Evil men do not understand justice, but those who seek the Lord understand it completely (Proverbs 28:5)
The 1973 Roe v. Wade case which set precedent for nationwide legalized abortion was based primarily on a woman’s “right to privacy.” Though the Supreme Court is obligated to draw its conclusions from the solid black and white text of our Constitution, the founding document simply does not address privacy. So the concept of privacy was artificially contrived to justify widespread in utero murder.
Take a look at the language espoused by Justice William O. Douglas in his majority opinion for the Roe v Wade case. He wrote, “[S]pecific guarantees in the Bill of Rights have penumbras, formed by emanations from those guarantees that help give them life and substance” and “create zones of privacy.” (Emphasis added)
Let’s break this down. Get ready – this may be a bit confusing.
By definition, a penumbra is a “partially shaded outer region of the shadow cast by an opaque object” formed by an emanation (something that comes out from a source). According to this argument by the 1973 Court, the wording of constitutional amendments cast shadows in their outer regions to create the concept of “privacy.”
Sound legit to you?
Based on this logic (or lack thereof) a woman has the right to decide and follow through with ending the life of her unborn child in the womb because it’s “her body” to do with as she pleases – in private. Of course, in manufacturing the privacy provision, the self-evident right to life (of the unborn child) was completely disregarded.
Now, let’s shift gears for just a moment. Let’s think about prostitution. Prostitution is illegal. But why? If a woman has the unhindered right to do what she wants with her own body, then shouldn’t she be free to partake in whatever sexual activity she pleases? It’s an encounter typically enshrined by a great deal more privacy than a procedure performed inside a medical clinic. So whose business is it, right?
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not advocating for prostitution – just drawing comparisons.
Still, prostitution is illegal in every state, except in brothels in Nevada. As we’ve already established, so-called constitutional privacy protections apply to abortions performed confidentially in a doctor’s office. But these same alleged provisions do not apply to privately performed and monetarily compensated sexual acts.
Let’s consider pornography, wherein individuals are being paid to perform sex acts. If it’s done in private, it’s illegal – it’s prostitution. But if you place a camera crew in the room and sell the filmed prostitution, it is legal. Somehow, it becomes a constitutional “freedom of speech” at that point.
Paid sex: Private – illegal. Public – legal.
Does anyone else see the inconsistency?
See it, and be assured that we are in desperate need of strict constructionists in the federal courts and on the Supreme Court, not judges and justices who cast shadows upon shadows to create justification for behaviors never intended by the framers of the Constitution.
One such Founding Father John Adams, signer of the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights said it clearly, "We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion...Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."
If ever there was a time for Christians to step up to the plate and serve in all aspects of our government, it is now. With God, “[T]here is no variation or shadow due to change” (James 1:17).
