The nomination of a woman to the Supreme Court by PDJT has raised the Roe vs Wade Supreme Court decision from 1973. Of course, it would not have mattered who was nominated by PDJT. Any nominee by a Republican President is going to be vilified as anti-woman, anti-LGBT and a host of other smears.
The Roe Vs Wade decision was one of the worst decisions ever to come down from the nine black robes on the bench. It is on a par with Plessy vs Ferguson from 1895-96 which allowed the Jim Crow laws, separate but equal and all the other crap that flowed downhill from that decision.
Whenever it is overturned (and it should be overturned) Roe vs Wade will be looked back on in the same way. The downstream crap from Row V Wade has been the killing of millions of unborn children. This has been justified by the statements along the lines that a woman has the right to kill her child.
This leads to the type of statement that someone on the left posted to Facebook recently.
“As insane as this may sound, you can be passionately “pro-choice” and not be “pro-abortion.”
Yes, this is an insane statement. It is designed to distract the hearer from the moral depravity of what abortion is, the killing of a child.
Where did the term “pro-choice” come from? After the Roe vs Wade decision, there was much rancor between the two sides of this issue. The idea that a child was being killed during an abortion created a moral dilemma for those supporting abortions. Just who wanted to be associated with the idea of killing children! No one!
So, “pro-choice” was a PR mechanism that was invented to shift attention away from the horrors of killing a child in the womb. The thrust was that a woman had the right to control what happened to her body. This was sold to the public as a natural right that everyone possesses.
Now few pro-life people would disagree with the idea that a woman has the right to control what happens with her body. This means that a woman has the right to choose to have sexual relations or not. A woman has the right to use protection to prevent pregnancy or not. There are some who might disagree with that. However, they represent a very small minority of the pro-life movement.
What most right-thinking people disagree with is the idea that a woman has the right to kill her child at any time, either before birth or after. Yet this is what pro-choice is all about. It promotes the idea that a woman can end the life of another human being simply because it is unborn. According to the pro-choice people, the reasons do not matter. Thus, the most vulnerable among us have no defense against having their lives terminated.
This is a separate and unique human being growing inside of her. He/she has the right to life just as any other human being does. No one has the unilateral right to end this life. This idea is moral depravity at its worst. This idea diminishes the value and sanctity of life for all. The accurate description of this collision of viewpoints is pro-life vs pro-death.
If one is pro-choice, then one is supporting the idea that a woman has the right to end the life of another human being. The Democratic Party is pro-death. To be a Democratic candidate for office anywhere in the country, Tom Perez, the DNC chair, has stated you must support the idea of killing unborn children.
The choice for President in 2020 has never been clearer. President Trump is unabashedly pro-life. Joe Biden, who is nominally Catholic, is the Democratic candidate. Democrats are pro-death. Voting for PDJT is voting for life.