[Music] hello and welcome to yet another beautiful Friday on speaking for him I'm Dan vanzin and here is your host Andrew gomon hello Dan I'm glad to be with everybody this Friday thank you for continuing to listen to the speaking for him podcast um you may or may not realize but we are approaching the 47th anniversary of Ro versus Wade a quick primer on that is it was a 72 decision by the Supreme Court to essentially legalize abortion and 50 states for basically any reason um there was discussion while they were coming up with it about the age of viability but it was never really clearly defined and so different states have different ideas of how um long you can go uh before you have to get an abortion or be before you're not allowed to get an abortion anymore um and the reality is that some states like Illinois and New York have recently basically doubled down and said we don't want row to fall we want to make sure that we're ready if row Falls and so we're going to make an even um an even uh more striking pro-abortion law that basically says until the day of the baby's birth we want to guarantee AB abortion or as they like to term it reproductive choice to um the women in question and I found an article uh as I was researching for this show um that I want to Sender the podcast on and it's called the three wrongs of row it's three arguments against the Row versus weight legislation and interesting or not legislation but court decision and interestingly enough none of these have anything to do with the Bible um and I I definitely believe that we need to use the Bible in our defense of life but this is just simply human logic and so as we dig in I think this will be good for you to be able to go back and talk to your secular pro-life friends a pro-choice friends about this and have an intelligent debate on these issues and and let them know hey these are the fundamental problems with r versus weight as a decision but first can you give us our quote of the day Dan I looked at a fetal development chart at the operation rescue office in Dallas I had a lot of emotion stirring inside me that's when I decided that it was wrong in any stage of pregnancy Norma mccorvy and Norma mccorvy was um cited as Jane row she used the PM of Jane row when the I don't know the name of the law firm but they basically petitioned this the Supreme Court on her behalf for the legalized rights of women and it may kind of dovetail on what I'm going to share with the main segment but Dan you were reading me some interesting facts about that from another uh source so why don't you give me some of those again now that we're on the air ah you're talking about the justic justic ability um this is from the opinion of the court on the Wikipedia page so if you really want to look it up it's right there so it's though not often discussed the court opinion first addresses the issues of standing and mootness under traditional interpretation of these rules Jane Rose's appeal was moot because she had already given birth to her child and thus would not be affected by the ruling as she also lacked standing to assert the rights of other pregnant women as she did not present an actual case or controversy in this case it means a grievance or a demand for Relief any opinion issued by the supr Supreme Court would then constitute an advisory opinion and uh the court then concluded that this case came within an established exception to the rule one that allowed consideration of an issue that was capable of repetition yet evading review okay so in in simple English basically what it means is she didn't really have a lot of standing to make this decision she basically didn't have a case but she also reflects later that she was kind of just awn that they would have found another Jane row if they had to and interestingly enough she never had an abortion she ended up having three total children I believe and she never actually had an abortion even though she was the plaintiff in this case and arguing for the right to do so uh this apparently is when she was pregnant with her third child yeah and part of it I'm sure was because of the length of time that the court decision took but um it is interesting that that was the case and I think it dovetails well on the the the things I want to show share with you the three fundamental things and these are basically from a legal logical perspective um that are wrong with the R versus Wade Court decision first and most importantly the outcome of row is fundamentally harmful and unjust why because the facts tell us that a baby is human from the moment of conception now I don't know how much knew in 1973 okay so I'm giving a little bit of benefit of the doubt that possibly in 1973 you might have been able to make some sort of justification for early abortion on the basis that you they didn't have an ability to necessarily look into a woman to see her baby I didn't look up how early ultrasounds came into being maybe that could be something that Dan could look up for us and give us a little bit later but the point is we know fundamentally especially now that biologically uh babies are separate human beings and it's very clear from the earliest moments after conception that this is the case um and uh this is a uh the high a highly specialized text called the developing human clinically oriented embryology this is a secular text um says human development begins at fertilization when a sperm fuses with an octi and form form a single cell zygote and it says this highly specialized toy potent cell marks the beginning of each of us as a unique individual do you realize that every part of your DNA every part of that makes up who you will become is present at that time and so I think it's important for us to realize that that makes it unjust because I've heard people say I've had friends even say this that you can't judge a woman's motives for abortion and I understand one side of that obviously people go through hard times but a person's hard times and the struggles that they have do not negate the humanity of their child if you admit that an unborn baby is a child then the circumstances with which they come to be have no bearing on whether they should have life okay so that that is the first Oneal FLW and now we're going to get into um a couple things that have to do with legal precedent because people always say to me and in the articles I read that are pro-abortion they say well versus weight is the law of the land do you want to know when the first uh ultrasound machine was yes go ahead and tell me okay so after the French physicist Pier curri uh discovered peio electricity it was made it so that we could actually do things like induce ultrasounds thereafter in 1940 American acoustical acoustical physicist Floyd Firestone devised the first ultrasonic Echo Imaging device AKA and ultrasound the supersonic reflecto scope to detect Eternal flaws of metal casings in 41 Austrian neurologist used it in collab or Austrian neurologist Carl theodus was in collaboration with his bar brother Frederick as physicist a physicist and likely the first person to ultrasonically Echo image the human body outlining thereby the ventricles and of a human brain and it doesn't uh in 49 a physic physicist named John wild used was became the father of the medical ultrasound when he looked at the thickness of botel tissue and then it's see okay well there's probably more in the Wikipedia article and we can definitely we can definitely post the Wikipedia article regarding roie Wade um to the blog post for this podcast but I think it's safe to assume if the first all alone was invented in 1940 that by 1973 it was fairly usable now I don't know how widely available it was in medical clinics it looks like it was in the early to mid-60s when the United States started using it but I think that they had alstone technology good enough to know that babies were pretty early on actual separate human beings MH okay so but the second problem is that it is legally and constitutionally mistaken Justice Harry Blackman's majority opinion claimed that Liberty um protected by the due process clause of the 14th Amendment includes a right to privacy that is Broad enough to Encompass a right to abortion now the interesting thing about this is that the 14th Amendment I read it yesterday and it deals with actually primarily the 100 the affirming of personhood of the of the black or African-American person because even after they stopped being slaves people wanted to say you're only three fifths of a person you are only three fifths of a person we don't want you to have full rights and the 14th Amendment said that cannot be we need to re recognize these people as full persons and actually there were a slew of let me see if I can find it here uh says that the right alleged in row is blatantly contradicted by the history of the abortion law in the United States ratification of the 14th Amendment roughly coincided with the enactment of a wave of state laws prohibiting abortion from conception with the primary aim according to clear and abundant historical evidence of protecting unborn children many of these statutes were already on the books by the time the 14th amendment was adopted in 1868 and many of them remain unchanged until Rose struck them down more than a century later and Justice William ringis said in his descending opinion that you had to find within the scope of the forth Amendment a right that was apparently completely unknown to the drafters of the amendment oh yeah and it mentions you have it mentioned earlier too that um as a constitutional uh argument as noted by University of Pennsylvania's law professor Kermit Roosevelt who does favor legal abortion row is barely coherent the court pulled its fundamental right to choose more or less from the Constitutional ether so e ether I believe is the word but um basically what it's saying is even if you're Pro abortion the right of row to decide this crucial issue is fundamentally flawed and the the fact of the matter is that the 14th amendment was used um to solidify the right to life before row yeah it basically reinforced the pro-life laws that were in place and then all of a sudden when Ro versus Wade came down it was like oh no it's the it the 14th Amendment is the reason to have abortions and then we have the situation where number one it was never discussed in the legislature no you know it didn't go through a legislative process where the house and the Senate voted on it the president it's un Democratic um and I don't think it ever would have passed that way even in some of our more liberal uh houses and senates that we've had um well maybe this one well you know there might have been sometimes but it never was put put to that kind of vote and then also don't forget the fact that many states already had strong pro-life laws in place Michigan and a matter of fact in November member of 72 voted to ban almost any kind of abortion and then in January of 73 it was all wiped away with a Supreme Court decision so that just shows you a little bit of how it is um unconstitutional and I kind of put the the third one in there so the third one was it's un undemocratic for the reasons that I just talked about so these three problem s that it's hurtful and unjust harmful and unjust fundamentally that it is constitutionally mistaken and that it is undemocratic all these things are reason reasons why Row versus Wade is needs to end it needs to fall and this is something that a lot of people don't understand I think if if more people understood it they would be more in favor of it even if they are pro-choice the reality is that New York as a state had abortion legal three years before Row versus Wade was even a thing yep all row fall falling would mean is that a state could decide on its own whether it wanted to have it it as a legal procedure or what kind of limitations it wanted to have on it well then there's also the fact that which you mentioned before is that U Row versus W since it didn't go through the elected government it is technically illegal um exactly and you yeah I just the the Supreme Court is not a place to make law it's a place to decide whether an existing law is unconstitutional and that needs to be done law by law and you can't just say it's unconstitutional because I don't like it either nope so well that's where the whole uh separation of uh the current understanding of separation of church and state came from too was because one guy didn't like it yeah and the so there's a lot of other issues we can get into along those similar lines but we won't do that because this is a focus on the fact that abortion uh is wrong and it needs to end in our country um and the first one of the big first steps would be to see Row versus Wade Fall by the wayside because it is bad precedent um Y and the other thing is I I'll just I want to leave with this the fact of the matter is I never understood how liberal um candidates can claim that they care about families and care about children when they when they want us to have the ability to kill our unborn I don't know why you would want to hamper your future the future people that have the P would have the power to elect you and people like you by killing them before they have a chance at life but that's the logic of some of the people that with whom we have to deal and I just want to say in finality the fact of the matter is that there are many people waiting to adopt the final thing that blows my mind is the number of fertility clinics that we have in the US and yet we still abort babies by the thousands every day that doesn't make sense to me and it shouldn't make sense to you either especially if you are a Christ follower this is Andrew gomon saying have a great weekend and keep serving the best of Masters thank you for listening to today's episode your host has been Andrew Gasson founder of speaking for him for more information on today's show and to leave us comments and voicemails visit speaking him. blogspot.com you can find Andrews Ministry at speaking forhim.com that's speaking the number four hiim you can also interact with us at facebook.com/ speaking for him and on Twitter @p speaking forhim and when you look for us on iTunes and Stitcher let us know what you think of the podcast by leaving a rating and review [Music]