“Women’s March on Asheville” & “Bans Off Our Bodies”

Press Statement by Meredith Eugene Hunt

For the occasion of the “Women’s March on Asheville” and “Bans Off Our Bodies” rallies in Asheville, North Carolina today, May 14, 2022:

“Pro-abortion reaction to Alito’s draft ruling is mass social hysteria.  Nothing they say, nor how loud they say it changes the reality of abortion hurting a mother and killing a baby.  Absolute “bodily autonomy” is violent and brutal when it means removing a pre-natal child from their natural environment, where they are perfectly viable. A child who only wants to be loved.

“The tragic part of Alito’s draft is it doesn’t recognize the humanity and personhood of pre-natal human beings.  It merely undoes the legal travesty that was Roe v. Wade, something the court should have done 30 years ago with the PP v. Casey decision. Pro-abortion people are declaring contempt for a Supreme Court that no longer affirms destroying a life.  But Justice Alito’s draft is persuasive.  It throws the “issue” of abortion back to the states because abortion never was a constitutional right.

“If the majority of the Court holds to Alito’s draft, the angry, absurd rhetoric to intimidate judges and lawmakers will continue in state legislatures.  The effort to drown and demonize voices who speak for women and children will intensify.  Our nation protected the enslavement of human beings for 200 years. The South relied upon slavery. It took a negation of a Supreme Court decision and war between states to end slavery

“Until we all recognize the personhood of pre-natal human beings, while also accommodating the unique nature of women, the division and conflict will only grow.”   

Hunt was the Director of Life Advocates in Asheville for 33 years.   

828-575-7300

lifeadvocates@earthlink.net

http://lifeadvocates.blogspot.com/

YouTube:  Life Advocates Asheville

Burning Roe v. Wade

Note: I purchased this volume to burn on a bonfire for the upcoming 45th anniversary of Roe v. Wade.  When I searched through the pages to find where the dissenting opinion of Justice Bryon White was, so I could remove it before burning the book, I COULD NOT FIND IT.  This book says it contains the complete text, but it does not.  I wrote a review of the volume for Amazon, but my review was rejected without them offering any specific reasons. I'm not going to spend a lot of time guessing what their problem was, but likely it is that I was blunt about abortion.  Below is my final review, a combination of what I sent originally and some changes and additions for the one I presently have on submission. As of this moment, it hasn't been approved.

The Review
First of all, Roe v. Wade is one of the most despicable documents in history.  It and slavish submission to it are responsible philosophically for the deaths of millions of human beings since 1973.  That itself is enough to earn this little volume a zero.  Less than zero. 

But if a person simply hopes to be objective and neutral, and approach the subject of abortion with an open mind and learn about Roe v. Wade by reading the original, full text, this volume fails.  Why?  Because it blatantly omits three additional dissenting and concurring opinions, ones that might give insight to the true meaning of Roe.  In particular, it does not include the scathing dissenting opinion of Justice Bryon White, joined by Justice William Rhenquist, who later became Chief Justice.

If you want to be educated about Roe, don’t buy this book.  In fact, there are no easily available sources of White’s opinion.  You will find it referenced on anti-abortion websites, but those are too easily dismissed.  The copy of Roe I have is from a bound law book in the law library at our county courthouse.  Because abortion is about blood and death, the truth about Roe v. Wade is hidden. If you want to find the complete text, you will have to dig.

White wrote: “I find nothing in the language or history of the Constitution to support the Court’s judgment. The Court simply fashions and announces a new constitutional right for pregnant mothers and, with scarcely any reason or authority for its action, invests that right with sufficient substance to override most existing state abortion statutes.  The upshot is that the people and the legislatures of 50 States are constitutionally disentitled to weigh the relative importance of the continued existence and development of the fetus, on one hand, against a spectrum of possible impacts on the mother on the other hand.  As an exercise of raw judicial power, the Court perhaps has authority to what it does today: but in my view its judgment is an improvident and extravagant exercise of the power of judicial review that the Constitution extends to this Court.”

Justice White wrote those words above and much more. His dissent is one of the best reviews of Roe v. Wade.  But don’t take my word for it. Find the complete text somewhere. Unfortunately it’s not in this volume.