the Vortex
You are not signed in as a Premium user; you are viewing the free version of this program. Premium users have access to full-length programs with limited commercials and receive a 10% discount in the store! Sign in or Sign up today!ALL OR NOTHING
A post-Roe world?
December 2, 2021 84 Comments
TRANSCRIPT
I'm Michael Voris, coming you from the U.S. Supreme Court, where the most important case on abortion in the past half century has just concluded oral arguments.
After two hours of some pretty intense back and forth on both sides and coming from both liberal and conservative justices, the case is now concluded, and the nation awaits a ruling. Side note — even though the court often holds off on handing down opinions until late June, there's no guarantee that it will take that long. It could come at any time.
But whenever it's handed down, here's the certainty: Either the justices will entirely abandon Roe v. Wade as well as Casey (directly or indirectly), or the high court will come up with some new, crazy standard to support what's called the "right to an abortion."
So going deeper, here's the reality: The case could not have even reached the court today had not at least four justices agreed to hear it. That does not automatically translate into at least four justices who would overturn Roe, but it does mean that at least four justices were at least willing to consider it.
That has the pro-abortion camp terrified that the truth of this evil is now up for consideration. But likewise, it has the pro-life side energized like never before in the past two and maybe three generations.
The scene around the court earlier today was symbolic of this new reality.
Pro-lifers were out in force, vastly outnumbering the death merchants — in fact, for most of the day, the pro-aborts (who fittingly enough stood on the left of the court's front steps) were completely surrounded by a much larger and louder crowd, something I personally have never witnessed here at the court or even heard of, for that fact.
And moreover, the atmosphere of the pro-lifers here was more like a huge block party. Music pumped in over giant speakers they set up last night; smiles, hugs, donuts, singing, dancing, high fives — you name it. It was refreshing to see, and a privilege to witness firsthand.
None of that, of course, guarantees any outcome. But here's the rub: Why would the court choose to hear a case on a matter that, in the past, other justices have said is "settled"?
That, again, is what has pro-lifers literally dancing in the street here (and child killers looking pretty glum).
But inside the court, the arguments and back and forths and so forth did seem to boil down to this one salient and ultimate point — when it comes to abortion, it's an all-or-nothing matter.
Of course, the pro-life side has maintained that truth for decades. The pro-death side actually believes that too, but has been completely dishonest about it. That's why the revolting Bill Clinton hid his embrace of child killing under the ridiculous phrase "keep abortion safe, legal and rare."
They lie about wanting abortion to be absolute — abortion on demand, abortion with no apologies. Only very recently have they come out and admitted that, and, today, for the first time in legal history, they had to admit it's all or nothing.
When asked by Brett Kavanaugh, if the court drew the line for legal abortion at another place (other than the current line of the point of viability), could the pro-abortion attorney suggest one to them, her answer was no. Anything else would be arbitrary — as if 24 weeks in the womb or 28, or whatever, isn't arbitrary.
The Mississippi law before the court actually redraws the line at 15 weeks. But what came out today in court was that the law is merely a vehicle to completely overturn Roe. Attorneys for Mississippi said (in essence and fact) Roe needs to go. The child killers said everything needs to be left in place, just as it is.
So no constitutional right to abortion or a constitutional right to abortion on demand — it's all out in the open now. No doubts remain.
It's hard to envision some "compromise," as Brett Kavanaugh said. There's the pretended right of a woman to kill her child versus the right of the child to live. There's no way to square this circle, and that became abundantly clear to everyone today. And it seems even the justices understand that anything other than a "yes" or "no" will not do.
The pro-abort justices (Kagan, Breyer and mostly Sotomayor, who was rude and interrupted nonstop), that trio kept trying to force the point that Roe and Casey work and all is good, that there's nothing worth reconsidering.
But the other six justices peppered questions at the pro-abort attorneys, trying to bring out legal distinctions and philosophical points that Roe could be overturned and no great damage done to the court or country.
It's, of course, never a good thing to try and read the tea leaves of a court by reading into the questions — but the questions are not nothing. They at least reflect the thinking of judges, and, in this case, it sounded like the justices were trying to get on the record that this is all or nothing. If that was the point of the questions, then today's arguments succeeded.
It does appear that, for the first time in a long time, America may be on the verge of a post-Roe world.
How exactly that will play out is still uncertain, but it does seem that pro-life America, having fought for decades to arrive at this moment, will now have to start imagining what life will look like after Roe.
As Winston Churchill said following the first major military defeat of Nazi forces at Stalingrad and then El Alamein, "This is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning."
And just like the Allies in World War II knew from the outset (as did the Axis Powers) some things are all or nothing.
Posts
