© Copyright 2013-2014 Brass Serpent Productions LLC. All Rights Reserved.
The 100% Pro-Life Blog of
Gaius Famius
No Abortion. No Capital Punishment.
No War. No Euthanasia.
Thoughts on the Injustices of the Supreme Court
by Gaius Famius
Published January 14, 2014
So that no one misunderstands what we are about to write below, let us state up front where we stand on the issue of abortion and abortion clinics. Abortion is the murder and execution of Unborn baby humans in all circumstances, without exceptions. Abortion clinics are the slaughterhouses where these crimes against humanity are committed. As a crime against humanity, abortionists and abortion clinics have forfeited all of their own civil rights, and in a world that actually possessed justice, they would be hounded to the ends of the earth until they could be arrested and tried for these crimes. Their clinics would be treated as crime scenes and seized by the local government and held for evidence. Communities would come together, and en masse, block off access to these “clinics” and prevent their use, just as a just community would do everything possible to shut down a storefront run by a serial killer that advertised for children to be brought in and slaughtered by the serial killer's knife. For that is exactly what abortion is.
However, in the legal world, there is no such thing as human justice. The law protects those who practice the barbaric slaughter of innocent Unborn human children, and imprisons those who speak out against legalized infanticide. The following article is about the law, and not about justice.
In a case currently before the Supreme Court, McCullen v. Coakley, a long term pro-life protester is fighting against a law passed by the state of Massachusetts that places a 35 foot buffer zone around abortion clinics. This buffer zone prevents protestors from getting too close to the abortion clinic so that the clinic can operate, and it's customers can come and go freely.
In order to understand how tenuous the case is, it must be looked at neutrally, supposedly the way that the court will look at it. Although in an activist court, nothing is neutral.
A legal business, attempting to go about it's legal business, is being prevented from having it's customers freely enter and leave it's premises without being directly confronted by protestors who do not agree with the customer's choices, and even if physical restraint is not being used by the protestors, the customers are being emotionally and intellectually restrained from engaging in a legal activity.
To understand, let us take the issue of abortion off the table. We will look at a couple of different examples of legal businesses and their customers.
A gas station sells oil based products derived from fracking and environmental protestors are physically at the very edge of the gas station property, preventing the gas station's customers from being able to freely enter and leave it's premises without direct confrontation.
A grocery store selling products full of high fructose corn syrup has health food protestors right at the front door, preventing the use of the grocery carts, and loudly proclaiming the benefits of a healthy life without junk food. The grocery store customers are being prevented from freely entering and leaving the premises of the food store they have chosen to buy their food at.
A health food store is mobbed by pro-factory beef protestors because the store does not sell beef from the local slaughterhouse. The health food store customers are being prevented from freely entering and leaving the premises of the health food store they have chosen to buy their food at.
A church has atheist protestors mobbing the sidewalks and standing in the driveway during morning services protesting the worship of a “non-existent” God. The protestors are preventing the church goers from being able to freely enter and leave the church premises in order to exercise their freedom of religion.
A bookstore is surrounded by protestors opposed to the release of a new book, and the customers are being prevented from being able to freely enter and leave the bookstore in order to buy the new book, or maybe they are looking for another book. The protestors are preventing the book store customers from being able to exercise their right to free speech by buying the books they want to read.
A pregnancy health center is mobbed by pro-abortion protestors who do everything they can to dissuade anyone from entering the pregnancy health center and considering the PHC's information and services. The protestors are preventing pregnant mothers from exercising their free speech rights to fully inform themselves of the options for their babies.
The truth is that all legal, non-criminal businesses should be entitled to have a reasonable buffer zone, and 35 feet is reasonable. If I was a business owner, I would be entitled to have a place of business where I and my customers could come and go without being directly confronted. The buffer zone law should be a standard protection for all business owners.
The buffer zone is necessary because even though current laws can be used to remove protestors that actually trespass on the business's property, the access to most businesses is by public common areas, and if these areas are blocked or full of protestors, then free access to the business is restricted. The buffer zone therefore keeps these public common areas clear of protestors so that they can be used for their intended purpose, which is a means of access to the business so it's customers can freely enter and exit with being harassed, or pressured, whether physically, or even emotionally and intellectually.
Let us here remind the reader that we do not believe that abortion clinics are entitled to any protections of the law because they are organized centers for committing heinous crimes against humanity, and do not deserve any legal protections, anymore than the gas chambers of Auschwitz deserved legal protection. Buffer zones should be a legal protection for all legal business, but never for organizations that engage in crimes against humanity.
A buffer zone is not a violation of free speech. Buffer zones protect the free speech of the business owner and the business customers to freely engage in their legal business without undue harassment. Being pressured to not buy the product or service of a particular business right at the entrance way of that particular business does constitute harassment, even if no physical attempts are made to restrain the customers.
Don't misunderstand us, we don't think that abortion should be legal at all, and every abortion clinic should have the legal status of drug dealers' crack houses, subject to raids and seizures and arrests, and people in a neighborhood should be free to block complete access to any drug house, or abortion clinic.
However, in the eyes of the Supreme Court, abortion clinics are legal businesses engaged in legal business activity. Since abortion clinics are legal, then like all legal businesses, they should have the right to protect access to their businesses without their customers being harassed. Under this basis, it is highly unlikely the buffer zone will be struck down.
In addition, the Supreme Court has demonstrated that it views abortion as a women's right and will provide extra protection for that right. Since the buffer zone law in question is aimed squarely at protecting abortion clinics and not all businesses on an equal basis, the Court will protect this law like it is a holy grail. Under current American constitutional law, abortion and abortion related services are protected, just as slavery once was under the same constitution.
It is on this basis that the Supreme Court will uphold the buffer zones, and most likely expand them. But only for abortion clinics. An expansion of the buffer zone concept to legitimately cover all businesses will not happen.
In our opinion it is must likely that the Supreme Court will uphold the buffer zone, and if it takes an activist stance, possibly expand the buffer zone, and make it clear under what circumstances every state can pass a buffer zone law and the legally acceptable limit of a buffer zone law. Since the Supreme Court is doing everything it can to protect abortion, it probably will take such steps to signal to every state what it can do. Any state then passing a buffer zone law, up to the limit of the Supreme Court limits will be protected from lawsuits because the Supreme Court will have already ruled.
If we look at the 2000 Supreme Court case of Hill v Colorado, a much more conservative Court upheld a 100 foot buffer zone protecting hospitals. This provides a precedence for expanding buffer zones up to 100 feet for abortion clinics. The Supreme Court could easily state that abortion clinic buffer zones are equally applied to all abortion clinics, and that a valid government interest exists in protecting the rights of women.
Of course, the law is not equally applied to all businesses, and all businesses should be provided with an equal buffer zone to whatever the Supreme Court decides upon for abortion clinics. Cases based upon a demand for full equality of businesses to protect their's and their customer's rights to free speech, freedom of religion, freedom of association, etc. should be found and laws granting buffer zones for all businesses should be pursued. If the laws of actual equal protection of all business are struck down by lower courts, then there would be good reason to appeal cases up to the Supreme Court demanding fair and equal treatment of all business, or the striking down of all buffer zone laws. This line of reasoning is not available to the Supreme Court under the current lawsuit because this lawsuit was not filed by another business, but by a protestor.
The buffer zone laws for abortion clinics will be upheld to specifically prevent pro-lifer protestors from working to defend the lives of children about to be legally slaughtered in legal slaughterhouses.
It should not be illegal to defend the life of an innocent child, but the day is coming when all pro-life actions will be banned, whether at 35 feet or 3500 feet.
If the buffer zone case is lost, then pro-lifers will need to find ways to start reaching women and girls thinking about abortions long before they ever get within reach of a buffer zone, especially now that they can buy do-it-yourself abortion pills at any pharmacy.
If you still have hope that this Supreme Court will do anything to restrict abortion in any way, then look at the other current news where the Supreme Court refused to even hear the abortion after 20 weeks ban case. On January 13, 2014, the Supreme Court decided not to hear the appeal by the State of Arizona in Home v. Isaacson after a lower court declared that the Arizona law HB 2036 “The Mother's Health and Safety Act”, which severely restricts abortion after 20 weeks, violated a woman's rights.
This case provided the Supreme Court the opportunity to lower nationally the maximum point of abortion on demand by lowering the point of viability from 24 weeks (1992), which was lowered from 28 weeks in Roe v. Wade (1973). Since it is easily proven that with proper medical support, almost any baby is viable at 20 weeks, the Arizona case was a perfect case for the Supreme Court to further restrict abortion.
Instead the Supreme Court refused to even hear the case. Effectively this upholds abortion on demand until 24 weeks without even having to issue a ruling. The Supreme court went against all current science by refusing to hear this case, and abortion on demand until 24 weeks is now the undeniable law of the land with almost no possibility that the 24 weeks can be lowered to 20 weeks.
The Supreme Court's refusal to hear the appeal means that 20-week abortion bans of ten other states will also be challenged in court, and on this precedence will be overturned by lower courts, effectively ending the movement to pass 20-week bans nationwide. The Supreme Court has just made it clear that they support abortion on demand until 24 weeks. All of the other courts will take notice, and bring themselves into alignment. Remember, the refusal by the Supreme Court to hear a case bears almost as much weight as actually ruling on a case.
Even the movement to pass a national 20-week ban is now in serious jeopardy. Should such a national law pass, it would be immediately tied up in lawsuits, and until such a law made it's way up to the Supreme Court, lower court injunctions would keep it from being implemented. At that point, the Supreme Court could still refuse to hear it, effectively striking down the law without even a hearing. If the Supreme Court were to review the law, it is highly unlikely that it would take that opportunity to lower the abortion on demand limit from 24 to 20 weeks.
We must ask, does the Supreme court only hear abortion cases that give it the opportunity to restrict and strike down pro-lifers? Because the Supreme Court isn't doing anything to restrict abortion.
At the Supreme Court level, the pro-lifers are losing and will continue to lose many more cases as an activist court works to make abortion common and funded by all.
There is no justice for the innocent Unborn babies in America under the Supreme Court, just as there was no justice for the slaves in America under the Dred Scott Decision of 1857.
The American Supreme Court's refusal in the 1850s to protect an entire class of humans, the black people, under constitutional law, led directly to the American Civil War. In the 21st century, the American Supreme Court's refusal to protect another entire class of humans, Unborn babies, will lead to serious and grave consequences of a nature that we are unable to predict.
When nations enslave or practice genocide against a portion of it's population under the guise of laws and justice, it is the inevitable lesson of history that that nation will fall by one means or another. Personally we believe in a Living God that will not much longer ignore the silent cries of the slaughtered millions of babies whose blood has soaked the ground of a once free nation. When God chooses to judge, His judgment does not respect the immoral and unjust judgments of judges that refuse to protect the innocent.
The point being that it has now become clear that pro-lifers must stop putting their hopes in a Supreme Court that has no intention of protecting the lives of the innocent Unborn, and must put all of their hopes for absolutely abolishing abortion in the ability of the only Living God to change the hearts of the people against abortion one person at a time through the sweat and work of the pro-lifers spreading the pro-life message of the right to life for all humans person to person, everywhere.
If every American had a website or blog declaring their support for the absolute right to life of all humans from the moment of fertilization, then the opinions of the Supreme Court would become irrelevant.
Woe to her that is filthy and polluted, to the oppressing city!
She obeyed not the voice;
she received not correction;
she trusted not in the Lord;
she drew not near to her God.
Her princes within her are roaring lions;
her judges are evening wolves;
they gnaw not the bones till the morrow.
Her prophets are light and treacherous persons:
her priests have polluted the sanctuary,
they have done violence to the law.
The just Lord is in the midst thereof;
he will not do iniquity;
every morning doth he bring his judgment to light,
he faileth not;
bu the unjust knoweth no shame.
I have cut off the nations:
their towers are desolate;
I made their streets waste, that none passeth by:
their cities are destroyed, so that there is no man, that there is none inhabitant.
Zephaniah 3:1-6
But Jesus called them unto him, and said,
“Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not:
for of such is the kingdom of God.”
Luke 18:16
“But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone where hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.”
Jesus in Matthew 18:6
“Therefore, as I live”, says the Lord God, “I will prepare thee unto blood, and blood shall pursue thee: since thou hast not hated blood, even blood shall pursue thee.”
Ezekial 35:6
For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;
And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an example unto those that after should live ungodly;
The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished:
II Peter 2:4,6,9
For the Lord is our judge, the Lord is our lawgiver
Isaiah 33:22
The message is clear. There is no justice in man's laws, but only in the laws of God. Unjust laws and their judges will be judged by God no matter how legal or constitutional they are in the eyes of men because they are illegal in the eyes of God. The silent cries of the Unborn are heard by God who has promised to avenge innocent blood. The justice of God is not ruled upon by judges, and if the fallen angels, and so many peoples of the ancient world were judged for their evil, then who are we to think that we will escape judgment merely because we live in the modern world?
There is nothing that we mere men can or should do to make such judgment happen, but we must proclaim the truth, stand on the truth, and not be complicit in any manner with the shedding of blood by unjust laws and judges. If we hope to escape the judgment of God ourselves, our hands must be free of innocent blood, and we must preach the laws and justice of God and the way of repentance for those who wish to turn from their sins. Otherwise, there is no escaping the justice of a righteous God who does not respect laws, constitutions, and courts that sanction evil against innocent blood, even the innocent blood of Unborn babies.
The true Supreme Court is the Supreme Court of God's Justice before His throne in heaven, and all other earthly courts are subject to being reviewed by the Supreme Court of God.
Choose you this day whose laws you will obey, the laws of men, or the laws of God.
And Elijah came unto the all the people, and said, “How long will you vacillate between two opinions? If Yahweh be God, follow Him. But if Baal, then follow him.”
I Kings 18:21
Copyright 2014 by Brass Serpent Productions LLC
This article may be redistributed for free in it’s entirety, but may not be reposted on any other website, without written permission of Brass Serpent Productions LLC, and must include everything, unedited, including the two links below, and the citations:
http://www.stopinfanticide.com
http://www.brassserpent.com
Below are citations for more background information.
Supreme Court to decide on constitutionality of statewide abortion clinic barrier
Supreme Court refuses to hear appeal in case striking down 20-week abortion ban