Hurrah for Alabama!

Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn
Share on reddit
Reddit
Share on delicious
Delicious
Share on digg
Digg
Share on stumbleupon
StumbleUpon
Share on whatsapp
WhatsApp
Share on email
Email
Share on print
Print

These communities, by their representatives in old  Independence Hall, said to the whole world of men: “We  hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are  created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with  certain unalienable rights; that among these are life,  liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” This was their majestic  interpretation of the economy of the Universe. This was their  lofty, and wise, and noble understanding of the justice of  the Creator to His creatures. [Applause.] Yes, gentlemen, to  all His creatures, to the whole great family of man. In their  enlightened belief, nothing stamped with the Divine image and  likeness was sent into the world to be trodden on, and degraded,  and imbruted by its fellows. They grasped not only the whole  race of man then living, but they reached forward and seized  upon the farthest posterity. They erected a beacon to guide  their children and their children’s children, and the countless  myriads who should inhabit the earth in other ages. Wise  statesmen as they were, they knew the tendency of prosperity  to breed tyrants, and so they established these great  self-evident truths, that when in the distant future some man,  some faction, some interest, should set up the doctrine that  none but rich men, or none but white men, were entitled to life,  liberty and the pursuit of happiness, their posterity might look  up again to the Declaration of Independence and take courage to  renew the battle which their fathers began — so that truth,  and justice, and mercy, and all the humane and Christian virtues  might not be extinguished from the land; so that no man would  hereafter dare to limit and circumscribe the great principles  on which the temple of liberty was being built.

Abraham Lincoln, August 17, 1858

 

 

Well the sovereign State of Alabama has passed a statute which is a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade.  Here is the text of the law:

 

Section 1. This act shall be known as The Alabama Human Life Protection Act.

Section 2. Legislative Findings.

(a) This state’s statute criminalizing abortion, Section 13A-13-7, Code of Alabama 1975, has never been repealed. It has remained unenforceable as a result of the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973) and its progeny, which struck down as unconstitutional a Texas statute criminalizing abortion and which effectively repealed by implication and made unenforceable all other state statutes criminalizing abortion.

(b) On November 6, 2018, electors in this state approved by a majority vote a constitutional amendment to the Constitution of Alabama of 1901 declaring and affirming the public policy of the state to recognize and support the sanctity of unborn life and the rights of unborn children. The amendment made it clear that the Constitution of Alabama of 1901 does not include a right to an abortion or require the funding of abortions using public funds.

(c) In present state law, Section 13A-6-1, Code of Alabama 1975, defines a person for homicide purposes to include an unborn child in utero at any stage of development, regardless of viability.

(d) In the United States Declaration of Independence, the principle of natural law that “all men are created equal” was articulated. The self-evident truth found in natural law, that all human beings are equal from creation, was at least one of the bases for the anti-slavery movement, the women’s suffrage movement, the Nuremberg war crimes trials, and the American civil rights movement. If those movements had not been able to appeal to the truth of universal human equality, they could not have been successful.

(e) Abortion advocates speak to women’s rights, but they ignore the unborn child, while medical science has increasingly recognized the humanity of the unborn child.

(f) Recent medical advances prove a baby’s heart starts to beat at around six weeks. At about eight weeks, the heartbeat can be heard through an ultrasound examination. A fetal Doppler can detect a fetal heartbeat as early as 10 weeks.

(g) Ultrasound imaging shows the developing child in utero.

(h) As early as six weeks after fertilization, fetal photography shows the clear development of a human being. The Alabama Department of Public Health publication “Did You Know . . .” demonstrates through actual pictures at two-week intervals throughout the entire pregnancy the clear images of a developing human being.

(i) It is estimated that 6,000,000 Jewish people were murdered in German concentration camps during World War II; 3,000,000 people were executed by Joseph Stalin’s regime in Soviet gulags; 2,500,000 people were murdered during the Chinese “Great Leap Forward” in 1958; 1,500,000 to 3,000,000 people were murdered by the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia during the 1970s; and approximately 1,000,000 people were murdered during the Rwandan genocide in 1994. All of these are widely acknowledged to have been crimes against humanity. By comparison, more than 50 million babies have been aborted in the United States since the Roe decision in 1973, more than three times the number who were killed in German death camps, Chinese purges, Stalin’s gulags, Cambodian killing fields, and the Rwandan genocide combined.

(j) The cases of Roe v. Wade and its progeny have engendered much civil litigation and legislative attempts to reign in so called abortion rights. Roe v. Wade attempted to define when abortion of an unborn child would be legal. Judges and legal scholars have disagreed and dissented with its finding.

Section 3. As used in this act, the following terms shall have the following meanings:

(1) ABORTION. The use or prescription of any instrument, medicine, drug, or any other substance or device with the intent to terminate the pregnancy of a woman known to be pregnant with knowledge that the termination by those means will with reasonable likelihood cause the death of the unborn child. The term does not include these activities if done with the intent to save the life or preserve the health of an unborn child, remove a dead unborn child, to deliver the unborn child prematurely to avoid a serious health risk to the unborn child’s mother, or to preserve the health of her unborn child. The term does not include a procedure or act to terminate the pregnancy of a woman with an ectopic pregnancy, nor does it include the procedure or act to terminate the pregnancy of a woman when the unborn child has a lethal anomaly.

(2) ECTOPIC PREGNANCY. Any pregnancy resulting from either a fertilized egg that has implanted or attached outside the uterus or a fertilized egg implanted inside the cornu of the uterus.

(3) LETHAL ANOMALY. A condition from which an unborn child would die after birth or shortly thereafter or be stillborn.

(4) MEDICAL EMERGENCY. A condition which, in reasonable medical judgment, so complicates the medical condition of the pregnant woman that her pregnancy must be terminated to avoid a serious health risk as defined in this act.

(5) PHYSICIAN. A person licensed to practice medicine and surgery or osteopathic medicine and surgery in Alabama.

(6) SERIOUS HEALTH RISK TO THE UNBORN CHILD’S MOTHER. In reasonable medical judgment, the child’s mother has a condition that so complicates her medical condition that it necessitates the termination of her pregnancy to avert her death or to avert serious risk of substantial physical impairment of a major bodily function. This term does not include a condition based on a claim that the woman is suffering from an emotional condition or a mental illness which will cause her to engage in conduct that intends to result in her death or the death of her unborn child. However, the condition may exist if a second physician who is licensed in Alabama as a psychiatrist, with a minimum of three years of clinical experience, examines the woman and documents that the woman has a diagnosed serious mental illness and because of it, there is reasonable medical judgment that she will engage in conduct that could result in her death or the death of her unborn child. If the mental health diagnosis and likelihood of conduct is confirmed as provided in this act, and it is determined that a termination of her pregnancy is medically necessary to avoid the conduct, the termination may be performed and shall be only performed by a physician licensed in Alabama in a hospital as defined in the Alabama Administrative Code and to which he or she has admitting privileges.

(7) UNBORN CHILD, CHILD or PERSON. A human being, specifically including an unborn child in utero at any stage of development, regardless of viability.

(8) WOMAN. A female human being, whether or not she has reached the age of majority.

Section 4. (a) It shall be unlawful for any person to intentionally perform or attempt to perform an abortion except as provided for by subsection (b).

(b) An abortion shall be permitted if an attending physician licensed in Alabama determines that an abortion is necessary in order to prevent a serious health risk to the unborn child’s mother. Except in the case of a medical emergency as defined herein, the physician’s determination shall be confirmed in writing by a second physician licensed in Alabama. The confirmation shall occur within 180 days after the abortion is completed and shall be prima facie evidence for a permitted abortion.

Section 5. No woman upon whom an abortion is performed or attempted to be performed shall be criminally or civilly liable. Furthermore, no physician confirming the serious health risk to the child’s mother shall be criminally or civilly liable for those actions.

Section 6. (a) An abortion performed in violation of this act is a Class A felony.

(b) An attempted abortion performed in violation of this act is a Class C felony.

Section 7. This act shall not apply to a physician licensed in Alabama performing a termination of a pregnancy or assisting in performing a termination of a pregnancy due to a medical emergency as defined by this act.

Section 8. The construction of existing statutes and regulations that regulate or recognize abortion in Alabama that are in conflict with or antagonistic to this act shall be repealed as null and void and shall recognize the prohibition of abortion as provided in this act. If this act is challenged and enjoined pending a final judicial decision, the existing statutes and regulations that regulate or recognize abortion shall remain in effect during that time.

Section 9. Although this bill would have as its purpose or effect the requirement of a new or increased expenditure of local funds, the bill is excluded from further requirements and application under Amendment 621, now appearing as Section 111.05 of the Official Recompilation of the Constitution of Alabama of 1901, as amended, because the bill defines a new crime or amends the definition of an existing crime.

Section 10. This act shall become effective six months following its passage and approval by the Governor, or its otherwise becoming law.

The law will be enjoined, at least most of it, by a Federal District Court almost immediately.  Then it will work its way through the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, and will likely be resolved by the Supreme Court.  May God defend the right.

 

More to explorer

Bat Capitalist

    News that I missed, courtesy of The Babylon Bee:   GOTHAM CITY—Billionaire Bruce Wayne has come under fire for the

October 14, 1947: Yeager Breaks the Sound Barrier

I was always afraid of dying.  Always.  It was my fear that made me learn everything I could about my airplane and

Comrades Under the Black Uniforms

    News that I missed, courtesy of The Babylon Bee:     ARLINGTON, VA—Last night, members of the militant anti-fascist group

12 Comments

  1. With the present makeup of SCOTUS (Kavanaugh and Roberts as well as the hard left justices), I’m not too confident that the result of this challenge will go our way.

  2. Perhaps not, but it may lead to a positive decision on one of the heartbeat laws if the Court splits the decision. Additionally these laws put the lie to the idea that Roe is settled law. Maybe, just maybe, the Court will now take Scalia’s advice.

    The concluding paragraphs

    of Justice Scalia’s dissenting opinion

    in Planned Parenthood v. Casey
    505 U.S. 833, 1001-1002 (1992)

    There is a poignant aspect to today’s opinion. Its length, and what might be called its epic tone, suggest that its authors believe they are bringing to an end a troublesome era in the history of our Nation and of our Court. “It is the dimension” of authority, they say, to “cal[l] the contending sides of national controversy to end their national division by accepting a common mandate rooted in the Constitution.” Ante, at 24.

    There comes vividly to mind a portrait by Emanuel Leutze that hangs in the Harvard Law School: Roger Brooke Taney, painted in 1859, the 82d year of his life, the 24th of his Chief Justiceship, the second after his opinion in Dred Scott. He is all in black, sitting in a shadowed red armchair, left hand resting upon a pad of paper in his lap, right hand hanging limply, almost lifelessly, beside the inner arm of the chair. He sits facing the viewer, and staring straight out. There seems to be on his face, and in his deep-set eyes, an expression of profound sadness and disillusionment. Perhaps he always looked that way, even when dwelling upon the happiest of thoughts. But those of us who know how the lustre of his great Chief Justiceship came to be eclipsed by Dred Scott cannot help believing that he had that case–its already apparent consequences for the Court, and its soon-to-be-played-out consequences for the Nation–burning on his mind. I expect that two years earlier he, too, had thought himself “call[ing] the contending sides of national controversy to end their national division by accepting a common mandate rooted in the Constitution.”

    It is no more realistic for us in this case, than it was for him in that, to think that an issue of the sort they both involved–an issue involving life and death, freedom and subjugation–can be “speedily and finally settled” by the Supreme Court, as President James Buchanan in his inaugural address said the issue of slavery in the territories would be. See Inaugural Addresses of the Presidents of the United States, S. Doc. No. 101-10, p. 126 (1989). Quite to the contrary, by foreclosing all democratic outlet for the deep passions this issue arouses, by banishing the issue from the political forum that gives all participants, even the losers, the satisfaction of a fair hearing and an honest fight, by continuing the imposition of a rigid national rule instead of allowing for regional differences, the Court merely prolongs and intensifies the anguish.

    We should get out of this area, where we have no right to be, and where we do neither ourselves nor the country any good by remaining.

  3. We’ve had a win in Virginia too!
    Victoria Cobb, President Family Foundation
    Tuesday, May 14, 2019
    Your prayers continue to pay off in big ways!

    This afternoon, in an extremely rare and unexpected twist in the abortion industry’s zealous efforts to strike down nearly all of Virginia’s abortion restrictions, Judge Henry E. Hudson issued a sudden 180-reversal from his devastating decision last week declaring that non-doctors can commit abortions in Virginia.

    According to Hudson’s Order today:

    “On further review, the Court is of the opinion that summary judgment was improvidently awarded to the parties on Count IV based on the present record. Rather, on further consideration, whether the “Physicians-Only Law” presents an undue burden to Virginia women who seek an abortion is a material fact that is genuinely in dispute.”

    Evidently, after sleeping on his initial decision for a few days, the judge realized he had made a serious miscalculation in judgment that was big enough to justify doing a complete (and very public) about-face. Or perhaps his surprise reversal was merely evidence of Proverbs 21:1 – “The king’s heart is in the hand of the LORD, as the rivers of water: he turneth it withersoever he will.”

    Whatever the full explanation, we’re thrilled that Judge Hudson took this extraordinary step to reverse his earlier decision that jeopardized women’s health, nullified our laws, and provided another free pass to the abortion facilities. Unfortunately, when we have an Attorney General who acts out of loyalty to a favored special interest instead of fidelity to the law, initial impressions of the court can become distorted. That seems to have played a role here.

    The final trial to decide all these issues is still yet to be heard, but we’re tremendously grateful for this positive course correction. Please continue to pray as this case moves forward. Remember: “This is the confidence that we have towards Him, that if we ask anything according to his will He hears us.” (1 John 5:14); and “The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.” (James 5:16)

  4. Meanwhile, here in Illinois there was supposed to be some kind of Big pro abortion rally at the Capitol today… turned out to be a group of maybe 50-75 women in those goofy Handmaids Tale costumes. Nowhere near as big as the pro life rally 2 months ago that drew about 3,000. The “Reproductive Health” all abortion all the time act that is the subject of these protests still hasn’t even had a committee hearing with only 2 weeks left in the legislative session… seems like the wind has gone out of those particular sails, thanks be to God.

  5. “Well the sovereign State of Alabama has passed a statute which is a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade.”

    A more beautifully divisive law could hardly be devised to portray the Pro Life position. This is exactly the kind of thing Republicans, especially Trump, should get firmly behind. But unfortunately most won’t. But hopefully Trump will. No doubt this law will fail in all the courts with the PR value is worth the trip.

  6. Why I Voted For Donald J. Trump

    If anyone thinks an “establishment GOP” POTUS would have set the tone to do it, you’re dreaming.

    Sweet Home Alabama!

    See you at the Supreme Court, Baby Killers.

  7. I think we’re still one vote away from having a SC majority willing to overturn Roe. Fortunately I think Trump will at least have the opportunity to appoint that Justice. If he chooses wisely.

    My fear is we’ll always be that one vote shy of an anti-Roe majority.

  8. T.Shaw you are right. And establishment GOP POTUS would not have gotten us to this point as Trump has. Who would even have thought that the man portrayed by the media as a womanizing, lying, cold hearted bumpkin could have brought us along so far as to infuse courage in others in order to fight abortions as he has? May God bless our President and nation.

Comments are closed.