Tyranny Instigated by the Judiciary

“The Law”, by which I mean the collective rules and regulation of a society, is a funny thing. From time to time idiotic, oppressive laws are passed which we would be best to remove through a legitimate legislative process. Yet, if we choose to eliminate them through some sort of “backend means”, such as imperial decree or judicial shenanigans, the whole legal structure of the country suffers.

Despite this, a little over 40 years ago, the Supreme Dorks of the day issued their shameful “Roe vs. Wade” and “Doe vs. Bolton” decisions.

Now before you accuse me of being a Bible-thumping anti-abortionist, understand that I support abortion. Well …. not really. I suppose a better way to state how I feel about this contentious issue is that I believe abortion should be legal, because if it is not, the consequences are much worse. Yes, an abortion does take the life of a human being – none of this, “but it’s only a fetus” crap! – but the operation still needs to be available to a woman should she choose to pursue it. I think abortions should be discouraged, and women should understand they may feel intense guilt about having one as they get older, but once a woman makes her mind up to abort a baby, I will sadly support her decision.

But that is just my opinion.

We are supposed to live in a democracy, a democracy whereby states and individuals are granted by default rights which are not specifically assigned to the federal government in the Constitution. (See the Ninth Amendment and the Tenth Amendment.) If through a legitimate exercise of the will of the people, (a direct ballot box vote, or vote by elected representatives), abortion is outlawed in the state I live in, I will abide by that decision, though I won’t like it, because I think anti-abortion laws are wrong. But if a judge through creative interpretation of the law, (finding new meanings in “penumbras” and “emanations”, or some such nonsense), strikes an anti-abortion law down, (or any law, for that matter), then this completely invalidates the concept of self-rule.

The “Roe vs. Wade” and “Doe vs. Bolton” decisions completely undermined the legitimate process of legislation in the United States. It was a giant step in this country’s continuing downward spiral into tyranny. (In more recent times, the Obamacare “tax” has been another huge step downwards.)

Sure, some folk speciously argue that the Fourteenth Amendment somehow trumps the Ninth and Tenth Amendments in this case. But can that possibly be, when abortion is almost certainly going to result in at least one deprivation of life? As for privacy rights emanating from the penumbras of other constitutional protections, (as argued in another stupid decision, Griswold vs. Connecticut), consider this: child abuse typically occurs in private.

“But it is illegal,” you reply. So was abortion.

“But child abuse causes the child to suffer!” What suffering could possibly be worse than to have your life terminated?

“Then for God’s sake, man, why do you support keeping abortion legal?” Because I believe in the sovereignty of an individual regarding what happens to his or her body. Just as I can’t be forced to donate a kidney to someone who will die without it, no one should be forced to carry another human being inside them. Encouraged and supported to the very best of our ability, yes! But forced? Absolutely not.

The reason I so vehemently oppose what those Supreme Dorks did some 40 years ago is that, like I have said above, it invalidates our constitutional form of government, preparing us for something much worse. To paraphrase/misquote that sick bastard, Uncle Joe Stalin:

Those who write the laws decide nothing. Those who interpret the laws decide everything.

Is that the type country you want to live in?