Hillary has always been an anarchist, a Progressive, a radical feminist AND pro-abortion. She states, in this interview with Chuck Todd, what she deems to be an immutable fact: the unborn have no constitutional rights.
Chuck Todd is one of the few even-handed MSM journalists — he actually maintains a more objective posture and does ask tough questions. This may be one of his most insightful questions posed to Hillary Clinton. And of course, Clinton does her best to sound authoritative, like a Con Law Prof. Unfortunately for Hill, most of us realize she’s merely a con.
Listen to the question and Mrs. Clinton’s response.
Chuck Todd: When, or if, does an unborn child have constitutional rights?
Hillary Clinton: Well, under our laws currently, that is not something that exists. The unborn person doesn’t have constitutional rights. Now, that doesn’t mean that we don’t do everything we possibly can, in the vast majority of instances to, you know, help a mother who is carrying a child and wants to make sure that child will be healthy, to have appropriate medical support. It doesn’t mean that you don’t do everything possible to try to fulfill your obligations. But it does include sacrificing the woman’s right to make decisions. And I think that’s an important distinction, that under Roe v. Wade we’ve had enshrined under our Constitution.
Note the last sentence, “And I think that’s an important distinction, that under Roe v. Wade we’ve had enshrined under our Constitution.”
Enshrined? Pardon me?
Also of note, Clinton does not say “fetus” but rather, “The unborn person…” Catch that Cecile Richards? The womb is meant to be a safe place for the “unborn person,” not a killing field, tearing the unborn limb from limb.
Roe v. Wade was an egregious decision not predicated upon precedent and without one shred of constitutional support. Indeed, the CJ Burger court is directly culpable for the murder of 57+ million babies since that horrible 1973 decision.
As I wrote in Roe v. Wade: The Shameful History of an Egregious SCOTUS Decision:
Roe v. Wade pitted fetal “right to life” against a woman’s “right to privacy.”
Roe v. Wade reached the Supreme Court on appeal in 1970, and the court issued its decision on January 22, 1973.
With a majority vote of 7-2, SCOTUS voted to strike down the Texas law which held abortion, for any reason other than rape or incest, to be illegal.
The court ruled:
The right to privacy was broad enough to “encompass a woman’s decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy.”
The question of “whether a fetus can enjoy Constitutional protection is separate from the notion of when life begins,” was not resolved by the court.
The Supreme Court members who decided Roe v. Wade:
Chief Justice Warren E. Burger
Justice William O. Douglas
Justice William J. Brennan, Jr.
Justice Potter Stewart
Justice Byron White
Justice Thurgood Marshall
Justice Harry Blackmun
Justice Lewis F. Powell, Jr.
Justice William RehnquistJustices Byron White (John F. Kennedy) and William Rehnquist (one of Nixon’s new appointees) dissented.
Justice Byron White wrote a stern dissent:
I find nothing in the language or history of the Constitution to support the Court’s judgment.
The Court simply fashions and announces a new constitutional right for pregnant women and, with scarcely any reason or authority for its action, invests that right with sufficient substance to override most existing state abortion statutes.
The upshot is that the people and the legislatures of the 50 States are constitutionally disentitled to weigh the relative importance of the continued existence and development of the fetus, on the one hand, against a spectrum of possible impacts on the woman, on the other hand.
As an exercise of raw judicial power, the Court perhaps has authority to do what it does today; but, in my view, its judgment is an improvident and extravagant exercise of the power of judicial review that the Constitution extends to this Court.
Improvident indeed. God bless Justices Byron White and William Rehnquist!
Hillary Clinton is part of the shameful legacy of Roe, cheering on the forces of evil who told women the lie “It’s perfectly fine to kill your unborn babies!”
The holocaust of the unborn and the load of guilt (which can be forgiven and assauged, if repented, by the grace of God) placed on millions of mothers should be assigned squarely on the shoulders of Mrs. Clinton, the Burger Court, and every screeching pro-abort activist.
I shudder to think what awaits those culpable for the slaughter, barring true remorse and repentance, when they face eternity.
First published at SavingOurFuture.com
