is from a post in Jill Stanek's blog. She points out what pro-abort Washington Post columnist Robert McCartney had to say about this year's March for Life:

"I went to the March for Life rally Friday on the Mall expecting to write about its irrelevance. Isn't it quaint, I thought, that these abortion protesters show up each year on the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, even though the decision still stands after 37 years. What's more, with a Democrat in the White House likely to appoint justices who support abortion rights, surely the Supreme Court isn't going to overturn Roe in the foreseeable future.

. . . . I was especially struck by the large number of young people among the tens of thousands at the march. It suggests that the battle over abortion will endure for a long time to come.
"We are the pro-life generation," said signs carried by the crowd, about half its members appearing to be younger than 30. There were numerous large groups of teenagers, many bused in by Roman Catholic schools and youth groups. They and their adult leaders said the youths were taught from an early age to oppose abortion.
"People our age are going to be the ones to change, to be the future leaders," said Lauren Powers, 16, who came with a group from an all-girls Catholic school in Milwaukee."

As I already said, their awareness means that they will be also gearing up to fight all the harder to stop what they see coming, the end of abortion on demand, from happenning. We cannot become complacent. We must continue the battle to fight for the "culture of life" & put a end to the "culture ofdeath" that is operating. Again I repeat, we must start with prayer. We must seek God's guidance & ask for His intervetion to change hearts. We must also continue to work to change the laws to protect the unborn. We must begin, end & undergird all our efforts with prayer. & even when that "culture of life" is established, we must keep on praying & working to preserve that culture until the return of Jesus at the end of time when the last battle will be fought & He will fully reign.

Sources:

Last week's Supreme Court decision rattles pro-aborts

SUPREME COURT'S CAMPAIGN FINANCE RULING SHOWS ROE ABORTION CASE COULD GO

Supreme Court Decision Sparks Pro-Abort Fears of Demise of Roe v. Wade

WaPo columnist after attending March for Life: "Roe supporters (including me) are justifiably nervous"