This is a stunning moment that really exemplifies the bankruptcy of the Roe v. Wade decision.
During the Supreme Court hearing on the Mississippi pro-life law that bans abortions at 15 weeks, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas broke his typical silence to ask a penetrating question.
Advocates for abortion don’t like straightforward questions.
“Would you specifically tell me, specifically state what the right is, is it specifically abortion? Is it a liberty? Is it liberty? Is it autonomy? Is it privacy?” Thomas asked.
Insert tap dancing here.
The lawyer defending abortion blathered on and on and on…and said very little. Here’s some of it. It’s basically a lot of syllables strung together but empty of meaning.
“The right is grounded in the liberty component of the 14th Amendment, Justice Thomas. But I think that it promotes interest in autonomy, bodily integrity, liberty and equality. And I do think it is specifically the right to abortion here, the right of a woman to be able to control, without the state forcing her to continue a pregnancy, whether to carry that baby to term,” the lawyer said.
But Thomas didn’t end it there.
You remember that kid in your neighborhood who took a magnifying glass and angled the sun’s rays to torture insects. Well, that’s kind of like this except awesome.
“I understand we’re talking about abortion here,” Thomas said. “But what is confusing is that we, if we were talking about the Second Amendment, I know exactly what we’re talking about. If we’re talking about the Fourth Amendment I know what we’re talking about because it’s written there. What specifically is the right here that we’re talking about?”
All out of polysyllabic hollow words and exhausted from tap dancing, the lawyer finally responded by saying that she believed the Constitutional right that legal access to abortion rests on is the heretofore unseen right to abortion.
“It’s the right of a woman prior to viability to control whether to continue with a pregnancy,” the lawyer replied.
I guess that part of the Constitution was written in invisible ink that only leftists can see.
This was a stunning moment because for so long the legal argument for abortion has been hidden by obfuscation and legalese terms but Clarence Thomas cut through all of it.
December 2, 2021 at 10:11 am
“If this suggestion of personhood is established, the appellant’s case, of course, collapses, for the fetus’ right to life would then be guaranteed specifically by the [14th] Amendment.” -Roe v. Wade
December 2, 2021 at 5:37 pm
I am beginning to feel that Justice Thomas is like Archbsp Vigano, it is getting late in his game and he has had enough of the crap! Time to let the guns blaze!
December 2, 2021 at 6:19 pm
It is so amusing when they ask for a simple yes or no answer and receive a whole soliloquy. Rarely does a yes or no ever come out of their mouth.
December 3, 2021 at 8:45 am
It all rests on the ‘moment of conception’ in my mind. Either you are a person or you are not. Either you are alive or you are not. This play with the word ‘you’, that’s the smoke screen abortionists and they’re supporters work with. Once they define ‘you’, they define life, death, value, etc., and all that’s left to deal with are the hands on the clock or the date on the calendar. ‘You’ become completely objectified and commodified. “Us’ becomes mechanized, utilized, commodified. Life is not longer life, but utility, whose value is defined by those in power.
Every ‘you’ is a Frankenstein, every definer is a Dracula.
December 3, 2021 at 8:47 pm
The facade was dropped many years ago by pro-abortionists.
They admit that they are extinguishing a life.
They do not care.
December 3, 2021 at 10:36 pm
Agreed. The whole argument is reframed in terms of a woman’s ‘right’ to abortion. No concern whatsoever about another human life.
December 4, 2021 at 4:19 pm
The SC hearing was confusing to me until I read a recap by a lawyer who summarized the Justices points: then the light came on. Each of the ‘life!’ Judges questioned (attacked) a different issue of the baby killers. It seems they have coordinated their effort to each knock out a different prop from the fallacious arguments in favor of baby- cide. While this is gratifying and does seem to indicate they will uphold Mississippi’s 15 week ban it is really quite pathetic. Six highly educated Justices engage in argument of absurdist while schizophrenically avoiding the pink elephant in the courtroom. At some point the SC must recognize that a baby in the womb is a human person legally and has the God given right to life guaranteed by our Constitution. They mat say this occurs at 6 months or some other arbitrary time but certainly any rational sentient being knows that killing a baby in the womb right up to its day of birth is insane. Then one has to ponder after that if there is any time when the termination of a God given life in the womb is not insane. One must be absolutely anti-theistic to support the notion of abortion – whether one has the self-awareness or examen of conscience to hear His quiet voice.