On this date 29 years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court made one of its worst decisions in history.

You’ve heard it said hundreds of times since, that the Roe v. Wade ruling legalized abortion in America.

That is not true.

What the court actually did was overturn infanticide and homicide laws in all 50 states, exceeding all constitutional authority by attempting to legislate – a power vested only in the Congress.

If you doubt what I am saying, just read the decision for yourself, sometime. It’s a ruling, that, when read between the lines, reveals its racist origins. It’s a ruling by “elites” for “elites.” It’s a ruling designed to promote population control. It had nothing to do with the law in 1973, yet it has, by default, become the “law of the land” today.

It also had nothing to do with the facts of the case – the supposed hardships of a woman named Norma McCorvey, aka Jane Roe.

In 1996, McCorvey, the woman who brought the action that resulted in the Roe v. Wade decision, asked the Supreme Court to reverse its ruling in light of the fact that she and her legal team knowingly based their case on fraudulent evidence – that she had been raped.

McCorvey lived with the guilt of this fraud for years – in addition to what her conscience told her about some 1.5 million abortions a year that ensued in the United States as a direct result of her actions. Today, she is a full-time, highly motivated anti-abortion activist.

How did the Supreme Court respond in 1996? Ironically, it declined to hear her pleas, again on this very date – Jan. 22.

You see, Roe v. Wade was never about the law. It was never about the Constitution. It was never about privacy. It was never about the facts of the case. It was a political decision made by unaccountable legislators guised, fittingly, in black robes. The black hoods of executioners would have been even more appropriate.

The 1973 U.S. Supreme Court did not interpret the Constitution. And it did not represent the people of the United States. Instead, it overturned laws in 46 states outlawing abortion – legislation approved by the will of the people – and restrictions on it in the remaining four states.

It’s amazing to me, in light of this history, that the current U.S. attorney general, John Ashcroft, pledged not to overturn Roe v. Wade in his confirmation hearings. He claims to be an opponent of abortion. He claims to know the law. He claims to know better. He claims to uphold the Constitution. He claims to work on behalf of the American people. Yet, his timid, political actions on this front betray those claims.

To justify its decision overturning legislation in 50 states, the Supreme Court was forced to come up with a constitutional excuse. So, it simply invented one – a right of privacy that is nowhere found in the document.

There is, however, found in the Constitution a specific and clear reason why abortions should be prevented. It is found in the preamble, often eliminated from the document in schools – when they bother to teach about the Constitution at all.

“We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America,” it says.

Who are the subjects and beneficiaries of the Constitution, as stated clearly in the preamble?

The answer? “… to ourselves and our posterity. …”

The word “ourselves” in this context refers to those men who wrote it – and to their generation of Americans.

“Posterity,” which literally means “descendants” or all succeeding generations, refers, in this context, to all those Americans yet unborn.

Is your great, great, great, great granddaughter your posterity? Absolutely. Is she born yet? Absolutely not. Does the fact that she is not yet born make her any less your posterity? No.

Now, specifically what rights are ascribed by the Constitution to ourselves and our posterity?

“Amendment V: No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”

Clearly, the Fifth Amendment establishes that our posterity – those yet unborn – shall not be deprived of life without due process. Bingo!

This same principle was contained in the Declaration of Independence:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.”

Life is an unalienable right, which means man can’t take it away through laws or through Supreme Court decisions. And just so there is no confusion about this being a limitation only on the federal government, check out the 14th Amendment.

Roe v. Wade is, thus, a sham – a house of cards. It was an artificial attempt to make abortion a right by citing a “right of privacy” that is itself nowhere to be found in the Constitution. Roe v. Wade created rights where none existed and abrogated those that were enshrined as unalienable.



Read more from Farah on abortion issue.

Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.