Skip to main content

Hillary: Unborn Persons Have No Rights


Hillary Clinton made a shocking admission on NBC’s Meet the Press.  When speaking of the unborn, she said, “The unborn person does not have Constitutional rights.” She went on to add that no laws or practices include, “sacrificing the mother’s right to make decisions.”

This is a major statement because abortion rights groups refuse to use any words that will “humanize the fetus,” and person is about as human as it gets. “Person” has become a legal word, not merely referring to homo sapiens, but to those human beings who are entitled to Constitutional rights.

Clinton’s comments served as an oxymoron; one cannot be both a person and not entitled to Constitutional rights.

As science has begun to definitively prove that the “fetus” is very much alive inside the womb, abortion activists have had to alter their approach. Many no longer insist that the fetus is just a “clump of cells,” but argue instead against personhood. Hillary’s husband, former President Bill Clinton, conceded as much in his memoirs, noting that the unborn child is alive, but not entitled to personhood status.

This personhood debate goes all the way back to Roe v Wade, where Justice Harry Blackmun wrote in the majority opinion:

“If this suggestion of personhood is established, the appellant’s case, of course, collapses, for the fetus’ right to life would then be guaranteed specifically by the [14th] Amendment.”   

The 14th Amendment is what guarantees all Americans have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Hillary Clinton made the jump from fetus to person; from human with no rights to person with full rights. As she stuttered and stammered through her answer, she finally noted that we can’t sacrifice the mother’s right to make decisions. By the benign word decision, she was referring to severing the bodies of these unborn persons.

But Justice Blackmun also addressed the concern of the mother’s rights. Conceding that at some point in time we must consider the rights of the unborn, he wrote, “Another interest—that of potential human life—becomes significantly involved. The woman’s [right to] privacy is no longer sole, and any right of privacy she possesses must be measured accordingly.” 


The Justice’s point was clear: the mother’s rights are sole, unless we can establish personhood. Hillary (and science) has established personhood. It is time to reverse Roe and protect our tiniest persons.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

To Save a Life

(Like my blog about the peace symbol, this blog was written as a default response to all the parents, students, and other people who are asking my opinion of To Save a Life.) By now you have probably heard of the movie To Save a Life, which opened nation-wide in theaters on January 22nd. The movie deals with so many issues that teens face today, like suicide, cutting, drinking, drugs, premarital sex, teen pregnancy, and abortion. At first glance this movie looks like an awesome resource that we should recommend for our teens, parents, youth pastors, and youth workers. But a closer look at the movie reveals a few disturbing things. For starters, according to pluggedin.com, there are 2 uses of the “A” word, 5 uses of hell (used as a curse word), and once the “D” word is used. There are other crude terms used to describe a girl, and crude terms for referring to sexual activity. There is also a bedroom scene that shows a girl removing a boy’s shirt, then afterwards the girl putting he...

All Things To All Men

One of our favorite verses to use in our evangelism methods is where Paul said that he “becomes all things to all men” so that he might “by all means save some (I Corinthians 9:22).” This is certainly a good idea if we keep it in its proper context and application. For example, I remember a time in high school where I knew a kid that loved skateboarding. Being the chicken that I am, I was never a skateboarder. All he would talk about was skating, and I knew none of his lingo. But to help develop a relationship with him (he was new to our church and didn’t know many people), I brushed up on my skating lingo so I could ask if he had done any sick ollies lately (impressed?). This would be like Paul saying “to the skateboarder, I became a skateboarder.” This is effective and necessary. But then there are the people that use this verse to justify doing sinful things in the name of evangelism. The first one that comes to mind is about drinking. Some people will go into the bars to evan...

What is a Curse Word?

I know. Stupid question, right? But lately I have heard Christians begin to debate what actually makes a word a curse word. Since the Bible never says, “Thou shalt not say the ‘s’ word,” how do we know that a word is bad? Because of this I have heard Christians justify cursing. The Bible gives a broad command for Christians to adhere to: let no corrupt word come out of your mouth (Ephesians 4:29). The word corrupt means rotten; therefore, we should never say a rotten word, whether it is on the list of curse words or not. First, we have to realize that there are curse words. On the night of Jesus’ arrest Peter was found guilty of using one himself. Matthew 26:74 tells us that when Peter denied knowing Jesus that he began “to curse and to swear.” This verse shows that there are curse words, and that they are wrong to use. I’m sure whatever words Peter said were not the same curse words that we have in our culture today. Here is the point: a curse word (or rotten word) is any wo...