NRL News

“Rolling back” Roe v. Wade could well help protect other vulnerable patients

by | Jul 9, 2018

By Dave Andrusko

Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy

We are hours away from pro-life President Donald Trump’s announcement who will be his nominee to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy. The hysteria index is now approaching 100% as the Abortion Industrial Complex gears up to fight whomever the President selects regardless of experience, qualifications, and intellectual firepower.

However that same complex of Planned Parenthood/NARAL, the Democratic Party, and almost the entirety of what is correctly called the Legacy Media has known for years and years that no matter how many misrepresented polls they trot out, support for abortion is discrete, finite, and subject to erosion. As we have documented countless dozens of times, a majority of the American people consistently opposes the reasons 90+% of all abortions are performed. That’s why abortion advocates wrap abortion is gauzy rhetoric about “reproductive rights/reproductive health.”

A friend forwarded me a post that appeared at the National Journal titled “’Roe’ Is the Scaffolding on Which a Slew of Liberties Are Built.”

The thesis is simple enough. Let me explain by first using different metaphors.

A countless number of subsequent decisions on issues far outside our single issue purview are bound to Roe, Lourdes Rivera argues. It’s like a loose thread. You “pull on” Roe (roll it back), and the whole ball of yarn comes undone.

Or, as Rivera, argues,

A cornerstone precedent like Roe reaches both backward and forward in time: From the past cases it elaborated on, to the later cases it influenced.

What to say?

When we look “backward” in time, we see how “privacy” and “autonomy” were like empty vessels. The courts filled them with rationales that legalized failing to treat babies born with disabilities and starving and dehydrating patients to death.

The “forward in time” for us is how these same vague terms morphed into support (“scaffolding” to use Rivera’s metaphor) for the “right” to assisted suicide. We’ve seen how the underpinning for legalizing abortion can be imported into the controversy over “assisting” someone to die.

Put another way, Roe is the anti-life virus that jumped from the preborn to the child born with imperfections to the medically vulnerable of any age.

But I agree with Lourdes Rivera 100% in one respect. He believes that “rolling back” Roe would have a “ripple effect.”

I would hope so. That when this disastrous decision is finally tossed overboard, this would reestablish protections for other vulnerable populations vanquished by the logic of Roe v. Wade.

Categories: Supreme Court