US Supreme Court rules states can decide about abortions: pro-abortionists continue violent threats and actions


Although the Constitution of the United States does not mention anything about abortions, some believe that back in 1973 it became a ‘constitutional right.’

However, the majority now on the US Supreme Court ruled that, no, abortion is not a constitutional right:

June 24, 2022

The Supreme Court on Friday overturned Roe v. Wade, effectively ending recognition of a … right to abortion and giving individual states the power to allow, limit, or ban the practice altogether.

The ruling came in the court’s opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which centered on a Mississippi law that banned abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy. The Republican-led state of Mississippi asked the Supreme Court to strike down a lower court ruling that stopped the 15-week abortion ban from taking place.

“We end this opinion where we began. Abortion presents a profound moral question. The Constitution does not prohibit the citizens of each State from regulating or prohibiting abortion. Roe and Casey arrogated that authority. We now overrule those decisions and return that authority to the people and their elected representatives,” Justice Samuel Alito wrote in the court’s opinion.

Alito’s opinion began with an exploration and criticism of Roe v. Wade and its holding that while states have “a legitimate interest in protecting ‘potential life,” this interest was not strong enough to prohibit abortions before the time of fetal viability, understood to be at about 23 weeks into pregnancy.

“The Court did not explain the basis for this line, and even abortion supporters have found it hard to defend Roe’s reasoning,” Alito wrote.

If the US Supreme Court would have based its views on the founding documents of that nation, it would have ruled that since abortion kills a human, it is murder and should not be allowed anywhere.

Here is a report about another justice:

June 24, 2022

Justice Clarence Thomas agreed with the U.S. Supreme Court’s majority that the faulty Roe v. Wade decision from 1973 that created a “right” to abortion in the U.S. Constitution had to be overturned. …

He noted that the pro-abortion faction attacking the state of Mississippi’s new abortion limit cited “one source” for their claims: “the Fourteenth Amendment’s guarantee that no state shall ‘deprive any persons of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.'”

The majority opinion explains why under court precedents, “the purported right to abortion is not a form of ‘liberty’ protected by the Due Process Clause.” … he said … “there is no abortion guarantee lurking in the Due Process Clause.”

For one, he said, “there’s “historical evidence” that such references “merely required executive and judicial actors to comply with legislative enactments and the common law when depriving a person of life, liberty, or property.”

And he said other sources said legislatures couldn’t do that either.

“Either way, the Due Process Clause at most guarantees process. It does not, as the court’s substantive due process cases suppose, ‘forbid the government to infringe certain ‘fundamental’ liberty interests at all, no matter what process is provided.”

So, as “‘substantive due process’ is an oxymoron that ‘lacks any basis in the Constitution,'” he said, “the resolution of this case is … straightforward. Because the Due Process Clause does not secure any substantive rights, it does not secure a right to abortion.”  …

He said, “The court divines new rights in line with ‘its own, extraconstitutional value preferences’ and nullifies state laws that do not align with the judicially created guarantees. Nowhere is this exaltation of judicial policymaking clearer than this court’s abortion jurisprudence. In Roe v. Wade, the court divined a right to abortion because it ‘fe[lt]’ that ‘the Fourteenth Amendment’s concept of personal liberty’ included a ‘right of privacy’ that ‘is broad enough to encompass a woman’s decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy.'”

Simply put, the court has protected “preferred rights.”

In this case, he said, “That 50 years have passed since Roe and abortion advocates still cannot coherently articulate the right (or rights) at stake proves the obvious: The right to abortion is ultimately a policy goal in desperate search of a constitutional justification.”

Then, he said, “Substantive due process distorts other areas of constitutional law. For example, once this court identifies a ‘fundamental’ right for one class of individuals, it invokes the Equal Protection Clause to demand exacting scrutiny of statutes that deny the right to others.”

That being said, notice something from the US Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men …

The unborn are alive and are entitled to stay that way. The right to life is supposed to be unalienable.

But instead of focusing on that, though Judge Thomas alluded to it, the US Supreme Court has mainly ‘passed the buck’ to the individual states to let them determine at what stage murder of the unborn can be done.

Yet, that still upsets many in the mainstream.

The groups calling themselves Jane’s Revenge has been involved in violent acts against anti-abortion counseling centers and has also been threatening riots.

The likely reason that they use the term ‘Jane’ is that in the 1973 US Supreme Court case known as Roe vs. Wade, the supposed plaintiff was referred to as ‘Jane Roe.’

As reported here before, the actual woman involved later became an anti-abortion activist. Others also realize this as the following shows:

June 21, 2022

Ever since the unprecedented leak of an early draft of the Dobbs decision from the Supreme Court, which may overturn Roe v. Wade, the “shock troops of tolerance” have been busy interrupting church services. And they have done much destruction of crisis pregnancy centers. …

Many of these attacks have been done through an ad hoc organization called “Jane’s Revenge.”

centers are on high alert, but where’s @AP news of #JanesRevenge #RuthSentUs + others already vandalizing and terrorizing pregnancy centers? (Share links please.)#bias #abortion #RoeVWade #dobbs #DobbsvJackson

— Jonah Pariah (@JonahPariah) June 22, 2022

The name would imply revenge on behalf of “Jane Roe” from the 1973 Supreme Court pro-abortion decision, Roe v. Wade.

Jane’s Revenge declares open season on crisis pregnancy centers across the nation: “From here forward, any anti-choice group who closes their doors, and stops operating will no longer be a target. But until you do, it’s open season, and we know where your operations are. The infrastructure of the enslavers will not survive. We will never stop, back down, slow down, or retreat.” …

And this damage is being done in the name of Jane Roe? As the record shows, Jane Roe’s identity was revealed in 1987, and her name was Norma McCorvey. It turns out McCorvey had not been raped (as claimed in the case). She had gotten pregnant from her boyfriend, and she just wanted an abortion.

ACLU attorney Sarah Weddington lied to her as she assured McCorvey she could get an abortion. But what Weddington really wanted was McCorvey’s participation in what became Roe v. Wade.

Then in the late 1990s, something amazing happened. Norma McCorvey made a profession of faith in Jesus Christ and came to oppose abortion. …

One man who knew McCorvey, who died in 2017, … told me: “As for Norma McCorvey, hers was a life of repentance, not of revenge. She wouldn’t have needed to take ‘revenge’ on pro-life people anyway, because she was one of us. She would have abhorred the way the pro-abortion people are acting now. In fact, she didn’t like them even when she was on their side. She thought they were arrogant and disrespectful of her.”

Although abortionist protesters like to use expression like, “My body, my choice,” the reality is that it is not their bodies that abortion kills, it is another.

As far as choices go, women have the choice to be married or not be married. If they are not married they should not engage in sexual intercourse. They have that choice. No one should be able to have the choice to kill babies (see also Abortion, the Bible, and a Woman’s Right to Choose).

The Bible condemns those that shed innocent blood, as that is something that God hates:

6 … do not kill the innocent … (Exodus 23:6)

19 So you shall put away the guilt of innocent blood from among you when you do what is right in the sight of the LORD (Deuteronomy 21:9).

37 They even sacrificed their sons
And their daughters to demons,
38 And shed innocent blood,
The blood of their sons and daughters,
Whom they sacrificed to the idols of Canaan;
And the land was polluted with blood. (Psalm 106:37-38)

16 These six things the LORD hates, Yes, seven are an abomination to Him: 17 A proud look, A lying tongue, Hands that shed innocent blood, 18 A heart that devises wicked plans, Feet that are swift in running to evil, 19 A false witness who speaks lies, And one who sows discord among brethren (Proverbs 6:16-19).

7 Their feet run to evil, And they make haste to shed innocent blood; Their thoughts are thoughts of iniquity; Wasting and destruction are in their paths. 8 The way of peace they have not known, And there is no justice in their ways; They have made themselves crooked paths; Whoever takes that way shall not know peace (Isaiah 59:7-8).

3 Thus says the LORD: “Execute judgment and righteousness, and deliver the plundered out of the hand of the oppressor. Do no wrong and do no violence to the stranger, the fatherless, or the widow, nor shed innocent blood in this place (Jeremiah 22:3).

17 “Yet your eyes and your heart are for nothing but your covetousness, For shedding innocent blood, And practicing oppression and violence” (Jeremiah 22:17).

Babies are innocent. Killing them is the shedding of innocent blood–making killing babies illegal is not a cause of bloodshed. Innocent blood pollutes the land. Furthermore, consider that God’s word records that a leader filled his land “with innocent blood, which the Lord would not pardon” (2 Kings 24:4). Because of that, God had the King of Babylon and others to destroy (2 Kings 24:1-4). The Bible tells of a coming end time daughter of Babylon, and its leader will destroy the USA according to Bible prophecy (Daniel 11:39; see also Anglo – America in Prophecy & the Lost Tribes of Israel).

Because of the availability, expect increased use of legal as well as, in some states, illegal, use of abortion pills.

Planned Parenthood reports:

The abortion pill is very effective. accessed 06/24/22

So, murders of the unborn are expected, but perhaps they will be noticeably less than before.

As far as the USA is concerned, if its Supreme Court would base its views on the founding documents of that nation, it would have ruled that since abortion kills a human, it is murder and should not be allowed anywhere.

The protests and threats of riots related to the Supreme Court ruling brings to mind the following:

23 ‘Make a chain,
For the land is filled with crimes of blood,
And the city is full of violence.
24 Therefore I will bring the worst of the Gentiles,
And they will possess their houses;
I will cause the pomp of the strong to cease,
And their holy places shall be defiled. (Ezekiel 7:23-24)

28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality…30…violent, proud, boasters,…31…unmerciful; 32 who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them. (Romans 1:28-32)

8…And the violence of the land and the city, And of all who dwell in it. (Habakkuk 2:8)

As we see less and less respect towards the God of the Bible, we should expect to see more violence.

Abortion is violent and sheds innocent blood.

UPDATE 06/26/22: we just uploaded a new and related video:


Abortion, the US Constitution, and the Bible

On June 24, 2022, the United State Supreme Court overruled the 1973 Roe v. Wade abortion decision. Did the Court just take away a constitutional right? What does the US Declaration of Independence say about life and the purpose of government? Does human life begin at conception according to 95% of biologists surveyed? Does the Word of God teach that unborn humans are children? What does the Bible teach about the shedding of innocent blood? Are there biblical consequences for performing or condoning abortion? Dr. Thiel along with Steve Dupuie deals with the issues.

Here is a link to the video: Abortion, the US Constitution, and the Bible.

Some items of possibly related interest may include:

Abortion, the Bible, and a Woman’s Right to Choose Do you know what the Bible teaches on this? Has the Roman Catholic Church allowed abortions? What about the real Church of God? Some may wish to view the YouTube videos: Abortion and Birth Control: History and Scriptures. Abortion, the Bible, and US Debt, American Infanticide, Euthanasia: Mercy killing or murder?, Abortion, the US Constitution, and the Bible, and Land of ‘Free’ Abortions and Debt.
God’s Grace is For All Is being Jewish a hindrance to salvation? What about not being a descendant of Israel? What does the Bible really teach? Here is a link to a related sermon titled Race and Grace; Do you view race as God does? Watch also Mystery of Race.
The MYSTERY of GOD’s PLAN: Why Did God Create Anything? Why Did God Make You? This free online book helps answers some of the biggest questions that human have, including the biblical meaning of life. Here is a link to three related sermons: Mysteries of God’s Plan, Mysteries of Truth, Sin, Rest, Suffering, and God’s Plan, Mystery of Race, and The Mystery of YOU. Here is a link to two videos in Spanish: El Misterio del Plan de Dios and El Misterio de Satanás, el Misterio de la Verdad, el Misterio del Reposo.

Africa: Its Biblical Past and Prophesied Future What does the Bible teach about Africa and its future? Did the early Church reach Africa? Will God call all the Africans? A related online sermon is also available: Africa: Its biblical past, present, and future. A video of possible interest is: Nairobi Conference: All About Love.
Crime can be stopped…here’s how! This was a booklet that was edited with some updates by Dr. Thiel. Here is a link to a related sermon: Crime and How it Will be Stopped!
Why Terrorism? Is Terrorism Prophesied? What does the Bible teach? Which nations may be affected? Here is a link to a related sermon: Terrorism, Christianity, and Islam.
Universal OFFER of Salvation, Apokatastasis: Can God save the lost in an age to come? Hundreds of scriptures reveal God’s plan of salvation Will all get a fair chance at salvation? This free book is packed with scriptures showing that God does intend to offer salvation to all who ever lived–the elect in this age, and the rest in the age to come. Here is a link to a related sermon series: Universal Offer of Salvation 1: Apocatastasis, Universal Offer of Salvation 2: Jesus Desires All to be Saved, Mysteries of the Great White Throne Judgment (Universal Offer of Salvation part 3), Is God Fair, Will God Pardon the Ignorant?, Can God Save Your Relatives?, Babies, Limbo, Purgatory and God’s Plan, and ‘By the Mouth of All His Holy Prophets’.

Get news like the above sent to you on a daily basis

Your email will not be shared. You may unsubscribe at anytime.