he Supreme Court draft opinion
leaked to the public this week shows that the Supreme Court may overturn Roe v. Wade
when it releases its final decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization
. In the draft opinion, five justices determine that Roe
should be overturned — but those opinions can be changed at any time before the final decision, which is expected in June.
However, Justice Samuel Alito, who wrote the draft opinion, said that the decision hinges on the fact that there is no right to abortion.
Roe was decided on unstable, unconstitutional grounds
“We hold that Roe and Casey must be overturned,” he wrote. “The Constitution makes no reference to abortion, and no such right is implicitly protected by any Constitutional provision including the one on which the defenders of Roe and Casey now chiefly rely — the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.”
He continued, “We begin by considering the critical question, whether the Constitution, properly understood confers a right to obtain an abortion. […] The Constitution makes no express reference to a right to obtain an abortion, and therefore those who claim that it protects such a right must show that the right is somehow implicit in the constitutional text. Roe, however, was remarkably loose in its treatment of the constitutional text. It held that the abortion right, which is not mentioned in the Constitution, is part of a right to privacy, which is also not mentioned.”
Alito explained the “Court’s decision left open at least three ways in which some combination of these provisions [the First, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth and 14th Amendments] could protect the abortion right.” Roe, he said, argued that the right to abortion existed somewhere in the Constitution, but failed to specify exactly where. Alito goes on to explain this in-depth, but the fact that there is no right to abortion is fairly straightforward to even those without a law degree.
The right to abortion simply does not exist in the Constitution, as Alito explained. However, the legality of abortion has convinced people that there must be a right and the abortion industry has thrived off of this false right.
Humanity does not depend on arbitrary qualities
Scientifically speaking, each new human life begins at the moment of fertilization. Things such as location, age, gender, race, cognitive ability, or physical ability do not determine the humanity of that new human being. He or she is human — biologically — and therefore, is worthy of the right to life and protection from harm.
Abortion is, plain and simple, the homicide of an undelivered human being. And globally, what has happened is that stronger human beings have decided that legalizing the homicide of abortion against another weaker class of human beings is acceptable. But no one has an actual right to kill an innocent human being. The idea that one person’s bodily autonomy overrules another person’s right to life and to a natural death (instead of being killed by homicide) is an incorrect, dangerous, and inhumane notion.
The abortion pill starves a developing child, a first-trimester D&C uses powerful suction to tear a child to pieces, and a second-trimester D&E literally dismembers babies who are capable of feeling pain and some of whom are old enough to survive outside the womb. A third-trimester induction abortion uses a lethal injection of feticide to cause the child to go into cardiac arrest. And a D&X, commonly called a ‘partial-birth’ abortion, includes partially delivering the child before stabbing the base of his or her neck and suctioning out his or her brain.
If born persons were subjected to any of these deaths, this would be rightly viewed as a human rights crisis. Yet undelivered persons, who are no less human than born persons, are subjected to these deaths on a daily basis in the United States.
The state has a duty to protect human beings
Furthermore, there is no debt of justice that the state owes to women that would allow them to kill their babies through abortion. States do, however, have a duty to protect human beings and act for the common good of society. Abortion deliberately kills innocent human beings, and therefore, it does the opposite.
The authors of the Constitution did not determine that undelivered babies should be excluded from the umbrella of “personhood.” As Josh Craddock, an affiliated scholar with the James Wilson Institute and the former editor-in-chief of the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, argued in an article for The Public Discourse, “The Fourteenth Amendment’s use of the word ‘person’ guarantees due process and equal protection to all members of the human species. The preborn are members of the human species from the moment of fertilization. Therefore, the Fourteenth Amendment protects the preborn. If one concedes the minor premise (that preborn humans are biological members of the human species), all that must be dem…