Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Abortion

Check out this old school photo of me back in my going-by-my-maiden-name pro-life activist days! Look at that slightly androgynous hippy chic awesomeness I exude! Ohhh yeah.

So I was looking over some of my old conservative / pro-life / First Amendment opinion columns and thought I’d repost some of them here on my Domestic Geek Girl blog from time to time. I mean, my random articles and commentaries are currently splattered randomly on the interwebs, but they’re not really located all in one place on the web ever since I retired from full time activism and have instead settled into attending the occasional right-wing brouhaha from time to time.

This blog is, and most likely primarily always will be all about babies, domestic duties, health, home, generic wellness and my budding green living lifestyle and, as always, random acts of geekery. But you all know I’m a hopeless bitter clinger, so expect the occasional “Politics & Patriotism” post from time to time, especially as I flesh out my blog with some old school rabble rousing goodness.

Anyhoo. Here’s a piece I wrote for The Examiner back in January of 2011. ^_^

What with the delusions of deity and supremacy running rampant in Washington, I figured I’d like to brush up on some good ol’ Constitutional and Declarational 101 amidst all the Obama administration shenanigans. So let’s just cut to the chase:

The role of the government is to protect life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. And in that order.

The now-famous “right to privacy” which secured the “right to abortion” in the Roe vs. Wade trial is not actually in the Constitution or the Declaration. When it was worked into the document to validate legalized child slaughter, the “right to privacy” actually fell under the category of “the right to happiness”.

Now. Let’s go over our numbers again. In the scale of rights, life is first. Liberty is second. And happiness comes last of all the fundamental rights.

This is why stalkers aren’t free to pursue their happiness of stalking, murderers aren’t free to pursue their happiness of murdering and – logic would dictate – abortionists should not be free to pursue whatever twisted happiness they derive from violently dismembering thrashing babies in the womb.

The right to life is superior to the right to privacy; therefore a fetus’ right to live supersedes a woman’s right to privacy. I’m not going to exhaust myself doubling the length of this article with biological facts and common sense tidbits that indisputably prove the life and humanity of the fetus. I’ll just assume that everyone reading this has an elementary school level of education and continue on.

The hierarchy of rights is really very simple, and well established in our nation. This is why registered sex offenders right to privacy is overshadowed by the rights of the people to be safe from Pedro the Candy Peddler. Sex offenders have lost their right to privacy, because they have violated the superior rights of someone else.

This is also why – to the dismay of many of Planned Parenthoods male supporters – child pornography is prohibited on private computers. (Planned Parenthood still has trouble grasping this one as well, judging by their proposal to the 2010 U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child, where they pushed for the “right” of children to be able to “express themselves sexually” – including being participants in pornography and prostitution.) But, no matter how wistfully PP may salivate over a world where every 8 year old is a kinky little slut and all 12 year olds are veterans to the abortion stirrups, the Constitution is still abundantly clear: Even in the privacy of your own home, you can’t view children being sexually exploited because the child’s right supersedes the adults’ right to privacy. (This comes as a crushing blow to David Ogden, Obama’s hand-picked Deputy Attorney General, who is adamantly pro-child pornography. Hm. Constitutional retardation must run in the party?)

No matter how private the abortion clinic may be, no matter how private the abortion chair is and no matter how private the sex life of the mother, no amount of “privacy and / or happiness” supersedes a child’s right to not be decapitated and raped with a giant suction tube.

If we are to apply Constitutional law in its entirety and preserve the documents that ensure our God-given rights as Americans, we must insist that the government do its duty in protecting children in the womb, just as it is the government’s duty to protect children from being molested, women from being raped, or any other violation of unalienable rights.

Petulant feminazis don’t realize that when they rail against the government potentially taking away “their abortions” by enforcing the Constitution, they are joining the ranks of those who railed against “their slaves” being taken away by that same pesky document. No one has or has ever had an inalienable right to harm another human being. To do so is un-Constitutional, lawless, selfish, and in the case of abortion – cold blooded murder.

Come on people. These truths are “self-evident”. (That’s Founding Fathers speak for “no duh”.)