The belief that life begins at conception is not based in science. It’s based in religion. Democracy ceases to exist when religion becomes a controlling part of its structure.
Contrary to what some proclaim, the United States was not founded on Christianity. The framers of the Constitution held the separation of church and state inviolable.
Although the phrase separation of church and state doesn’t appear in the Constitution, it’s a valid concept that’s been used legally and judicially. Right to privacy and right to a fair trial are also absent but are upheld by law and embraced by all Americans. Separation of church and state is implicit in the First Amendment:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
We’ve seen a steady erosion of the Constitution since its inception.
Indigenous peoples were forced to send their children to Christian schools. Under God was inserted into the Pledge of Allegiance and In God We Trust inscribed on all U.S. currency, both of which are faith-based mottoes.
Francis Bellamy created the original Pledge of Allegiance in 1891:
I pledge allegiance to my flag and the Republic for which it stands — one Nation indivisible — with liberty and justice for all.
In 1951 The Knights of Columbus, a Catholic men’s organization, urged Congress to add under God to the pledge. Congress did so on 14 June 1954 under President Dwight D. Eisenhower, despite bipartisan concerns regarding separation of church and state.
The Coinage Act, signed into law on 12 February 1873, mandated In God We Trust be inscribed on all coins. On 11 July 1955 Eisenhower signed into law a bill requiring that inscription appear on all paper and coin currency. On 30 July 1956 Congress and Eisenhower approved In God We Trust as America’s motto, disregarding beliefs of atheists and agnostics among the citizenry.
Historically both Congress and the Supreme Court have upheld the phrases under God and In God We Trust, touting them as benign mottoes while ignoring they had become the law of the land.
A monotheistic ideal inserted into our Pledge of Allegiance, inscribed on our currency, and displayed in our government buildings violates the First Amendment.
Nonreligious and non-Christian children are forced to recite the religious-laced pledge in school. We’re compelled to use currency inscribed with a religious belief. We’re struck by religious mottoes when visiting government establishments.
The United States is a multi-racial, multi-cultural, multi-religious country. On average 40-50% of Americans poll as nonreligious, and 10-15% as atheist and agnostic. How would people feel if the words In Allah We Trust were on our currency? My preference is Great Spirit rather than God, but I’d never vote to force my spiritual belief on another.
Which brings me to the subject of abortion . . .
Ninth Amendment: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Tenth Amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Roe v Wade is the Supreme Court’s ruling that held the Constitution protects a woman’s right to an abortion prior to fetal viability.*
The majority of Americans support this ruling, but where is their voice in deciding passage of antiabortion laws?
A fetal heart begins to beat at 5-6 weeks. A heartbeat, however, does not confirm the presence of a soul. Nor does kicking or thumb-sucking. Resembling a human infant doesn’t make a fetus a sentient life form, nor does it confirm the presence of a soul. Some believe a soul enters a body at conception. Others believe it enters when the first breath is taken. Both are religious or spiritual beliefs. Neither is based in science. Therefore, since the First Amendment states that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, outlawing abortion is unconstitutional.
Although Roe v Wade is still constitutional law, several States have passed laws banning abortion – at all stages of fetal development – and more are poised to do so if the precedent is overturned. Women have been imprisoned and charged with murder, regardless of their reason for having an abortion or if the abortion was spontaneous. Incest, rape, trafficking, and serious health concerns are either not addressed or deemed invalid.
The Supreme Court is poised to overturn Roe v Wade. This would once again objectify women, relegate us to second-class citizens, and deem us property of the state. We’d be charged with manslaughter or murder and sentenced to a lengthy prison term, if not execution, along with anyone who assists us. How is this not tyranny? How is this not the imposing of a religious belief? How is this not violating the Constitution? How is this not pandering to a minority electorate?
Right to Life and Antiabortion are not synonymous.
Right to Life opposes capital punishment. Right to Life includes all creatures and decries vivisection, factory farms, sport/trophy hunting. Right to Life is ensured by the Fourteenth Amendment. Antiabortion is an adverb qualifying an element of one’s religious beliefs.
Fourteenth Amendment, Section 1: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
There’s one more factor that needs addressing . . . the puppeteers.
The power elite are those in the top brackets of wealth who wield political power and control everything across the globe. A pin in a map here and a bribe there maintain their control over the world’s economy, politics, military, businesses, and disposition. They shield themselves behind politicians and others of influence who fall prey to their rapacity and subornation. They leverage ultimatums, tug on the strings, and manipulate the corrupt and ignorant, respectively, into doing their bidding.
Much of this is evidenced by the rise of multinational corporations – which serve as umbrellas for the countless smaller corporations they absorb – and their dominance in the global marketplace. Their goal is a worldwide totalitarian government, one they’ve been methodically working toward for at least 200 years. Despite efforts at diversity – which elevated token women and minorities within their ranks – they remain white, male, and Christian.
Their tacit motto is divide and conquer. They’ve managed to spotlight that which divides us, invoke fear of the unknown, provoke anger as a means of conquering fear, keep us fighting with each other, and incite violence as a means of strong-arming us into maintaining the status quo – all of which ensures their power and dominance.
I have no doubt they’re a driving force behind overturning Roe v Wade. The power of womankind would diminish, become a lesser threat to their dominance, and eventually be silenced. It won’t stop here. All our rights and freedoms are at risk, including the right to vote.** They’ve targeted everyone they deem a threat to their supremacy, using the resolve of corrupt politicians, religious zealots, and white nationalists to achieve their goals – the latter of which wants to transmute the U.S. into a white Christian nation. Many Americans are unaware of the powerful cabal supporting, if not directing these campaigns and the obliteration of democracy that would result.
Personally, I wouldn’t choose to have an abortion. However current law, precedent, and the Constitution grant me the right to do so. Violating a woman’s right to control her own body would strike a death blow to democracy.
Imposition of religion by government upon its citizens is a weapon of autocracy.
It’s purported that upon leaving the Constitutional Convention in 1787, Benjamin Franklin was asked, “Doctor, what have we got? A republic or a monarchy?” to which he replied, “A republic, if you can keep it.”
So, which will we choose: democracy or tyranny?
Much of the turmoil we’re witnessing across the globe is the product of a dying patriarchy. It’s digging in its claws attempting to survive. It will not. How long this will continue is unknown. The amount of carnage the beast will inflict is inestimable. But it will die. Then love and compassion will make way for the light waiting to fill the world.
Namaste, my friends ❤️
©Tina Frisco 2022
*The Court based its decision on the three trimesters of pregnancy. First trimester: termination is solely at the discretion of the woman. Second trimester: the state may regulate (but not outlaw) abortion in the interest of the mother’s health. Third trimester: the fetus is viable and the state may regulate or outlaw abortions in the interest of the potential life, except when necessary to preserve the life or health of the mother.
**The Fifteenth Amendment ensures the right to vote:
The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.
Our ability to vote in 2022 will largely depend on where we live. According to the Brennan Center for Justice, as of 14 January 2022, legislators in at least 27 states have introduced, pre-filed, or carried over 250 bills with restrictive voting provisions, compared to 75 such bills in 24 states on 14 January 2021.
3 thoughts on “The Right to Life Is the Right to Choose”
A most welcomed explanation to truth and the reality of the constitution Tina. You missed your calling my friend. It should be you on the bench. This message needs to be spread far and wide. ❤ ❤
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks, Deb. If I had entered the field of law, I’d have been a public defender or an attorney advocate for human/animal rights, taking all injustices to the media. Those types of attorneys usually don’t get appointed to judgeships.But hey, anything’s possible! ❤️
LikeLiked by 1 person
So true. And no doubts you’d have been a defender not a prosecutor ❤
LikeLiked by 1 person