Today's Challenge Concerning Abortion

As a Republican I am pro-life. I have not been convinced by Supreme Court rulings, legislation passed in the state of Vermont, political organizations or individuals to be swayed in my opinion and beliefs concerning this issue. In June 2019, Governor Phil Scott signed R-57, that protects a women's right to an abortion from restrictions at any age or for any reason. Women in Vermont in Vermont have a choice and I hope that any woman who finds herself pregnant will choose not to have an abortion. Societal norms have shifted over the decades in their vantage of an unwed mother. Today, unwed mothers are viewed as courageous, independent and of moral fiber. Decades ago that wasn't the case. One travesty that I envision happening at the present time is that young women, to avoid their parents anger, will, for that reason, choose to have an abortion. As a result, a human life ends. Another reason why some young women might be choosing to abort their child may be the fear or uncertainly of the future.
Some History, Facts and Information Concerning Abortion The framers of the Constitution chose to abridge our God Given Rights as beginning at birth. More than 200 years ago a birth of a nation gave rise to a definition of human rights that cast aside what rights exist before birth. We should recognize that as we only define rights and do not grant them, the moral question concerning abortion should be revisited and defined to include what has been granted to them by a divine power, that is, the right to life and to be born however Mother Nature would permit. Without a voice to speak his or her own opinion and without a means of defense, the God-given means to grow to self-sustaining human life may, due to United States Supreme Court decisions based upon the 14th Amendment, be terminated without crime, without due process, without judgment, without the opportunity to be become acquainted with society or his or her own mother and father, or to become educated- to conjugate- to promulgate- to work- to play-to live or to dream. The United States Supreme Court is, in this case, the body of governance that maintains that the freedom of the mother is protected by the 14th Amendment. There is no law stating that abortion must be protected by the Federal Government and no Constitutional Amendment stating that Abortion is a Constitutional Right. There is, however, the language in the 14th Amendment that is referenced. Planned Parenthood vs. Casey was decided June 29, 1992 and allowed for viability to become determinant to the definition of the onset of human life. The decision replaced Roe vs. Wade trimester definition pertaining to abortion and allowed for abortions to occur up to 24 weeks into a pregnancy. With viability having become a determinant, fetuses are being aborted within the fifth month of pregnancy. This allowance brings to the foreground further moral questions concerning this issue. While viability or the probability of a fetus to survive outside of the womb at 24 weeks is 50%. 23 weeks -20% to 35%, we are, without a doubt in my mind, referring to living human beings. While some states have sought to set forth restrictions on abortion clinics by way of imposing hospital standards, the Planned Parenthood vs. Casey decision also found that a legal restriction that places an undue burden is one that places, "a substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion of a nonviable fetus." That obstacle also includes imposing standards on an abortion clinic if the intent of those restrictions is to deny access to the abortion procedure, as defined by the Supreme Court in this decision. The Court determined that the practice is an infringement of a woman's right to choose. Note that while the United States Supreme Court defines "undue" as a "substantial obstacle", the Vermont General Assembly furthered the law in Vermont to maintain that "any" restriction that would stand in the way of a woman who seeks an abortion is illegal.
To be fearful of repercussions or financial distress, isn't to be free to choose. Those who believe in the right to life, as I do, may win the battle over time. However, in the meantime, let's enable young mothers to be free to choose, with regard to financial, medical and educational security. While many entitlements exist, young pregnant women who are faced with the choice of whether or not to have a baby, must also make this choice despite some seemingly insurmountable odds, at present. Let's provide young mothers with a legislative framework that will make for the simple choice of whether or not to have an abortion to be a decision solely based upon that one question. Parents- please talk to your daughter. Don't let your disappointment or anger be the reason why your granddaughter or grandson's life ends. Also, please talk to them about birth control and, if you choose, if you assist your daughter with contraceptives you might be able to avoid the whole life changing decision. Without specific language allowing Abortion to be legal or a Constitutional Right, it has become so with a cost to our society that is very difficult to measure. Meanwhile, the very basis of the United States Supreme Court's decisions is the 14th Amendment that was not fashioned for this purpose. The 14th Amendment was fashioned for the purpose of freeing all those in the United States of slavery who had been denied their equality and human rights as equal citizens. Both Roe vs Wade and Planned Parenthood depend on the language found in the 14th. Both decisions refer to a pregnancy as a possible infringement to one's God given liberty from the creation of a human life, also His artwork. The argument presumes that if His work negates itself we must be free to extract what we may, so as to allow for His work otherwise. Indeed, the argument presumes that we have the moral ability to choose and to end a human life before birth and with good conscience. First, I disagree with the extended interpretation of the 14th. The interpretation of the Amendment to include a woman's freedom to abort an unborn child was not its intent and is not found in its language. I also disagree, based upon this extended interpretation or otherwise, the presumption that we, as a people, are within the moral fiber of what He has set forth to end the life of an unborn child so as to enable what has been granted to us otherwise. That a woman, for some months, must carry a child and give birth is viewed as an infringement- courtesy of Mother Nature and the Hand that created her. However, infringement, relative to Constitutional Rights and the law relates to a person or persons to another or others, not the course of human events or what Mother Nature and a Divine power grows or grants. Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness, as the framers intended, referenced one's natural capabilities and natural course, with the Bill of Rights protecting and empowering people and governments in relation to each other with respect to what is born to us. In 2019, the "Heartbeat Laws" passed in the states of Ohio, Georgia, Louisiana and Missouri that makes an abortion illegal as soon as a heartbeat can be detected. North Dakota was the first state to pass a "Heartbeat Law" in 2013 and was overruled as unconstitutional in 2015. Alabama, that was the first state to enact a "Heartbeat Law" in 2014 that withstood such scrutiny and later prohibited abortion in its entirety in 2019. Called the "Human Life Protection Act". the law bans abortion other than in the case of a medical emergency is temporarily blocked from taking effect. Since 1973, the Guttmacher Institute estimates that more than 60 million abortions have occurred in the United States. That number contrasts sharply with the total from the Center for Disease Control, that gages the total number of abortions occurring in the United States for the same period at just over 40 million. In 2017, 862,320 abortions occurred in the United States(Guttmacher), down from its peak of 1,608,600 in 1990. The CDC reported 1,429,427 million abortions for the same year.
As a Republican I am pro-life. I have not been convinced by Supreme Court rulings, legislation passed in the state of Vermont, political organizations or individuals to be swayed in my opinion and beliefs concerning this issue. In June 2019, Governor Phil Scott signed R-57, that protects a women's right to an abortion from restrictions at any age or for any reason. Women in Vermont in Vermont have a choice and I hope that any woman who finds herself pregnant will choose not to have an abortion. Societal norms have shifted over the decades in their vantage of an unwed mother. Today, unwed mothers are viewed as courageous, independent and of moral fiber. Decades ago that wasn't the case. One travesty that I envision happening at the present time is that young women, to avoid their parents anger, will, for that reason, choose to have an abortion. As a result, a human life ends. Another reason why some young women might be choosing to abort their child may be the fear or uncertainly of the future.
Some History, Facts and Information Concerning Abortion The framers of the Constitution chose to abridge our God Given Rights as beginning at birth. More than 200 years ago a birth of a nation gave rise to a definition of human rights that cast aside what rights exist before birth. We should recognize that as we only define rights and do not grant them, the moral question concerning abortion should be revisited and defined to include what has been granted to them by a divine power, that is, the right to life and to be born however Mother Nature would permit. Without a voice to speak his or her own opinion and without a means of defense, the God-given means to grow to self-sustaining human life may, due to United States Supreme Court decisions based upon the 14th Amendment, be terminated without crime, without due process, without judgment, without the opportunity to be become acquainted with society or his or her own mother and father, or to become educated- to conjugate- to promulgate- to work- to play-to live or to dream. The United States Supreme Court is, in this case, the body of governance that maintains that the freedom of the mother is protected by the 14th Amendment. There is no law stating that abortion must be protected by the Federal Government and no Constitutional Amendment stating that Abortion is a Constitutional Right. There is, however, the language in the 14th Amendment that is referenced. Planned Parenthood vs. Casey was decided June 29, 1992 and allowed for viability to become determinant to the definition of the onset of human life. The decision replaced Roe vs. Wade trimester definition pertaining to abortion and allowed for abortions to occur up to 24 weeks into a pregnancy. With viability having become a determinant, fetuses are being aborted within the fifth month of pregnancy. This allowance brings to the foreground further moral questions concerning this issue. While viability or the probability of a fetus to survive outside of the womb at 24 weeks is 50%. 23 weeks -20% to 35%, we are, without a doubt in my mind, referring to living human beings. While some states have sought to set forth restrictions on abortion clinics by way of imposing hospital standards, the Planned Parenthood vs. Casey decision also found that a legal restriction that places an undue burden is one that places, "a substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion of a nonviable fetus." That obstacle also includes imposing standards on an abortion clinic if the intent of those restrictions is to deny access to the abortion procedure, as defined by the Supreme Court in this decision. The Court determined that the practice is an infringement of a woman's right to choose. Note that while the United States Supreme Court defines "undue" as a "substantial obstacle", the Vermont General Assembly furthered the law in Vermont to maintain that "any" restriction that would stand in the way of a woman who seeks an abortion is illegal.
To be fearful of repercussions or financial distress, isn't to be free to choose. Those who believe in the right to life, as I do, may win the battle over time. However, in the meantime, let's enable young mothers to be free to choose, with regard to financial, medical and educational security. While many entitlements exist, young pregnant women who are faced with the choice of whether or not to have a baby, must also make this choice despite some seemingly insurmountable odds, at present. Let's provide young mothers with a legislative framework that will make for the simple choice of whether or not to have an abortion to be a decision solely based upon that one question. Parents- please talk to your daughter. Don't let your disappointment or anger be the reason why your granddaughter or grandson's life ends. Also, please talk to them about birth control and, if you choose, if you assist your daughter with contraceptives you might be able to avoid the whole life changing decision. Without specific language allowing Abortion to be legal or a Constitutional Right, it has become so with a cost to our society that is very difficult to measure. Meanwhile, the very basis of the United States Supreme Court's decisions is the 14th Amendment that was not fashioned for this purpose. The 14th Amendment was fashioned for the purpose of freeing all those in the United States of slavery who had been denied their equality and human rights as equal citizens. Both Roe vs Wade and Planned Parenthood depend on the language found in the 14th. Both decisions refer to a pregnancy as a possible infringement to one's God given liberty from the creation of a human life, also His artwork. The argument presumes that if His work negates itself we must be free to extract what we may, so as to allow for His work otherwise. Indeed, the argument presumes that we have the moral ability to choose and to end a human life before birth and with good conscience. First, I disagree with the extended interpretation of the 14th. The interpretation of the Amendment to include a woman's freedom to abort an unborn child was not its intent and is not found in its language. I also disagree, based upon this extended interpretation or otherwise, the presumption that we, as a people, are within the moral fiber of what He has set forth to end the life of an unborn child so as to enable what has been granted to us otherwise. That a woman, for some months, must carry a child and give birth is viewed as an infringement- courtesy of Mother Nature and the Hand that created her. However, infringement, relative to Constitutional Rights and the law relates to a person or persons to another or others, not the course of human events or what Mother Nature and a Divine power grows or grants. Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness, as the framers intended, referenced one's natural capabilities and natural course, with the Bill of Rights protecting and empowering people and governments in relation to each other with respect to what is born to us. In 2019, the "Heartbeat Laws" passed in the states of Ohio, Georgia, Louisiana and Missouri that makes an abortion illegal as soon as a heartbeat can be detected. North Dakota was the first state to pass a "Heartbeat Law" in 2013 and was overruled as unconstitutional in 2015. Alabama, that was the first state to enact a "Heartbeat Law" in 2014 that withstood such scrutiny and later prohibited abortion in its entirety in 2019. Called the "Human Life Protection Act". the law bans abortion other than in the case of a medical emergency is temporarily blocked from taking effect. Since 1973, the Guttmacher Institute estimates that more than 60 million abortions have occurred in the United States. That number contrasts sharply with the total from the Center for Disease Control, that gages the total number of abortions occurring in the United States for the same period at just over 40 million. In 2017, 862,320 abortions occurred in the United States(Guttmacher), down from its peak of 1,608,600 in 1990. The CDC reported 1,429,427 million abortions for the same year.
As a Republican I am pro-life. I have not been convinced by Supreme Court rulings, legislation passed in the state of Vermont, political organizations or individuals to be swayed in my opinion and beliefs concerning this issue. In June 2019, Governor Phil Scott signed R-57, that protects a women's right to an abortion from restrictions at any age or for any reason. Women in Vermont in Vermont have a choice and I hope that any woman who finds herself pregnant will choose not to have an abortion. Societal norms have shifted over the decades in their vantage of an unwed mother. Today, unwed mothers are viewed as courageous, independent and of moral fiber. Decades ago that wasn't the case. One travesty that I envision happening at the present time is that young women, to avoid their parents anger, will, for that reason, choose to have an abortion. As a result, a human life ends. Another reason why some young women might be choosing to abort their child may be the fear or uncertainly of the future. Some History, Facts and Information Concerning Abortion The framers of the Constitution chose to abridge our God Given Rights as beginning at birth. More than 200 years ago a birth of a nation gave rise to a definition of human rights that cast aside what rights exist before birth. We should recognize that as we only define rights and do not grant them, the moral question concerning abortion should be revisited and defined to include what has been granted to them by a divine power, that is, the right to life and to be born however Mother Nature would permit. Without a voice to speak his or her own opinion and without a means of defense, the God-given means to grow to self-sustaining human life may, due to United States Supreme Court decisions based upon the 14th Amendment, be terminated without crime, without due process, without judgment, without the opportunity to be become acquainted with society or his or her own mother and father, or to become educated- to conjugate- to promulgate- to work- to play-to live or to dream. The United States Supreme Court is, in this case, the body of governance that maintains that the freedom of the mother is protected by the 14th Amendment. There is no law stating that abortion must be protected by the Federal Government and no Constitutional Amendment stating that Abortion is a Constitutional Right. There is, however, the language in the 14th Amendment that is referenced. Planned Parenthood vs. Casey was decided June 29, 1992 and allowed for viability to become determinant to the definition of the onset of human life. The decision replaced Roe vs. Wade trimester definition pertaining to abortion and allowed for abortions to occur up to 24 weeks into a pregnancy. With viability having become a determinant, fetuses are being aborted within the fifth month of pregnancy. This allowance brings to the foreground further moral questions concerning this issue. While viability or the probability of a fetus to survive outside of the womb at 24 weeks is 50%. 23 weeks -20% to 35%, we are, without a doubt in my mind, referring to living human beings. While some states have sought to set forth restrictions on abortion clinics by way of imposing hospital standards, the Planned Parenthood vs. Casey decision also found that a legal restriction that places an undue burden is one that places, "a substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion of a nonviable fetus." That obstacle also includes imposing standards on an abortion clinic if the intent of those restrictions is to deny access to the abortion procedure, as defined by the Supreme Court in this decision. The Court determined that the practice is an infringement of a woman's right to choose. Note that while the United States Supreme Court defines "undue" as a "substantial obstacle", the Vermont General Assembly furthered the law in Vermont to maintain that "any" restriction that would stand in the way of a woman who seeks an abortion is illegal.
To be fearful of repercussions or financial distress, isn't to be free to choose. Those who believe in the right to life, as I do, may win the battle over time. However, in the meantime, let's enable young mothers to be free to choose, with regard to financial, medical and educational security. While many entitlements exist, young pregnant women who are faced with the choice of whether or not to have a baby, must also make this choice despite some seemingly insurmountable odds, at present. Let's provide young mothers with a legislative framework that will make for the simple choice of whether or not to have an abortion to be a decision solely based upon that one question. Parents- please talk to your daughter. Don't let your disappointment or anger be the reason why your granddaughter or grandson's life ends. Also, please talk to them about birth control and, if you choose, if you assist your daughter with contraceptives you might be able to avoid the whole life changing decision. Without specific language allowing Abortion to be legal or a Constitutional Right, it has become so with a cost to our society that is very difficult to measure. Meanwhile, the very basis of the United States Supreme Court's decisions is the 14th Amendment that was not fashioned for this purpose. The 14th Amendment was fashioned for the purpose of freeing all those in the United States of slavery who had been denied their equality and human rights as equal citizens. Both Roe vs Wade and Planned Parenthood depend on the language found in the 14th. Both decisions refer to a pregnancy as a possible infringement to one's God given liberty from the creation of a human life, also His artwork. The argument presumes that if His work negates itself we must be free to extract what we may, so as to allow for His work otherwise. Indeed, the argument presumes that we have the moral ability to choose and to end a human life before birth and with good conscience. First, I disagree with the extended interpretation of the 14th. The interpretation of the Amendment to include a woman's freedom to abort an unborn child was not its intent and is not found in its language. I also disagree, based upon this extended interpretation or otherwise, the presumption that we, as a people, are within the moral fiber of what He has set forth to end the life of an unborn child so as to enable what has been granted to us otherwise. That a woman, for some months, must carry a child and give birth is viewed as an infringement- courtesy of Mother Nature and the Hand that created her. However, infringement, relative to Constitutional Rights and the law relates to a person or persons to another or others, not the course of human events or what Mother Nature and a Divine power grows or grants. Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness, as the framers intended, referenced one's natural capabilities and natural course, with the Bill of Rights protecting and empowering people and governments in relation to each other with respect to what is born to us. In 2019, the "Heartbeat Laws" passed in the states of Ohio, Georgia, Louisiana and Missouri that makes an abortion illegal as soon as a heartbeat can be detected. North Dakota was the first state to pass a "Heartbeat Law" in 2013 and was overruled as unconstitutional in 2015. Alabama, that was the first state to enact a "Heartbeat Law" in 2014 that withstood such scrutiny and later prohibited abortion in its entirety in 2019. Called the "Human Life Protection Act". the law bans abortion other than in the case of a medical emergency is temporarily blocked from taking effect. Since 1973, the Guttmacher Institute estimates that more than 60 million abortions have occurred in the United States. That number contrasts sharply with the total from the Center for Disease Control, that gages the total number of abortions occurring in the United States for the same period at just over 40 million. In 2017, 862,320 abortions occurred in the United States(Guttmacher), down from its peak of 1,608,600 in 1990. The CDC reported 1,429,427 million abortions for the same year.
As a Republican I am pro-life. I have not been convinced by Supreme Court rulings, legislation passed in the state of Vermont, political organizations or individuals to be swayed in my opinion and beliefs concerning this issue. In June 2019, Governor Phil Scott signed R-57, that protects a women's right to an abortion from restrictions at any age or for any reason. Women in Vermont in Vermont have a choice and I hope that any woman who finds herself pregnant will choose not to have an abortion. Societal norms have shifted over the decades in their vantage of an unwed mother. Today, unwed mothers are viewed as courageous, independent and of moral fiber. Decades ago that wasn't the case. One travesty that I envision happening at the present time is that young women, to avoid their parents anger, will, for that reason, choose to have an abortion. As a result, a human life ends. Another reason why some young women might be choosing to abort their child may be the fear or uncertainly of the future. Some History, Facts and Information Concerning Abortion The framers of the Constitution chose to abridge our God Given Rights as beginning at birth. More than 200 years ago a birth of a nation gave rise to a definition of human rights that cast aside what rights exist before birth. We should recognize that as we only define rights and do not grant them, the moral question concerning abortion should be revisited and defined to include what has been granted to them by a divine power, that is, the right to life and to be born however Mother Nature would permit. Without a voice to speak his or her own opinion and without a means of defense, the God-given means to grow to self-sustaining human life may, due to United States Supreme Court decisions based upon the 14th Amendment, be terminated without crime, without due process, without judgment, without the opportunity to be become acquainted with society or his or her own mother and father, or to become educated- to conjugate- to promulgate- to work- to play-to live or to dream. The United States Supreme Court is, in this case, the body of governance that maintains that the freedom of the mother is protected by the 14th Amendment. There is no law stating that abortion must be protected by the Federal Government and no Constitutional Amendment stating that Abortion is a Constitutional Right. There is, however, the language in the 14th Amendment that is referenced. Planned Parenthood vs. Casey was decided June 29, 1992 and allowed for viability to become determinant to the definition of the onset of human life. The decision replaced Roe vs. Wade trimester definition pertaining to abortion and allowed for abortions to occur up to 24 weeks into a pregnancy. With viability having become a determinant, fetuses are being aborted within the fifth month of pregnancy. This allowance brings to the foreground further moral questions concerning this issue. While viability or the probability of a fetus to survive outside of the womb at 24 weeks is 50%. 23 weeks -20% to 35%, we are, without a doubt in my mind, referring to living human beings. While some states have sought to set forth restrictions on abortion clinics by way of imposing hospital standards, the Planned Parenthood vs. Casey decision also found that a legal restriction that places an undue burden is one that places, "a substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion of a nonviable fetus." That obstacle also includes imposing standards on an abortion clinic if the intent of those restrictions is to deny access to the abortion procedure, as defined by the Supreme Court in this decision. The Court determined that the practice is an infringement of a woman's right to choose. Note that while the United States Supreme Court defines "undue" as a "substantial obstacle", the Vermont General Assembly furthered the law in Vermont to maintain that "any" restriction that would stand in the way of a woman who seeks an abortion is illegal.
To be fearful of repercussions or financial distress, isn't to be free to choose. Those who believe in the right to life, as I do, may win the battle over time. However, in the meantime, let's enable young mothers to be free to choose, with regard to financial, medical and educational security. While many entitlements exist, young pregnant women who are faced with the choice of whether or not to have a baby, must also make this choice despite some seemingly insurmountable odds, at present. Let's provide young mothers with a legislative framework that will make for the simple choice of whether or not to have an abortion to be a decision solely based upon that one question. Parents- please talk to your daughter. Don't let your disappointment or anger be the reason why your granddaughter or grandson's life ends. Also, please talk to them about birth control and, if you choose, if you assist your daughter with contraceptives you might be able to avoid the whole life changing decision. Without specific language allowing Abortion to be legal or a Constitutional Right, it has become so with a cost to our society that is very difficult to measure. Meanwhile, the very basis of the United States Supreme Court's decisions is the 14th Amendment that was not fashioned for this purpose. The 14th Amendment was fashioned for the purpose of freeing all those in the United States of slavery who had been denied their equality and human rights as equal citizens. Both Roe vs Wade and Planned Parenthood depend on the language found in the 14th. Both decisions refer to a pregnancy as a possible infringement to one's God given liberty from the creation of a human life, also His artwork. The argument presumes that if His work negates itself we must be free to extract what we may, so as to allow for His work otherwise. Indeed, the argument presumes that we have the moral ability to choose and to end a human life before birth and with good conscience. First, I disagree with the extended interpretation of the 14th. The interpretation of the Amendment to include a woman's freedom to abort an unborn child was not its intent and is not found in its language. I also disagree, based upon this extended interpretation or otherwise, the presumption that we, as a people, are within the moral fiber of what He has set forth to end the life of an unborn child so as to enable what has been granted to us otherwise. That a woman, for some months, must carry a child and give birth is viewed as an infringement- courtesy of Mother Nature and the Hand that created her. However, infringement, relative to Constitutional Rights and the law relates to a person or persons to another or others, not the course of human events or what Mother Nature and a Divine power grows or grants. Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness, as the framers intended, referenced one's natural capabilities and natural course, with the Bill of Rights protecting and empowering people and governments in relation to each other with respect to what is born to us. In 2019, the "Heartbeat Laws" passed in the states of Ohio, Georgia, Louisiana and Missouri that makes an abortion illegal as soon as a heartbeat can be detected. North Dakota was the first state to pass a "Heartbeat Law" in 2013 and was overruled as unconstitutional in 2015. Alabama, that was the first state to enact a "Heartbeat Law" in 2014 that withstood such scrutiny and later prohibited abortion in its entirety in 2019. Called the "Human Life Protection Act". the law bans abortion other than in the case of a medical emergency is temporarily blocked from taking effect. Since 1973, the Guttmacher Institute estimates that more than 60 million abortions have occurred in the United States. That number contrasts sharply with the total from the Center for Disease Control, that gages the total number of abortions occurring in the United States for the same period at just over 40 million. In 2017, 862,320 abortions occurred in the United States(Guttmacher), down from its peak of 1,608,600 in 1990. The CDC reported 1,429,427 million abortions for the same year.