How to Overturn Roe v. Wade: Personhood & Enforcement
How to Overturn Roe v. Wade:
Personhood & Enforcement
FIRST, if you haven’t read these pages – PLEASE DO NOW.
Any attempt to establish personhood for unborn children will have the effect of ending abortion and be a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade. In addition to defining personhood an amendment MUST be capable of overcoming other critical issues the U.S. Supreme Court had in Roe.Pro-Life Dave (David Rogers):
“For any State Personhood Amendment (aka Human Life Amendment) to be successful it must be capable of overturning Roe v. Wade. Otherwise it can easily be nullified by a Federal Court.”
Robert Muise of the Thomas More Law Center reiterates this point:
“Without a direct challenge to Roe, any proposal to protect innocent human life from abortion is utterly meaningless.”
What will it take to Overturn Roe v. Wade?
by Pro-Life Dave
ACTIONS SPEAK LOUDER THAN WORDS
The Supreme Court LOOKS AT BOTH a state’s laws (including constitution) and the state’s actions, what they do. To convince the U.S. Supreme Court any state is serious about a declaration that an unborn child is a person, the state must enforce the amendment. In the Mississippi Ultimate Human Life Amendment, a mandate was placed upon the state to do just that: “…the government of the state of Mississippi shall recognize and defend the God-given Right to Life of all persons equally…” So now the state is forced to halt all prosecution for murder (not likely) or will have to start prosecuting for murder of the unborn.
See more info here.
PERSONHOOD & THE DUE PROCESS CLAUSE
This bears repeating: We have laws against murdering a person. The only problem is current federal case law does not recognize an unborn child as a person. So using a constitutional amendment process we can establish the definition of a person to include an unborn child.
From the Ultimate Human Life Amendment (Mississippi):
“The word “person” shall apply to all human beings…
…at all stages of biological development from fertilization until natural death.”
Person must be defined to include unborn children and must include provisions for non-sexual, artificial laboratory creation of unborn children. In addition the definition of personhood must be connected to the due process clause already in the state constitution which reads: “Section 14. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property except by due process of law.” The Mississippi UHLA states: “in accordance with Section 14” This is in most state constitutions in one form or another but an unborn child would have to be convicted of a capital crime and tried before they could be sentenced to death — again not likely.
Must Protect and Include ALL UNBORN CHILDREN
If people and politicians only knew that providing an exception for rape or incest is what got us into this entire mess with abortion in the first place they might think twice. If any exception is given to kill an unborn baby, except when saving the life of the mother, then the state is proving that it does not believe an unborn child is a human being. This was the case for prior to Roe v. Wade and the case for the State of Texas under which Roe came from. In Roe, Texas argued before the Supreme Court that unborn children were human beings and persons due protection. The Supreme Court did not believe them because their laws and actions of the state said otherwise, as in point #1 above shows. Their talk, their law (and constitution) must match their actions.
The personhood definition must including ALL unborn children from both natural and artificial reproductive means. Early Personhood Amendments only covered unborn children created by natural reproduction and totally left out artificial reproduction which continued to allowed for areas like frozen egg destruction, cloning, and embryonic stem cell research and experimentation.
See more info here.