Russell and Duenes

Facts, Supreme Court Justices, and the Lordship of Christ

leave a comment »

Where to start? The Supreme Court’s decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey is shot so full of erroneous and unconstitutional reasoning, I could write a piece on just about every paragraph I’ve read in the ruling thus far, most of which has been spent explaining why Roe v. Wade cannot be overturned. But it’s not the constitutional issues that are the biggest problem. The glaring problem is that Jesus is Lord of heaven and earth, which means he’s Lord over human life and when it begins. This presents a real problem for people, including certain justices of the Supreme Court, who are intent on rebelling against him. But ultimately, truth will out! Let me explain.

In Planned Parenthood, Justices O’Connor, Kennedy and Souter, regarding Roe and whether it should be overturned, wrote the following:

The sum of the precedential enquiry to this point shows Roe’s underpinnings unweakened in any way affecting its central holding. While it has engendered disapproval, it has not been unworkable. An entire generation has come of age free to assume Roe’s concept of liberty in defining the capacity of women to act in society, and to make reproductive decisions; no erosion of principle going to liberty or personal autonomy has left Roe’s central holding a doctrinal remnant; [505 U.S. 833, 861] Roe portends no developments at odds with other precedent for the analysis of personal liberty; and no changes of fact have rendered viability more or less appropriate as the point at which the balance of interests tips.


Because neither the factual underpinnings of Roe’s central holding nor our understanding of it has changed (and because no other indication of weakened precedent has been shown), the Court could not pretend to be reexamining the prior law with any justification beyond a present doctrinal disposition to come out differently from the Court of 1973. To overrule prior law for no other reason than that would run counter to the view, repeated in our cases, that a decision to overrule should rest on some special reason over and above the belief that a prior case was wrongly decided.

What does all this actually mean? It means that upon these words, no changes of fact could ever unseat Roe. The Court argued in Roe that “we need not resolve the difficult question of when life begins.” But 1) it’s not a difficult question anymore, and 2) most people who argue in favor of abortion now acknowledge when human life begins, namely, at conception. I would say that’s a “factual change” from when Roe was written in 1973, but the Court will have none of it. The facts on the ground are now just what they were in 1973 and what they always will be: A new human being created in God’s image comes into being upon the union of egg and sperm. But this fact won’t budge the Court, because it’s not the facts that need to change, but human hearts. The fact is, Jesus is Lord, and when enough human hearts gladly submit to His lordship, we’ll see the Roe decision, and the tens of millions of babies that have been legally killed as a result of it, for the horrors that they are. Just as we finally saw “separate-but-equal” for the horror that it was, which led to the overturning of Plessy v. Ferguson.

May you give us eyes to see, O Lord, that we may obey you in this matter. Amen.



Written by Michael Duenes

May 17, 2010 at 10:02 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: