The Battle Over ROE v WADE
By Ken Simmons
The issue of abortion is likely the most divisive issue in America today. Those on the left seem to be unanimous in their opposition to any restrictions on abortion, and those on the right consider the issue of abortion to be a case of “the fight for the right to kill the unborn.” This clearly shows just how deeply America is divided over this issue.
On June 24, 2024, the Supreme Court ruled that the previous Court decision on Roe v Wade in 1973 was unconstitutional, and it rightly overturned that decision and returned that power to the states, rights as clearly defined in the 10th Amendment to the Constitution.
领英推荐
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution,?nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."?
Since that decision, there was outrage from the left, and they seem to have focused their outrage on Donald Trump, since while he was president he was responsible for the appointment of three conservative Justices to the Supreme Court. But if that same leftist crowd had bothered to read the Constitution they would have realized the court decided correctly. If “the people” disagree with that decision their only recourse is to address the issue before “the people” and attempt to form a new Constitutional Amendment, an Amendment that allows abortion in all 50 states. However, short of such a new Amendment, they have no recourse but to complain and to demonstrate their ignorance.
It is for reasons such as this that presidential candidate Kamala Harris has proposed sweeping changes to the Supreme Court, changes that would increase the number of justices, and changes that would also assign term limits on those justices. It is for reasons like this that the wisdom of our founding fathers deliberately made our government cumbersome, and changes to that government difficult. ?
The changes proposed by Harris would however, make the Supreme Court subject to the whims of the current party in power, available to be used as a weapon against the opposition party. It is not unreasonable to assume that one party might appoint justices that agree with their policies, but since the number of justices is flexible they would “pack the court”, and the next party in power could do the same, resulting in a never-ending back and forth battle over the Court, rendering it as little more than a political tool to be used as a weapon.
The Supreme Court should never be weaponized, but should remain solely for the purpose of determining the constitutionality of laws written by the legislators both in the federal government and in the states. It is for reasons such as this that conservatives should resist activist candidates who would appoint activist justices. They are the ones who pose a real and present danger to our democracy
The sky is the limit!
1 个月As a non-American Christian I pray that the forces of darkness will not prevail in the upcoming election. Whatever the US has become, it is still the last bastion standing against growing global totalitarianism. I'm encouraged by the fact that a growing number of US pastors are voicing the obvious moral decline in the United States and the world as we, as Christians, should occupy until Christ's imminent return.