by Randall Terry, Founder, Society for Truth and Justice, and Operation Rescue
In the middle of Missy Smith’s heroic effort to run TV ads in DC showing aborted babies (see ads at MissySmith.com and help her if you can!) another battle is raging. It concerns the personhood amendment efforts in several states.
The goal of these initiatives is to declare at the state level, that a “person” is present at conception. Such a person is a legal being, whose rights shall be protected by law, as well as any other person.
Conceptually, this could pave the way for laws protecting “persons” from assault or murder to apply also to “persons” who yet reside in their mothers’ womb.
Here are samples of the wording:
Colorado:
Section 32. Person defined. As used in sections 3, 6, and 25 of Article II of the state constitution, the term “person” shall apply to every human being from the beginning of the biological development of that human being.
Florida:
Section 28. Person Defined.—
- The words “person” and “natural person” apply to all human beings, irrespective of age, race, health, function, condition of physical and/or mental dependency and/or disability, or method of reproduction, from the beginning of the biological development of that human being.
- This amendment shall take effect on the first day of the next regular legislative session occurring after voter approval of this amendment.
Other states have similar projects under way. Take a look at PersonHood.net for more information.
The State Battles for Personhood for the Unborn
Those Catholic groups (and some Protestant ones) who stand against the personhood amendment initiatives are wrong on four fronts: 1) ethically; 2) historically; 3) politically; and 4) judicially. I will shortly prove my point. First, concerning the Catholic bishops who oppose these efforts, we should fear for their souls; they have led their flocks astray on a life and death matter, and will give account for this at a dreadful judgment. I proffer that the opposition of certain Catholic bishops to the personhood amendments is not connected to their Catholicism —which would demand that they fight for babies with all their might, according to the duties laid down in Evangelium Vitae by John Paul II —but rather their refusal to follow genuine Catholic teaching. I think the opposition we see (from cleric and layman, Catholic and Protestant) is a brew of ignorance, arrogance, perhaps laziness, with a fear of conflict, bad press, and of drawn out sacrifice. Please let me make my case.
1) Ethically, we have no right not to fight. We must fight as if our own lives hung in the balance. If you were about to be ripped apart, and the personhood initiative had the remotest chance to save your life (I will explain how it could in a moment), neither I, nor any bishop, nor any lay political activist has the right to say “It is not the right time.” Jesus said, “Do unto others what you would have them do unto you.” If you or I were threatened with murder, we would want every Biblical, Constitutional and reasonable tool available used for our rescue, however slim the chance of success.
Second (in regards to ethics), abortion is murder. It is a violation of the command, “You Shall not Murder.” That command is above all the laws of men, and that command must be heralded far and wide. Moreover, Romans 13 teaches us (along with many other passages) that civil authority exists to reflect and enforce the criminal laws of God (i.e., the second tablet of the Law.) Bringing civil law in conformity with God’s law is a demand from heaven, and a duty among men. To fight to make all child-killing illegal from conception to birth—state by state —legislature by legislature —at the federal legislative level and in every court we can —is a duty on our part. Not to fight is a dereliction of duty. Consider the vantage point of the victims. Can anyone really believe that the souls of the babies who have been dispatched into eternity by the abortionist’s knife would say: “No! Do NOT try for a personhood amendment! The time is not right now!”
2) Historically, they are wrong. I invite you to ponder the social revolutions of the past. Think of the defeat of the Stamp Act; ponder the Boston Tea Party; consider the abolitionists and the Underground Railroad; think well on the suffragettes or those who ended child labor. Finally, remember the words and images of the Civil Rights Movement. (I urge you to read Mother Mary Jones autobiography, and Martin Luther King’s “Letter from the Birmingham Jail.”) If you study these movements —their rhetoric, their actions, and the images they used —you will see just how incorrect the opponents of personhood amendments are. It is PRECISELY because we have NOT used tactics like these sundry movements that babies continue to die. It is (in part) because we have NOT pushed for personhood amendments at the state level —in conjunction with a tenth amendment demand for state autonomy and states’ rights—that child-killing by abortion is still with us. Every single social revolution I mentioned above was won by people who did and said and showed things that were “ill timed” or “imprudent” etc. Finally, to recount the sacrifices and risks – and victories against all odds —that the heroes and martyrs of the Church have given us would take an encyclopedia.
3) Politically, the opponents of personhood efforts are mistaken as well. When looking at the histories of other social revolutions, it is safe to say that the proponents of change rarely —if ever —possessed a majority. Samuel Adams said: “It is not necessary to have a majority to prevail, only an irate tireless minority, keen to set brush fires in the minds of men.” We have forgotten —or betrayed -this truth. The reason the pro-life movement has SO LITTLE political strength —and it is waning by the year —is because our political activities in civil responsibilities contradict our message. I ask you: Is abortion murder, or not? If it is, then why are we so timid and tepid? We should do EVERYTHING reasonable in our power to make it illegal again. When the abolitionists or the suffragettes fought politically against all odds, year after year, and were shot down again and again, they did not resort to the silliness of “We need a better time…” or “We need to educate people more.” No, they screamed louder. They became more shrill in their cries for justice. That is why they prevailed politically. They were to politics, what the importunate widow was to prayer.
Concerning saving lives now —as I alluded to above -we will save more lives now by this type of activity than without it. Let me explain.
If a young woman sees, hears, or reads a news story about those “crazy people” making all these sacrifices to pass a personhood amendment because “abortion is murder, “she may choose life for her baby (if she is considering killing the child.) I know of what I speak: After my appearance on Oprah years ago, in two separate cities I was approached by two separate women, both of whom placed a baby in my arms, and told me they saw me on Oprah. Both of them had abortions scheduled, and both of them cancelled their appointment, and gave life to their child. How many other babies were saved because of my appearance on Oprah? I did not have pictures of babies; I was not counseling those ladies; I was simply declaring the truth that abortion was murder on a TV show. And by the way: I was on Oprah because I was making a fuss; I wasn’t waiting for the “timing to be right.” I was screaming my lungs out —in word and deed —and it was newsworthy. This is critical to any social revolution. The opponents of personhood whine that they get bad press, or no press. Well, do something newsworthy —like trying to change the state constitution —and you will get a lot of press!
4) Judicially, those opposed to personhood amendments are wrong as well. The pipeline to the Supreme Court can take 3 —10 years. If one of these efforts in any state prevails, it could be the case that actually overturns Roe. We cannot wait for the perfect 5 —4 majority to bring a case. Our next President could appoint the final vote to overturn Roe, but we cannot wait to find out. The pipeline should be FILLED with cases from as many states as possible. The more states that demand personhood and the more pressure that is thereby brought to bear in the judiciary, the more judges look like tyrants and fools for justifying murder and harboring murderers. And who knows; maybe a Governor with some backbone will tell the federal courts to “go to hell”; that he/she intends to uphold the state’s constitution, including protecting the “persons” of the unborn. Moreover, judicially —in my opinion —the single greatest source of the loss of life, liberty, and justice in America, is the Supreme Court, followed by various state courts such as in Vermont and Massachusetts. Think of how many evils the Courts have unleashed onus. But what is worse than this —may God forgive us, and our forbears inspire us to battle —is that our founders saw the danger of a judicial oligarchy, and gave us protection against it in Article 3, Section 2 of the Constitution. I.e., congress can pass a law, and tell the Court they have no jurisdiction in that area.
America has been overrun by judicial tyrants who -with their lifetime appointments— are beyond the grasp of voters. If our elected federal officials had used the above remedy (Article 3, Section 2), child-killing and a host of lesser evils would have been destroyed. Moreover, the ability to impeach judges who violate their oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States (such as in the case of a judge who decrees a “right” to murder our offspring) has been left to rot. Our political leaders are often cowards and traitors, by virtue of their sins of omission; i.e., they submit to judicial decrees, rather than defying them, and impeaching the lawless judges. Think what would have happened in Massachusetts if Governor Romney and the State Legislature had refused to obey the State Court when it ORDERED them to create homosexual marriage, and rather proceeded to impeach the judges that “so ordered” that abomination. Instead, Romney and company groveled like the frightened Roman Senate before Caesar, and thereby dragged the nation close to the abyss.
Moreover, judicially—in my opinion—the single greatest source of the loss of life, liberty, and justice in America, is the Supreme Court, and various state courts such as in Vermont and Massachusetts. Think of how many evils the Courts have unleashed on us. But what is worse than this – may God forgive us, and our forbears inspire us to battle – is that our founders saw the danger of a judicial oligarchy, and gave us protection against it in article 3, Section 2 of the Constitution. I.e., congress can pass a law, and tell the Court they have no jurisdiction in that area.
I will not belabor the point. The simple fact is that ethically, historically, politically, and judicially, the “personhood amendment movement” is correct in its mission. For that matter, so is anyone who calls for a federal law to outlaw all child-killing from conception till birth, with an Article 3, Section 2 prohibition of Court review.
These efforts do more to “educate people” than most (if not all) of the other efforts combined. Why? Because these efforts show that someone actually believes that abortion is murder, that babies should be protected by law, and is therefore trying to pass a law or amendment to protect babies. The press coverage alone is worth its weight in gold, because the conflict and controversy surrounding the amendment forces people to think; it “educates” them.
Those who oppose these efforts —and sit (alive) in their comfort, pontificating follies, speaking of “better timing” —are simply wrong. But far worse, in my opinion, many of them have become like the Vichy government of France that collaborated with the Germans in the 1940s. Think about it. Child-killing could not continue without the silence, inactivity, fear, and treachery of those who “wait for a better time.”
It is not the Catholicism of those who oppose personhood that misguides them, but rather their refusal to obey it.
Your Servant in Christ, and a Slave to the Battle to End Legalized Child-killing,
Randall Terry
No comments yet.