Before Roe v. Wade
January 22, 2019
PLANNED PARENTHOOD aborted 332,757 children last year and received $564 million from taxpayers. On this, the 46th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, some important history of what led to the decriminalization of murder from Dr. Thomas Droleskey at Christ or Chaos:
Roe v. Wade did not “start” the genocide of the preborn in this country that has taken over fifty million innocent human lives since 1965. The move for the decriminalization of surgical baby-killing began at the state level (so much for demigod of states’ rights) as pro-abortion leaders such as Dr. Bernard Nathanson, a founder of the National Repeal of Abortion Laws (now called NARAL-Pro Choice), and Lawrence Lader and William Baird, among others used the existence of various “exceptions” in abortion legislation then on the books as the means of “liberalizing” “access” to baby-killing for all women in all circumstances. The move for decriminalized baby-killing under cover of law started at the state level, moving into the Federal court system only when pro-death advocates believed that it was propitious for them to challenge the laws of those states which prohibited or restricted “access” to baby-killing.
It is useful to review some of the history of decriminalizing surgical baby-killing under cover of civil law prior to Roe v. Wade. Those who contend that the “people” in the various states have the “right” to determine whether to permit or prohibit surgical baby-killing would have no problem with the pre-Roe legislation, nor would they be bothered by the fact that many states have “trigger laws” in effect to “protect” baby-killing in the event that Roe v. Wade is reversed at some point by a decision of the Supreme Court of the United States of America.
The State of Colorado was the first to “liberalize” its existing legislation, doing so in 1967:
The pre-Roe abortion statute was based upon § 230.3 of the Model Penal Code. Under the statute, an abortion could be performed at any stage of pregnancy (defined as “the implantation of an embryo in the uterus”) when continuation of the pregnancy was likely to result in the death of the woman, “serious permanent impairment” of her physical or mental health, or the birth of a child with “grave and permanent physical deformity or mental retardation. An abortion could be performed within the first sixteen weeks of pregnancy (gestational age) when the pregnancy resulted from rape (statutory or forcible) or incest, and the local district attorney confirmed in writing that there was probable cause to believe that the alleged offense had occurred Pursuant to Roe v. Wade, the limitations on circumstances under which abortions could be performed and the requirement that all abortions be performed in hospitals were declared unconstitutional by the Colorado Supreme Court in People v. Norton.Enforcement of the statute was not enjoined.
The pre-Roe statute has not been repealed, and would be enforceable if Roe v. Wade were overruled. The broad exceptions in the statute, however, in particular the exception for mental health, would allow almost all abortions to be performed. Colorado, Life Legal Defense Fund.These links no longer work. This site, Christ or Chaos, appears to be the current source for the information that used to appear at Life Legal Defense Fund.
Some thoughts from Phil Lawler at Lifesite News about the Covington Catholic/March for Life incident:
It’s time for the pro-life movement to grow up.
The disgraceful treatment of students from Covington Catholic – and by that I mean the pell-mell rush of pro-life “leaders” to condemn innocent young men – illustrates a potentially fatal flaw in the movement. For much too long, some of the most visible spokesmen for the pro-life movement have sought desperately to be seen as respectable, to be treated fairly by the mainstream media. It’s never happened. It’s never going to happen. And it’s not a worthy goal.
The media pounced on an opportunity to treat a few teenagers from Kentucky as symbols of bigotry, on the slimmest of evidence. That was unjust, but not unpredictable. (More on that below.) Now that the truth about the confrontation at the Lincoln Memorial has come out, the newspapers and network that vilified the Covington Catholic students are issuing perfunctory apologies. But the damage is done, and that damage is considerable.
Still worse, in my view, is the inexcusable haste with which many pro-life spokesmen leapt for the bait, joining the chorus of condemnation. Even before the fuller story came out, with videotape conclusively proving that the Covington Catholic students were victims rather than aggressors, the original footage provided no conclusive evidence of wrongdoing. Sensible reporters, and sensible commentators, should have said: “Let’s look into this; let’s get the whole story.” Why did so many people rush to judgment?
As it turns out, the behavior of the Covington Catholic students was blameless. They were intentionally provoked, and reacted with restraint and even courtesy. Nick Sandmann, the teenager who suddenly became the focus of a nationwide hate campaign, has released an extraordinarily charitable statement about the incident. Their school, their diocese, and the March for Life should be proud of these young men.
