The Sacred Cow of Abortion
Topic: Out of control judges

by Eric Rauch

What’s a seventeen year-old to do? They can’t drink, they can’t smoke, they can’t stay out late, but at least they can get an abortion without their parents being notified. Such is the state of our completely out-of-whack judicial system that continues to make rulings that apparently exist in a vacuum, with no legal precedent or rationale.

The most recent ruling comes courtesy of the Sunshine State.1 A new law came into effect on June 30 of this year requiring Florida doctors to notify the parents of girls under the age of 18 who request an abortion. Since this is a little too black and white for the government, they also instituted a “waiver” so that girls who did not want their parents to be notified had a chance to tell their particular unique and sad story as to why their parents should not be privy to such information. One such girl, who had her waiver denied by Polk County Circuit Judge Ellen Masters, decided to appeal. The Appeals Court ruled in her favor and could set the precedent which would permit any girl under 18 to get an abortion without parental notification.

What is troubling about this case is the complete lack of regard for the law by the Appeals Court. Understandably, each case is not without its unique and difficult situations and scenarios, but the best one that could be found in this one was that the girl’s parents are Catholic and would “adamantly oppose her decision to have an abortion and might kick her out of their house.” The Appeals Court ruled that this girl has the maturity to decide if an abortion would be the best course of action without involving her parents. This same girl who, according to federal law, doesn’t possess enough maturity to buy a pack of cigarettes or a bottle of beer, or, according to Florida law, doesn’t possess the maturity to be out driving after 1 AM without an adult in the front seat2, or, according to the U.S. Supreme Court, cannot be executed for a capital crime3, this same girl has somehow, magically become mature enough to make the decision to kill another human being that has had the misfortune of becoming lodged in her womb. The girl, presumably, knew of her parents’ Catholic beliefs before she became pregnant, but it didn’t stop her from engaging in the activity that leads to pregnancy. Now, however, she has gained wisdom and maturity from her parents’ Catholic beliefs and will thank them by killing their first grandchild.

What kind of sick and twisted logic allows judges to rule this way? The Appeals Court is a three-judge court, so at least two of them were in agreement in this judicial atrocity. The Appeals Court ruled that she was “mature,” but this wasn’t even the issue in the Circuit Court. Judge Masters ruled that she simply didn’t meet the criteria for a waiver. For the overruling to be made on the basis of “maturity,” it completely ignores this basic legal fact. If she had wanted plastic surgery instead of an abortion, nobody would even question the need for parental notification. But abortion has become such a sacred cow, that liberals don’t even hide the fact that this is their one and only issue. The Harriet Miers debacle (and now the debate raging around Samuel Alito) revealed this quite clearly. In fact, the New York Times editorial staff was even so bold as to print that only two issues really matter when confirming a Supreme Court judge: what is their view on abortion, and what is their view of a strict constructionist understanding of the Constitution. In reality, both are asking the same thing, i.e. do you believe that the U.S. Constitution is a “living document” and should be pounded and stretched to conform to our current agenda or “evolved standard of decency?” Apparently, the judges on the Appeals Court in Florida are trying to make their bids for the Supreme Court now. They would probably be confirmed immediately with this ruling in their collective histories.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. click here

2. click here

3. click here

Secular humanists rock foundations of Christian nation
Topic: Out of control judges

article found here


The secularists are gloating. They got a court order to remove the Ten Commandments monument from the rotunda of the Alabama Judicial Building and another court order to suspend Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore who put it there.

But anyone who thinks this confrontation in Montgomery is just about an inscribed rock and a defiant judge is out of touch with reality. The Ten Commandments dispute is the tip of the iceberg in the ongoing battle to obliterate every acknowledgement of God except behind the closed doors of churches.

The goal of the secularists and the atheists is to treat religious people like smokers. You can continue to exist only if you are out of sight, out of hearing and out of smell.

The American Civil Liberties Union, Americans United for Separation of Church and State and other anti-religious groups and atheists have instigated scores of lawsuits all over the country demanding that judges banish God from all public forums. The ACLU lost its efforts to remove the Ten Commandments from courthouses in Kentucky and suburban Philadelphia, but the Freedom From Religion Foundation got a federal judge to ban a Ten Commandments monument from a public park in LaCrosse, Wis., even though the city had sold the land it sat on to a private group.

The city of Everett, Wash., is being sued by Americans United for Separation of Church and State to remove a Ten Commandments monument from city property. It is one of many Ten Commandments monuments donated to cities during the 1950s, '60s, and '70s by the Fraternal Order of Eagles.

The ACLU has already forced the removal of the Eagles' Ten Commandments monuments from eight Utah cities and has announced a scavenger hunt to track down a ninth that the ACLU believes exists but can't find.

The ACLU intimidated the National Park Service into removing plaques from the Grand Canyon that contained verses from the book of Psalms. It was agreed that the Park Service can continue to use the names of Hindu gods for some of the trails and canyon formations.

The ACLU got the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to let stand a federal district court decision banning grace before meals at Virginia Military Institute. The Citadel then announced that it, too, would eliminate prayers before meals, and you can bet that the ACLU will now target prayers at our military and naval academies and onboard ship.

The atheists and secularists are on the warpath to stop the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance because it contains the words "under God." Atheist Michael Newdow was successful in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, the ACLU won in Colorado, and we can expect similar lawsuits in the 33 states that require recitation of the pledge in public schools.

In Pennsylvania, a federal judge voided a state law that required teachers to lead students in reciting the pledge or singing the "The Star Spangled Banner" each morning. The animosity against the national anthem is probably because its fourth stanza includes the words "our motto: 'in God is our trust.'"

Suing on behalf of agnostics and lesbians, the ACLU got a judge to banish the Boy Scouts from a San Diego city park where they have met since 1920. The Scouts' offense was that they include God in their membership oath.

The attempt to remove God from all state constitutions is at the heart of the Montgomery dispute. Justice Moore took an oath to uphold Alabama's constitution which, in order to "secure the blessings of liberty," invokes "the favor and guidance of Almighty God."

The silliness of the arguments against Moore's Ten Commandments 5,280-pound granite monument, known as "Roy's Rock" is shown by the repeated assertion that he is trying to establish the Christian religion. The secularists seem unaware that the Ten Commandments predate Christianity.

When chief antagonist Barry Lynn was asked on television how he could oppose the Ten Commandments monument in Montgomery when the U.S. Supreme Court building shows the Ten Commandments on its walls, he said that's different because the Supreme Court also shows the Code of Hammurabi. But Moore's rock likewise displays several other quotations from historic documents.

The secularists and the atheists seek out judges who pretend to find rights in the U.S. Constitution that no one else have seen for over two centuries. The federal judges who believe they can make law, and punish, fine or imprison those who challenge their tyranny, display arrogance like King Louis XIV's famous words, "L'etat, c'est moi" (I am the state).

The American people don't have to tolerate the federal judiciary's totalitarian grab for power.

When Congress returns to Washington after Labor Day, its first order of business should be to use its Article III, Section 1 power to pass a law withdrawing jurisdiction from all federal courts over whether an acknowledgement of God violates the First Amendment.

The solution is really that simple. It's not only perfectly constitutional, it's Congress's constitutional duty to stop the out-of-control federal courts.