Quo vadis? Where are you going, Miriam?
Miriam
cites US jurisprudence to argue for the passage of the RH Bill,
revealing that it is her intention to put us along the
contraception-to-abortion track followed by America. How crazy is
that? Here's the irony: backed by her own authority as an expert in
the interpretation of law, she herself demonstrates that the RH Bill is
in fact what the pro-lfie movement has always suspected: a gateway to
abortion. Perhaps unwittingly, she is showing the public where the
Philippine society will end up if the RH Bill is passed.
Miriam quotes Griswold v. Connecticut,
381 U.S. 479 (1965). The case involved a Connecticut law that
prohibited the use of contraceptives. By a vote of 7–2, the Supreme
Court invalidated the law on the grounds that it violated the "right to
marital privacy". What Miriam did not mention was how Griswold was followed-up eight years later with Roe v. Wade,
410 U.S. 113 (1973), which provided the legal basis for
abortion-on-demand in America. In Roe, the Court ruled that a woman's
choice to have an abortion was protected as a private decision between
her and her doctor. The Supreme Court effectively overturned
individual states' laws against abortion by ruling them
unconstitutional. Since Griswold, the US Supreme Court has cited the right to privacy in other rulings. The Griswold line of cases remains controversial, and has drawn accusations of "judicial activism".
The Griswold to Roe sequence
demonstrates how even at the highest levels of jurisprudence, abortion
follows contraception as night follows day. Moreover, you may notice in
the same sequence, a movement from the destruction of marriage to the
destruction of human life. The evidence for these two consequences is
historical. Contraception and abortion are related as cause is to
effect. You cannot accept contraception and pretend abortion will not
happen.
The opinion on Roe was written by Justice Harry Blackmun,who declared that abortion is a "fundamental right" under the U.S.
Constitution and substantive due process under the Fourteenth
Amendment. Writing for the 7-2 Court, Justice Blackmun held that abortion is a fundamental right because it falls under the "penumbra" of the right to privacy. Roe v. Wade provided reinforcement for cases such as Griswold v. Connecticut and Lawrence v. Texas,
all of which set up spheres of personal activity which states cannot
regulate without "good cause." It was thus, that the deaths of
millions of unborn Americans was based not on legislation by by judicial
action, and that judicial action was based on a "penumbra" -- a partial and vague shadow! -- of the constitutional right to privacy. Justice Blackmun had forced the issue by conjuring a "ghost" of the right to privacy.
Against the error of placing privacy as the supreme right, we should invoke the doctrine that there exists a hierarchy of rights, and that the Right to Life is prior and superior to the Right to Privacy.
All other rights are subject and subsequent to the Right to Life. This
argument was recognized and accepted by the Philippine Constitutional
Commission of 1986, and it is the sense in which the Philippine
Constitution enshrines the equal protection of mother and unborn (Ref.
Article II, Sec.12). The US Constitution is NOT the Philippine
Constitution. The Philippine Constitution is pro-God, pro-life, pro-family, and pro-poor --
this was the tag-line during the 1987 referendum by which the Filipino
people overwhelmingly approved what was then known as the "Cory"
Constitution. Using Miriam's US jurisprudential arguments, the
implication is that the protection of the unborn in the Philippine
Constitution should be aborted, presumably via charter change.
When
legislation is divorced from sociology and historical facts, the
ensuing laws can lead -- as they have led -- entire nations to suffer
the very same pitfalls that other nations have experienced. Miriam is
living inside her head and inside her law books, narrowing down her
vision into the arguments presented by the cabal of foreign interest
groups and dummy NGOs (PLCPD, FFPD,
etc) supported by USAID and UNFPA, and the big pharmaceuticals lurking
behind the controversy. They have co-opted the academe, medical
professionals, the DOH, and the presidency itself, turning the RH
machinery into a kind of Goliath that now challenges what could be the
last nation with an actively Christian/Catholic majority.
Here's another irony:
Those who advocate "absolute freedom" will be
absolutely blinded by the kind of freedom they espouse.
No comments:
Post a Comment