Texas has come up with a law that the Supreme Court knows it can’t overturn!
The Texas law has established a foundational threshold for a beginning point of life that is easily recognized; and that is the “heartbeat”. An infant doesn’t breathe the breath of life until it emerges from the mother’s womb. This is the point where an infant begins to breath air utilizing its own lungs to receive the oxygen of life, which is circulated by the blood of life that requires a “heartbeat”. At about six weeks into fetal development following conception, a “heartbeat” is detected indicating that the infant is circulating the blood of life in its own circulatory system, although the oxygen of life is supplied through the umbilical of the mother. A pregnant woman not only eats for two, she also breaths for two. Sometimes more if she is carrying twins or triplets. That’s why pregnant women should not smoke as it cuts back on the extra oxygen necessary for the development of the infant(s).
Solomon could not have written a wiser law for this day and time! The enforcement part is clever indeed. And totally Constitutional! Its enforcement is not through criminal action by the State’s Attorney, but civil action by the public. The State has not infringed on anyone’s rights! However, it has established a definitive point to call life – Life, which right belongs to the States and the people respectively under the 9th and 10th amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The Constitution does not grant the power to define life or the beginning thereof to any federal branch of government!
It is the public that determines the liability of any perceived criminal activity commited (intended or unintended) through civil action in a civil court which handles disputes between citizens under the common law. (Remember, OJ Simson walked in criminal court, but paid in civil court.) Under the 7th amendment of the Constitution, “…where the value in controversy shall exceed 20 dollars…no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States…”. Think maybe a prolife biologist and a Constitutional Lawyer “tag teamed” this legislation? Score one for WWE the people!
Can the State bring suit against parties for fiscal damages due to a potential loss in its future taxpayer base? The national debt that is mounting to the point of infinity is being borrowed on the perceived taxation of future citizen taxpayers. Right? If that “tax base” is depleted by any number of future taxpayers via abortion, logic would perceive that abortion is causing fiscal harm to the ability of that debt ever getting repaid. Therefore, abortion would be fiscal harm to all current taxpayers under current obligation to repay the national debt. One would think that any politician who is forever spending money above and beyond what it has on hand could see this, then ban abortion on that principle alone! But the blind are leading the blind, or else there are a lot of evil leaders hell bent on egotistical tyranny. Of course, today’s politicians have not even a grain of sand for common sense why less any minor degree of wisdom.
I’m not a lawyer or judge, just a retired farmer. Who said a judge had to be a lawyer anyway? Wasn’t the Constitution framed by a good number of farmers along with other merchants and businessmen?
What is the Value of Life?
Please share this!
LOLGB+
The Ezekiel 33 Watchman Report 