Overturning Roe v. Wade: What would RBG do?

In April 1986, the world’s worst nuclear accident occurred in Chernobyl, Ukraine, leaking radiation. Leaks of opinions not yet issued by the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) are far more rare than nuclear accidents. Yet the leak of Justice Samuel Alito’s majority opinion in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health case, overturning the 1973 Roe v. Wade case ruling women have a right to abortion, has triggered severe fallout by the pro-abortion community.

The Chernobyl reactor spewed radiation into the environment for 33 years before it was finally capped and sealed. Controlling fallout from the Alito leak requires immediate steps to check those liberals refusing to accept overturning bad law. The fires these liberal arsonists stoke, believing protests and violence will change the Dobbs outcome, must be extinguished. This demands attacking lies and misinformation with truth.

President Joe Biden has been on a roll, feeding liberals at the disinformation trough. Their bellies distended with so much false information, their minds failing to comprehend the full impact of the Dobbs opinion.

While this author clearly believes abortion – except under extraordinary circumstances – is wrong, as explained before, Dobbs does not make abortions illegal. It simply seeks to overturn the flawed reasoning of 1973 SCOTUS that claimed a constitutional right to privacy limits the government’s ability to interfere with one’s decision to bear children.

Dobbs does not extinguish a legislature’s right to pass abortion laws. Pro-abortionists simply must look to their state and local governments for the answer. Additionally, Congress could seek either to codify abortion or ban it entirely. But a legislative, not a judicial, initiative is required.

Pro-abortionist activists – undoubtedly undertaking little effort to understand Dobbs’ impact – wasted no time calling for protests, which quickly turned violent. As was the liberal wont during the BLM riots of 2020-2021 to resort to violence, so too have pro-abortionists in the streets of Los Angeles, directing their anger against police as well. As pro-abortionists set fires to pro-life facilities and sought to intimidate SOCTUS members, little is being done to hold them accountable, with Biden outrageously claiming he has no view on whether protesters should pressure them. (Federal law prohibits protests that seek to influence court cases.) As was the case with the BLM riots, such violence eventually could lead to the loss of life.

A tweet by extreme leftist and one-time journalist Simon Gwynn suggested just such an outrageous call for violence:

“Interesting real life trolley problem in America now. If you had the chance to kill Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, the two oldest right wing Supreme Court judges, should you do it while Biden can get his nominees to replace them confirmed?

“It’s interesting as an abstract question but becomes a real conundrum if, say, you’re terminally ill and have little to lose yourself, but know that it could save many women’s lives in the future.”

While Gwynn formerly worked for Haymarket Media Group, he reportedly resigned over “unwise” tweets. Although he later removed this tweet, he did so in a contemptuous effort to justify it:

“I’ve removed my recent two tweets about the U.S. Supreme Court as on reflection they’re obviously pretty irresponsible, though I don’t think they would be against Twitter’s TOS. FYI I don’t endorse murdering anyone, but don’t think there’s anything wrong with thought experiments.”

As has been all too apparent over the last several years in America, such outrageous “thought experiments” often become reality, pushing others, tottering on the edge of sanity, over it. Obviously, pro-abortionists such as Gwynn see no harm promoting death not only for a voiceless fetus but for humans voicing contrary views to his as well.

Not to be outdone by Gwynn’s murder reference, MSNBC panelist and shock-comedian Laurie Kilmartin, in a disgusting attempt to be funny, reported she would like to have sex with the leaker of the Alito opinion so she could then abort the fetus. Satanists now claim they will press to have abortions sanctioned as a religious ritual. Meanwhile, Squad member Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., shares her absurd legal perspective on the issue – lacking any kind of legal background – saying Dobbs is a stunning rebuke of precedent and: “These Justices are acting like this is somehow something that they have the right to do. They do not have the right to change this which is settled law.” (Spoiler alert: Yes, they do.) God help us when a member of Congress is clueless about the powers of our judicial branch.

For 25 years, WND has boldly brought you the news that really matters. If you appreciate our Christian journalists and their uniquely truthful reporting and analysis, please help us by becoming a WND Insider!

Despite the fact the Alito opinion has been reviewed for months by other SCOTUS members for comment, in a 5-4 majority opinion, there should be little basis for a sudden shift. While justices can change their vote up to the time an opinion is issued, it appears no justice has been so inclined. Any shift at this point would only undermine public confidence in the Court, leaving it susceptible to future intimidation.

It is incredible how liberals push so hard for abortion rights and killing an unborn child instead of recognizing that a safe haven alternative exists making abortion unnecessary. Emergency locations such as hospitals and fire stations serve as drop-off points on a 24/7 basis for unwanted babies.

The liberal knee-jerk reaction upon hearing about the Alito opinion leak strongly suggests pro-abortionists fail to fully understand the impact of the Court’s pending decision. They would also do well to heed the sound advice of Justice Amy Coney Barrett pleading with them to read the 98-page decision before taking to the streets.

Undoubtedly, among those failing to read the opinion are former President Barack Obama and wife Michelle. They have become cheerleaders for the pro-abortion wolf pack, irresponsibly encouraging protest. Not only as a former president but as a lawyer who was allegedly being considered by Biden to serve on the SCOTUS, Obama knows the repercussions of riling up a crowd on such an emotional issue. Yet the Obamas issued a statement claiming the termination of unborn babies is a “freedom” that was “enshrined” in the Constitution.

Such a totally irresponsible statement seeks to give legality to a terribly flawed Roe v. Wade decision. The Obamas might be surprised to learn that even the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg – a true champion of the left – believed the case was wrongly decided. She described it as a “heavy-handed judiciary’s interference (that) was hard to justify. …” strongly suggesting were she alive today she would have sided with the majority opinion.

Additionally, liberal fear mongers such as twice-failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton suggest Dobbs is just the beginning of an assault on other rights, like same-sex marriages. However, Alito’s opinion specifically addresses this, stating Dobbs is limited to the abortion issue alone.

Teachers’ unions have jumped on the anti-Dobbs bandwagon, ironically claiming the decision is racist. Meanwhile, they ignore the racist implication that 38% of all 63 million abortions since 1973 involved unborn blacks, meaning 24 million fewer blacks are alive today.

If only Justice Ginsburg were alive today to join the majority. Perhaps then the whole Obama/Biden/Clinton crowd would accept the fact SCOTUS interprets the law based on the Constitution, not fanatical protests.

Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected].


This article was originally published by the WND News Center.

Related Posts