Legal Points – Right to Life

 

Samples of  RTL  legal points-(edited)– – written byRobert  J. Winnemore – Attorney at law 

1 – Abortion Is Death, Not Reproductive Health Service

2- The Baby In The Womb Has the Right To Reproductive Health Service 

    In Being Born Alive And Healthy

3 – The Right To Life Is A Basic Human Right That Exists Outside Of Any Document

4 – The Taking Of  Innocent Human Life Is A Crime Against Humanity And Any Statute Which

     Facilitates It Is Null And Void

5 – The State Attorney General Has The Parens Patriae Responsibility To Protect The Lives

6 – The Moment Of Creation Is The Moment Of Conception

7 – The Right To Life From The Moment Of Creation Is Self-Evident, 

      Creator Endowed And Inalienable And Does Not Depend On Any Document

8 – The Baby’s Right To Life Attaches at the moment of Conception

9 – The Baby’s Right To Privacy Attaches At The Moment Of Conception

10 – The Right To Privacy Gives No Right to Kill

11 – The Mother Has No Paramount Right To Life Over That Of The Baby

12 – The Baby Is A Person At The Moment Of Conception

13 – The Baby’s Right To Equal Protection Of The Laws Attaches At The

        Moment Of Conception

14 – The Baby’s Right To Due Process Of Law By Both The Federal And State

        Governments Attaches At The Moment Of Conception

15 – The Baby’s Civil Rights Attach At The Moment Of Conception

16 – The Common Law And The U.S. Constitution Are Based On God’s Law

1 – Abortion Is Death, Not Reproductive Health Service

Abortion is death. It is the taking of innocent human life. It is not a reproductive health

service. That part of the statute, …, which purports to include abortion to kill the baby as a

reproductive health service is null and void. Health means to stay alive and well. Death is the

very opposite of health. Reproductive health service means for the baby to be born alive and well.

It can never mean the intentional death of the baby. It can never mean death by the abortion of

the baby. That part of the statute, …, which seeks to include death by abortion as a reproductive health service is

 null and void…… as a violation of the baby’s right to life from the moment of conception

2- The Baby In The Womb Has the Right To Reproductive Health Service

 In Being Born Alive And Healthy

The baby in the womb wanting to be born isobviously seeking the reproductive health

service of being born alive and well since every living being seeks its own survival and

 self- preservation.…. The baby has the self-evident, Creator-endowed, inalienable right to life starting from the 

moment of conception, which is the moment of creation.

The baby in the womb, from the moment of its conception, is a person, as it’s DNA code

locks in and defines its characteristics for life in the microsecond when the male sperm of 23

chromosomes united with the female egg of 23 chromosomes, making a human person of 46

chromosomes. Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), and Doe v. Bolton, 410 U.S. 179 (1973), and

their progeny requiring the baby to reach its seventh month to be considered a person are wrong.

Those cases were only based on the old quickening cases as to when the mother felt the baby’s

first kick. We know now, with sonograms, that the baby is moving and kicking long before the

mother feels it. The later cases, requiring the baby to reach the stage where it could exist outside

the womb, are likewise erroneous as even a natural born baby cannot exist outside the womb

without being constantly fed, nurtured, kept warm, and cared for, for its existence to continue.

The operative moment is when the sperm meets the egg at the moment of conception, the moment

of creation when the 23 chromosomes of the sperm unite with the 23 chromosomes of the egg

and the new person’s DNA code locks in, and defines it as a person unique from all other persons,

which DNA code exists long after that person’s death.

As it is self-evident that all men are created equal, the self-evident, inalienable, Creator

endowed right to life attaches at creation. Moreover, the baby in the womb has the right to life

contained in the U.S. Constitution, as the Preamble states that the U.S. Constitution was created

to provide for the common defense and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our

posterity, and common defense means the defense of life, and so there must be a right to life for it

to be defended and common defense includes the defense of baby in the womb, and it specifically

mentions posterity, which includes the baby in the womb, and you can’t have liberty without being

alive to enjoy it, so the baby in the womb has the right to life from the moment of conception,

under the Preamble of the U.S. Constitution, and this right to life in the Preamble attaches at

creation, as it is self-evident that all men are created equal. In addition, the baby in the womb has

the right to life implied in the rest of the U.S. Constitution, for you must be alive to have the

rights enumerated therein. It cannot be said that the baby in the womb cannot, for if the right to

life cannot be implied from the rest of the U.S. Constitution, then the right to privacy cannot be

implied, and Roe and Doe must fall. This right to life in the balance of the Constitution attaches

at creation as it is self-evident that all men are created equal. The baby in the womb has an equal

right to privacy as the mother starting from the moment of the baby’s creation, as it is self-evident

that all men are created equal, so that at the moment of the baby’s creation it has equal rights as

the mother, including the baby’s right to life and right to privacy. The mother’s rights are not

paramount. The rights of both are equal at the moment of the baby’s creation. It is self-evident

that all men are created equal. Thus, Roe V. Wadewas wrong. The baby has an equal right to

privacy from the moment of creation. And the mother has no superior right to life over the baby,

so Doe v. Boltonwas erroneous. The mother cannot kill the baby for her own health and well

being. Each has an equal right to lifestarting from the moment of the baby’s conception, when

the sperm meets the egg. It is self-evident. Moreover, it is inalienable, and neither the mother nor

the U.S. Supreme Court can take it away. Doe v. Boltonwas erroneous. The baby has the right

to life starting from the moment of its conception. …

3 – The Right To Life Is A Basic Human Right That Exists Outside Of Any Document

As U.S. Justice John Marshall Harlan wrote in his dissent in Poe v. Ullman, 367 U.S. 497,

82 S.Ct. 1752, 6 L.Ed.2d 989, there are certain rights that are so basic that they need not be

mentioned in any document to exist. The right to life is one of those rights.

No statute can stand which facilitates the taking of innocent human life.That part of this

statute is null and void which facilitates that taking of innocent human life by abortion ..

4 – The Taking of Innocent Human Life Is A Crime Against Humanity And Any Statute Which

Facilitates It Is Null And Void

Babies in the womb areinnocent human life. They have committed no crime. They have

the right to life from the moment of conception, as it is self evident that all men are created equal,

So all rights attach at creation. Any statute which facilitates their being killed by purporting to

Prevent their defense starting from the moment of their conception, is null and void, as it 

Facilitates a crime against humanity, and the taking of innocent human life.


.5 – The State Attorney General Has The Parens Patriae Responsibility To Protect The Lives

Common defense means defense of life. Common defense means the defense of others, not only

ourselves and includes the babies in the womb about to be aborted. The Preamble of the

Constitution specifically says “of our posterity”. This includes babies in the womband there can

be no liberty unless one is alive to enjoy it. Thus, there is a right in the U.S. Constitution to

defend the lives of the babies about to be aborted. No injunction or order …can thwart it. 

Any attempt to do so is null and void. 

6 – The Moment Of Creation Is The Moment Of Conception

The moment of creation of a human being is the microsecond when the 23 chromosome

Male sperm unites with the 23 chromosome female egg, the moment of conception, to make a 46

Chromosome human being. This is the microsecond, as Dr. Jerome Lejuene testified in the

Tennessee Frozen Embryo Case, Davis v. Davis v. King, d/b/a Fertility Center of East Tennessee,

No. E-14496, September 21, 1988 decision by the Circuit Judge W. Dale Young, Circuit Court

For Blount County, Tennessee at Maryville, Equity

Division (Div. I); and also in The State of New Jersey v. Alexander Loce, et.al., April 29, 1991

Decision by Judge Michael J. Noonon, Municipal Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Morris

County, Criminal Action, Docket No. c1771, et. seq., and in The City of Wichita v. Elizabeth A.

Tilson, No. 91 MC 108, July 20, 1992, Memorandum Opinion by Judge Paul W. Clark, in the

Criminal Department of the District Court for the Eighteenth Judicial District, Sedgwick County,

Kansas,when individual human life comes into existence. It is this micro second when the baby’s

DNA code locks in for life, and long after its life on this earth ceases, identifying it as a unique

individual, unlike any other.

Moreover, it is the law of this state as unanimously agreed in the opening pages of

 Byrne v. NYC Health and Hospitals Corp. by all the Justices of the New York Court of Appeals that the

Moment of creation is the moment of conception.

7 – The Right To Life From The Moment Of Creation Is Self-Evident, Creator Endowed And Inalienable And Does

Not Depend On Any Document

We hold these truths to be self-evident (self-evident – not depending on any document)

That all men are created equal (at the moment of creation, the rights of all are equal) and are

Endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights (inalienable – no one can take them away,

Not another human being, not the U.S. Supreme Court, not any legislature; Creator-endowed –

Only God gives them, only God can take them away) that among these are the right to life  (Creator-endowed, 

inalienable right to life starting from the moment of conception, which is the moment of creation).

Our Nation was created on these words; they are the foundation of our nation’s existence. The war for 

Independence from the British crown and the war that freed slaves was fought on them. They cannot be denied. 

Lincoln said at Gettysburg,” Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a new  

nation Conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal,” These words are our 

Nation’s raison d’être. They cannot be denied now.

8 – The Baby’s Right To Life Attaches at the moment of Conception

Since it is self-evident that all men are created equal, and self evident that all men are endowed by their Creator

with inalienable right to life, and all rights attach at the moment of creation, which is the moment of conception,

when The sperm meets the egg.  Not only is the right to life from the moment of conception self-evident, but there 

exists a Right to life in the preamble of the U.S. Constitution which states that the constitution was drafted to 

provide for the Common defense and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity. Common

defense means defense Of  life. Common defense includes the defense of the life of the baby in the womb.

Moreover, it specifically says to Secure the blessings of liberty to our posterity, so it includes the defense of our

posterity which includes the baby in the womb, and there can be no liberty without being alive to enjoy it, so it

includes the life of the baby in the womb. And since the Constitution provides for the defense of life, there must be

a right to life for it to be defended.

 Thus, There exists a right to life in the preamble of the U.S. Constitution. Furthermore, there is a right to life 

implied in the rest of the U.S. Constitution, for you cannot have the rights Enumerated therein unless you are alive

to enjoy them. So, there is a right to life implied in the U.S. Constitution.  To deny this means that the right to privacy 

implied in Roe v. Wadewould have to fall. Thus, the right to life comes from 3 sources: 1) it is self-evident, 2) it is 

contained in the Preamble of the U.S. Constitution, and 3) it is implied in The balance of the U.S. Constitution. 

Since it is self-evident that all men are created equal, all rights attach at Creation, including and especially the right 

to life, the foremost right, without which you could have no others as Even Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, in his 

treatise “Natural Law”, agrees the rest of the world believes.

9 – The Baby’s Right To Privacy Attaches At The Moment Of Conception

Since it is self-evident that all men are created equal, all rights must attach at creation

This includes the right to privacy. Since the moment of creation is the moment of conception, the

Right to privacy attaches at conception. Since it is self-evident that all men are created equal, the

Rights of all are equal as soon as conception takes place. This means that the baby’s right to

Privacy in the womb is equal to the mother’s. This is self-evident, as all men are created equal.

Thus, the mother has no paramount right to privacy over that of the baby in the womb. Thus,

Roe v. Wadewas erroneous. The mother has no paramount right to privacy over the baby. The

Baby’s right to privacy is equal. So the baby’s life cannot be taken under a right to privacy where

The baby has an equal right to privacy.

10 – The Right To Privacy Gives No Right to Kill

There is no way that a right to privacy can give a right to kill. Even if the baby in the

Womb did not have an equal right to privacy, which it does, a right to privacy cannot be

Developed into a right to kill. So Roe v. Wadewas wrong on two counts. You cannot get a right

Kill from a right to privacy.Thus, there can be no right to an abortion under Roe v. Wade. Since

it is self-evident that all men are created equal, and the rights of all are equal at creation, and the

Creator-endowed inalienable right to life attaches at creation, and the baby’s right to life is equal

To the mother’s at creation, and the baby’s right to privacy also attaches at creation, and it is equal

To the mother’s at creation and no right to privacy can give a right to kill, there could have been

No abortion under Roe v. Wade.

11 – The Mother Has No Paramount Right To Life Over That Of The Baby

As it is self-evident that all men are created equal and endowed by their Creator with the

Inalienable right to life, the baby’s right to life at the moment of its creation is equal to the

Mother’s and is inalienable. The mother cannot take it away. The mother’s right to life is at no

time superior to that of the baby in the womb.

It is self-evident that all men are created equal. So the baby’s right to life is equal to hers

from the moment of the baby’s conception. Thus, Doe. v. Boltonwas erroneous. The mother

cannot take the life of the baby, even if her own life is in danger, because she has no paramount

Right to life over the baby. The baby has an equal right to hers starting from the moment of it’s conception. Thus, 

there can be no abortion, either under Roe v. Wadeor Doe v. Bolton. There should be no abortion at all.

12 – The Baby Is A Person At The Moment Of Conception

When the 23 chromosome sperm meets the 23 chromosome egg, and a 46 chromosome

Human being comes into existence, it’s DNA code locks in that microsecond, defining all its

characteristics for the rest of its life and beyond – whether it is going to be tall or short, healthy or

sickly, or good at math or dim-witted. Its personhood is defined and locked in that microsecond,

and all that is left to be determined are the breaks in life that it will enjoy. That human being is a

Person from that microsecond on. It is a person from conception on. It does not have to wait

Until its mother feels its first kick. The concept of quickening in Roe v. Wadeis obsoleteWith

Sonograms we see the baby moving around long before the mother ever feels it. It is kicking long

before she ever feels it. The baby does not have to be able to survive outside the womb to be

considered a person. Even a naturally born baby cannot exist outside the womb without constantly

being fed, kept warm, nurtured, attended to. So that concept is erroneous. The baby is

certainly a person once it is born and it cannot exist outside the womb at that point without

constant care, attention, feeding, warmth, etc.

As to whether a fetus is a person, William D. Popkin’s Materials on Legislation, Political

Language and the Political Process, Foundation Press, University Casebook Series, Westbury,

N.Y., 1993, states “…A significant majority of courts find a civil wrongful death remedy for death

of a fetus.”(p.460)  If they can sue and recover, then they had the right to life.

Just as modern technology has made obsolete the original common law rule that it was

impossible to know whether a fetus inside the womb was alive at the time a vehicular accident

 occurred, Commonwealth v. Cass, 467 N.E.2d 1324, (Mass., 1984), so modern technology has

made obsolete the notion that it is impossible to know when a human being becomes a person. It

becomes a person at the moment of conception when 46 human chromosomes, 23 from the

Sperm, and 23 from the egg, come into existence, and its DNA code locks in.

The baby is a person from conception when its 46 human chromosomes come into

existence, and its DNA code locks in, making it unique from all other individuals forever. So the

concept of quickening in Roe v. Wadeand being able to exist outside the womb is obviously

erroneous. What is left for Roe and Doeto stand on?  Nothing. The right to life attaches at

conception and it is equal to everyone else’s right to life. For the purposes of the U.S.

Constitution which speaks of personhood, the baby is a person at the moment of it’s conception,

When 46 human chromosomes, 23 from the sperm, and 23 from the egg, come into existence,

And its DNA code locks in and makes it a unique individual, different from all other individuals

forever. DNA proves that the baby before its birth and after, from the moment of its conception,

Is the same person.

13 – The Baby’s Right To Equal Protection Of The Laws Attaches At The

Moment Of Conception

Since it is self-evident that all men are created equal and are endowed by their Creator

with the inalienable right to life, the right to life attaches at the moment of creation, when all

rights attach, as all men are created equal, so the rights of all are equal at creation. The moment

of creation is the moment of conception,when the 23 chromosome sperm meets the 23

chromosome egg, and the DNA code of that person locks in forever, making it unique forever

from all other persons from the moment of conception. Personhood begins at conception, the

moment of creation. For Government, State or Federal, either through its judiciary, or legislative

branch or executive, to allow the baby to be killed by abortion at any time after conception is a

denial to it of the right to Equal Protection of the Laws, specifically the right to life which

attaches at creation, when the Government, State or Federal, does not allow other individuals to

be killed without first having been indicted, charges brought against them, been given the right to

counsel, right to discovery, right to face and cross examine accusers, right to trial by a jury of

one’s peers, and right to exhaust all appeals. The right to Equal Protection of the Laws attaches

at the moment of conception when the sperm meets the egg and the DNA code locks in and 

defines the personhood of that human being forever. All rights attach at the moment of creation,

including the right to equal protection of the laws required of states under the 14th Amendment of

the U.S. Constitution and necessarily required of the Federal Government, impliedly under the 5th

Amendment, as it is self-evident that all men are created equal, and all rights attach at creation,

including the right to Equal Protection of the Laws. It is one of those rights that Justice John

Marshall Harlan (seePoe v. Ullman) would refer to as so basic that it need not be written down.

The whole tenet of our nation’s existence is that all men are created equal. Thus they are entitled

to have rights and protections applied to them equally from the moment of creation…

The baby in the womb from the moment of conception is entitled to Equal Protection of the Laws f

rom both the Federal and State Governments. And the baby in the womb from the moment of conception has the 

right to have its life defended and its right to Equal Protection of the Laws enforced…

Even if personhood didn’t exist at the moment of conception (creation), which it does, the

baby in the womb from the moment of conception is entitled to Equal Protection of the Laws

from both the Federal and State Governments, as it is self-evident that all men are created equal,

and at the moment of creation the rights of all are equal. Thus, they must be afforded Equal Protection of the Laws 

from the moment of creation, as it is self-evident that all men are created equal.

14 – The Baby’s Right To Due Process Of Law By Both The Federal And State

Governments Attaches At The Moment Of Conception

Since it is self-evident that all men are created equal and are endowed by their Creator

with the inalienable right to life, the right to life attaches at the moment of creation, when all

rights attach, as all men are created equal, including the right not to have life taken away without

Due Process of Law. The right not to have life taken away without Due Process of Law attaches

at the moment of creation because it is self-evident that all men are created equal and the rights of

all attach and are equal at that moment. It is self-evident, because it is self-evident that all men

are created equal. It does not depend on when personhood arises. The right to life from the

moment of creation is inalienable. It cannot be taken away. This is self-evident. Even if

personhood did not arise until the seventh month in the womb, the right not to have one’s life

taken away without Due Process of Law attaches at creation (conception) because it is self

evident that all men are created equal, so the rights of all attach and are equal at the moment of

creation. That includes the right not to have one’s life taken away without Due Process of Law.

Besides, the right to life is inalienable and attaches at the moment of creation (conception).

But personhood exists at the moment of conception, the moment of creation, when the

sperm meets the egg and the DNA code locks in and defines the personhood of that human being

forever. The right under the 5th Amendment Due Process Clause not to have life taken away by

the Federal Government without Due Process of Law, and the right under the 14th Amendment

not to have life taken away by any State Government without Due Process of Law, attaches at

that moment of conception, the moment of creation, when the sperm meets the egg, and the DNA

code locks in, defining the personhood of that individual forever.

The baby in the womb, from the moment of conception, has the inalienable right to life. It

certainly cannot have its life taken away without first having been indicted, charges brought

against it, been given the right to counsel, the right to discovery, the right to face and cross

examine its accusers, the right to trial by jury, the right to present witnesses, and the right to

exhaust all appealsThe baby in the womb from the moment of conception has the right to have

its life defended, and its life not taken away without Due Process of Law…

Roe v. Wadewas not Due Process of Law, because the baby from the moment of

conception has an equal right to life from the moment of conception as the mother, as it is self

evident that all men are created equal. Moreover, the baby’s right to life from the moment of creation is inalienable. 

This is self-evident. Neither the mother nor the U.S. Supreme Court can

take it away. And the baby has an equal right to privacy in the womb as the mother’s right to

privacy, as it is self-evident that all men are created equal. And in no event can a right to privacy

include a right to kill. So Roe v. Wade was not Due Processof Law. No right to take the baby’s

life can exist under it. No right to take the baby’s life can exist underDoe v. Bolton. The baby’s

right to life is equal to the mother’s from the moment of creation, as it is self-evident that all men

are created equal. So the mother has no paramount right to life over the baby. So Doe v. Bolton

was not Due Process of Law. No right to take the baby’s life can exist under it. And N.O.W. v.

Terry was not Due Process of Law. No right can exist to cross state lines and kill the baby in the

womb under the Commerce Clause. Freedom from impost duties in crossing state lines gives no

right to kill a baby in the womb which has the self-evident inalienable right to life from the

moment of creation. The Federalist Papers state that the U.S. Constitution is based on the Law of

Nature and of Nature’s God ( Federalist Paper No. 43, by James Madison,drafter of the U.S.

Constitution). Any statute or decision which is not in conformity with these is not valid under the

U.S. Constitution. Moreover, personhood exists at the moment of conception when the 23

chromosome sperm unites with the 23 chromosome egg and DNA code locks in. So to deprive

the baby in the womb of personhood and thereby strip it of its Constitutional rights was not Due

Process of Law. But it had the self-evident inalienable right to life from the moment of creation

which transcended the Constitution. That all men are created equal is the foundation of this

nation’s existence.To deny it is a denial of Due Process of Law. That’s why the Revolution and

the Civil War were fought – because all men are created equal. Negroes were not yet considered

full persons at the time the Civil War was fought. But it was self-evident that all men were

created equal.

15 – The Baby’s Civil Rights Attach At The Moment Of Conception

Since it is self-evident that all men are created equal, the rights of all attach at the moment

of creation,which is the moment of conception.  The baby’s Civil Rights thus attach at the

moment of conception. Even Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes in his work “Natural Law” conceded

that the rest of the world believed the right to life to be the most basic of all rights. Thus, anyone

who has an abortion performed on a baby, or performs an abortion, or assists in one, or facilitates

one violates the baby’s Civil Rights which attach at the moment of the baby’s creation, which is

conception, since all men are created equal, and may be prosecuted federally for depriving the

baby it’s Civil Rights.

Moreover, since personhood begins at the moment of conception when the baby’s 46

human chromosomes come into existence and DNA code locks in forever, Civil Rights, especially the right to 

life, attach at the moment of conception, has the right to have  it’s Civil Rights enforced…

16 – The Common Law And The U.S. Constitution Are Based On God’s Law

            Blackstone’s Commentaries states that the Common Law is based on Natural Law and God’s Revealed 

law, and “upon these depend all human laws”, and no human laws should be suffered to contradict these.” Jones’ 

Blackstone, Vol. 1, Section 40, at p. 42, Ed. By William Casey Jones, Claitor’s Publishing  Division, 1915, 1976, 

Baton Rouge, Louisiana.  Natural Law, according to Professor Mulalley of the philosophy Department of Queens 

College of the University of the New York is “Man’s participation in God’s eternal  law”. Blackstone’s 

Commentaries states that Natural Laws are the “immutable laws of human nature” laid down by God regulating

restraining man’s free will. Jones’ Blackstone, Ibid., Vol. 1, Section 39.

            American Law is the Common law, which is based on the Natural Law and God’s law. Jones’ Blackstone, 

Ibid.  The U.S. constitution, according to the framer, James  Madison, in the Federalist papers, paper no. 43, is 

based on the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God. Thus, both Common law and the U.S. Constitution are based on 

Natural law and God’s Law. Natural Law is based on God’s Law. All statues and court decisions in this nation must 

conform to the U.S Constitution. Thus, they must all conform to God’s Law, or they cannot stand. Roe v Wade,  

Doe v Bolton, and N.O.W. v Terryviolates God’s Law.They violate the Fifth Commandment (Exodus 20:13). The 

Ten Commandments are God’s revealed law (Exodus 31:18).  Roe and Doeviolates the self-evident, that all men are 

created equal. They cannot stand. 

            Separation of Church and State is no excuse. The Common Law has already been based on God’s Law for 

centuries. The U.S. Constitution was based on God’s Law centuries ago. The framers framed it so.  They admitted 

the existence of God and the foundation of this nation’s law on God’s law.

            All the Constitution prohibits regarding religion is the establishment of one sect of religion as having 

to be practiced by the population as a form of worship as opposed to other religions. But it did not deny the 

existence of  God. It protected the worship of God as one sees fit. The absence of religion cannot be established as 

the state religion by the American Judiciary and thereby prevent the practice of religion, 

——————————————————————————————————————–

 The side of principle is not well funded. But it is the side of truth. It is standing for principle, while government has abandon  it….

.. But the side of principle must prevail, and the government must adopt it in order to survive. As Sophocies’ Antigone  stated, no government can exist outside of God’s laws ………  Robert J. Winnemore 

Euthanasia

Arguments Against Euthanasia

Source: https://www.all.org/learn/euthanasia/arguments-against-euthanasia/

  1. Euthanasia is selling death, not life. http://www.prolifehealthcare.org/nancy-valko-rn-the-dark-side-of-euthanasia-selling-death-2011.html
  2. No matter what you call it, euthanasia, assisted suicide or something else, it is wrong. http://www.prolifehealthcare.org/euthanasia-and-assisted-suicide.html
  3. Understand the language of promoters of euthanasia and you can understand how to fight against them: http://www.prolifehealthcare.org/confusing-language-masks-deadly-agenda.html
  4. Death by dehydration is ugly, painful and wrong. Terri Schiavo’s story makes that point: http://www.lifeandhope.com/terri_schiavo
  5. Stealth Euthanasia: Using palliative care and hospice to kill people prematurely http://www.prolifehealthcare.org/stealth-euthanasia.html
  6. There is no “duty to die!” http://www.prolifehealthcare.org/nancy-valko-rn-futility-policies-and-the%20duty-to-die-2003.html
  7. Organ Donation: Crossing the Line: Linking the “right to die” with organ donation has opened a terrible Pandora’s Box. http://www.prolifehealthcare.org/nancy-valko-rn-organ-donation-crossing-the-line-12-2011.html
  8. Refusing to donate your organs may save your life! http://www.prolifehealthcare.org/organ-donation-refusal-may-save-your-life-julie-grimstad.html
  9. Train young people in these arguments by using the Culture of Life Studies Program unit study “Euthanasia: An Introduction”http://cultureoflifestudies.com/blog/euthanasia-an-introduction-released/
  10. “Life, Life Support and Death” booklet. This is an in depth examination of the use of life support machines and why the crucial difference between ordinary and extraordinary care is so important to avoid imposed death for a loved one. $3.00 each http://www.all.org/life-life-support-and-death/

American Life League acknowledges the outstanding work of the American Life League Culture of Life Studies Program, the Pro-life Healthcare Alliance and the Terri Schiavo Foundation websites from which our material was taken and to which you are invited to go to read the complete articles providing arguments against acts of euthanasia for high school students and others of every age.

Euthanasia, Incrementalism and Euphemisms; April 2020 Health & Science, Life News

Websites

Charlotte Lozier Institute

Euthanasia Prevention Coalition

Not Dead Yet Assisted Suicide Talking Points

National Catholic Bioethics Center

Patients Rights Council

Reasons to Oppose Assisted Suicide

Opposition to Assisted Suicide is bipartisan & reasonable

Opposition to NY Assisted Suicide

Opposition to Assisted Suicide Educational Conference

Infanticide

INFO ON NY RHA ACT:

http://www.prolifeli.org/images/pdf/NYS-RHA-S240-20190122.pdf

http://www.prolifeli.org/images/RHA-Fact-vs-Fiction-NYersForLife-2019.pdf

                                 

  • https://youtu.be/ItF1RBsUxXE
  • On January 22, 2019, New York Governor Andrew Como signed into law “The Reproductive Health Act”. The name of the legislation is a euphemism for legalizing the killing of fully formed human beings.  

    This act strips abortion from the penal code. Under prior New York State –(NYS) law only the “life 
    of the mother” would allow a third trimester abortion.  Under the new law, the “health
    of the mother” would allow it.  Because of definitions in previous Supreme Court decisions, specifically “ Doe  VS Bolton”, those factors that defer to the health of the mother are broadly defined;  physically, emotional,  psychological, familial, and the woman’s age.  The health of the woman is so broadly defined as to make almost any issue sufficient for a woman to get an abortion throughout all nine months of pregnancy.

    Under the new law Section 4164 of the public health law is REPEALED. This law gave full civil rights protection to a child born accidentally in a post 20 week abortion, required that such abortion be done in a hospital, and that a second doctor be available to provide care to the infant.  This new law now in effect legalizes infanticide.

    Under the new law, you do not have to be a doctor to do surgical abortions. This means that nurse practitioners, physician assistants, and midwives will be able to do so also.

    Under the new law , an attack on an unborn child that does no harm to the mother, but causes a miscarriage – because the unborn child is not a “person” under our law, -the only possible crime to prosecute might be misdemeanor assaults on the woman, a woefully inadequate remedy for such a heinous offense.

    Under the new law, it says that anyone that becomes pregnant has the fundamental right “to abortion. The term “Fundamental right” is extremely significant. It means that abortion cannot be regulated except for compelling state interests and in the narrowest way possible.  Virtually no regulations of abortion survive this “strict scrutiny” standard.  Therefore the abortion laws in NYS are dismissive of the real health of the mother. Those receiving an abortion by NYS law are not entitled to “informed consent” as every other invasive surgery requires. They also do not need parental consent or parental notification to perform an abortion in a minor, neither do they need spousal notification. 

    In New York state only a fraction of abortion providers are being inspected and only very rarely. Some are going without inspection for as long as 10 years.
    By contrast, restaurants in NY City are inspected and graded every year, and tanning salons every 2 years. This lack of inspection poses a safety concern according to documents obtained by the NY Post.

    The new law says “the state shall not discriminate against, deny or interfere with the exercise of the rights set forth…  The language poses a threat to religious freedom and conscience rights. The state can deny licenses to individuals and institutions that do not cooperate with abortion.

     Only 15.6% of those having abortions in NY pay out of pocket according to the NYS Dept. of Health. The rest are paid for through insurance or Medicaid. In fact over 50% of NY City abortions in 2016 were paid for by tax payers through Medicaid.

    New York State will become an abortion destination- because we will be one of the few States in the nation that permits late term abortions for any reason without any regulations.

                                                                                        Submitted by 
                                                                                        Chris Moore – Feb 2019
                                                                                        Past LICL Suffolk Chair

    Look at some of the people these laws would have killed…
      https://theabortionsurvivors.com

    The Faces of Choice  See incredible video of actual abortion survivors! There ad was rejected for airing  as Super Bowl commercial! 

Pro Life Apologetics

Abortion

Abortion

Articles

Joel Brind, Ph.D., is a professor of Human Biology and endocrinology and Deputy Chair for Biology at BaruchCollege, CUNY, and co-founder of the Breast Cancer PreventionInstitute. He has been teaching since 1986, and researching the abortion/breast cancer (ABC) link since1992. He recently reported that within the past decade“ literally dozens of studies” have come out of Asia and the Mideast indicating “the linkage is obvious”. Dr. Brind cites the “now raging breast cancer epidemic in China following on the infamous ‘one-child policy’ instituted in 1980. The role of abortion there became clear in 2013 [with] HubeiHuang et al. publishing a systematic review and meta-analysis of no less than three dozen studies from mainlandChina alone.” In 1996, Brind and his colleagues “documented with[their] own review and meta-analysis, among world-wide studies at that time – a 30% increase in breast cancer risk among women with a history of any induced abortions… Literally millions of women are paying the price for what I have often described as a cover-up. All these results mean that the trade association of the people that perform abortions(associations such as the American College of ObGynsand the Royal College of ObGyns) has a major PR problem on their hands. Sure, you can recycle the old lies promulgated by the US National Cancer Institute (NCI)back in 2003, but the 14-year-old conclusions about allegedly‘safe abortion’ are a bit old and the ‘evidence’ almost laughably outdated.” Brind refers to the recent “fact sheet” distributed by the abortion advocacy group Abortion Law Reform AssociationNew Zealand as a “refurbished pack of lies”. The factsheet refers to NCI’s 2003 ‘workshop’ findings that “neither induced nor spontaneous abortions are linked to arise (sic) in breast cancer risk.” Brind states that he was one of the experts at the ‘workshop’ and that they “were not even permitted to examine the data during this charade of one-sided presentations.” Brind states that the NCI disburses grant money for most breast cancer research. Brindwrote a minority report contradicting the findings. One researcher who declined to collaborate on the minority report told Brind, “I have to live with these people every day; they have to sign off on my grants.” The NCI calls Brind’sreport a ‘minority dissenting comment’ on their website, but provides “no link to the text or even a mention of the author’s name.” (To access the report, go to bcpinstitute.org.)The first “fact” on the New Zealand fact sheet states, “Many studies with strong research designs conducted throughout the world with hundreds of thousands of women unanimously conclude that women who have had either spontaneous or induced abortions do not have a subsequent elevated risk for developing breast cancer.” Brind asks, “How many is many? They don’t say. Nor – most importantly– do they say what proportion of existing studies they are talking about. It is only to state the obvious that the absence of such basic data is very disturbing.” Brand then comments on the phrase “studies with strong research designs”. He notes that the phrase sounds “impressive, even meaningful, but it has no meaning whatsoever, because they don’t say whether they are good studies or bad.(Most of these ‘many’ are actually probably fraudulent, and [Brind has] published deconstructions of them many times in…peer-reviewed medical literature.” Brind then comments on the phrase that these studies ‘unanimously conclude’: “So, for example, say you have 100 studies. 20come to one conclusion (say, that there’s no link between abortion and breast cancer), and 80 of them come to the opposite conclusion (that there is a link between abortion and breast cancer). Well, in a sense the 20 studies can be called ‘many’, right? Taking the ‘many’ (20) studies (even though which in fact they comprise a small minority of the100 total studies), we can truthfully say that these ‘many’studies ‘unanimously conclude’ that there is no link…This should set a new world’s Olympic record in gymnastics – verbal gymnastics, that is! But real facts – like the fact that abortion does indeed raise a woman’s risk of breast cancer – are not subject to majority rule by organizations which engage in such deceptive marketing. Yes, they can be denied by a majority of health ministries, abortion associations, even voluntary anti-cancer charities (in reality, all the same cadre of politically correct population controllers), and you may arrive at any ‘consensus’ you like.Facts – real facts – are indeed stubborn things. The earth is round…and abortion increases a woman’s risk of breast cancer.” Iceland recently reported that they “are on the verge of
eliminating Down Syndrome”. Fr. Shenan Boquet of Human
Life International asks, “But how has Iceland
achieved this seeming miracle of modern medicine? Peel
back the cheerful headline, and one discovers a true Pandora’s
box of horrors.” Fr. Boquet notes that prenatal testing
for Down’s in Iceland is nearly universal and nearly
100% of the children diagnosed with Down’s are aborted.
(Iceland has not eliminated Down’s, they have eliminated
people with Down’s.) But Iceland is not alone.
Some studies show that 9 out of every 10 children diagnosed
with Down’s are aborted. “Many western countries
like the US, France, and Denmark – Denmark claiming a
98% abortion rate for unborn children diagnosed with
Down syndrome – are active participants in this atrocious
act of discrimination.” Fr. Boquet continues, “As horrifying as a government- imposed eugenics program is, surely there is something
equally horrifying in the fact that the eugenic mentality
has penetrated so deeply into the public mindset that there
is no longer any need for government intervention: so that
barely a single mother or father can be found…left to fight
the zeitgeist and unconditionally welcome their unborn
child with Down’s for the mere fact that he or she is their
baby, “imperfections” and all.” One study of those living
with Down’s found that 99% of them are “happy” with
their lives. Another study found that 99% of the parents of
children with Down’s love their child, and 97% of them
were “proud of them”. An Icelandic woman with Down’s
stated, “They only see Down syndrome. They don’t see
me. It doesn’t feel good. I want people to see that I am
just like everybody else.”

SURGICAL ABORTIONS involve an invasive
procedure:
Vacuum Aspiration is done in the first trimester. A
hollow plastic suction tube is inserted into the dilated
cervix. The uterus is emptied by either a manual syringe
or high-powered suction machine. The broken pieces of
the child are pulled through the hose.
Dilation and Suction Curettage (D & C) is similar to
the vacuum aspiration, but generally used after 14 weeks.
After the child is suctioned out of the uterus, the
abortionist inserts a curette and cuts the placenta and
umbilical cord into pieces and scrapes them out into a
basin. The uterus is suctioned out to be sure no body parts
have been left behind. Bleeding is usually profuse.
Dilation and Extraction (D & E): The cervix must be
dilated considerably farther than in 1st-trimester abortions.
Forceps are used since the baby’s bones are calcified. The
abortionist uses the forceps to grab the baby’s leg or other
body part and with a twisting motion tears it from the
body. The spine is snapped and the skull crushed. The
body parts must be reassembled and counted to assure that
the entire baby has been removed and nothing remains in
the womb.
Induction or Prostaglandin Abortion: Labor is induced
using prostaglandin drugs, and the cervix is dilated. To
ensure that the baby is dead upon delivery and to start
uterine contractions, saline or urea is injected. To
guarantee against a live birth, Digoxin or potassium
chloride may be injected directly into the baby’s heart to
kill the child before delivery. Other times the child may be
delivered alive and left without medical intervention until
the child dies. This method is used in the 2nd or 3rd
trimester.
Dilation and Extraction (D & X or partial-birth
abortion): The mother undergoes 2 days of dilation. The
abortionist performs an ultrasound to locate the child’s legs
and feet. Forceps are used to pull the legs into a feet-down
position. The abortionist uses his hands to deliver the child
in a manner similar to a breech birth. The head remains
inside the birth canal. Surgical scissors are used to pierce
the child’s head at the base of the skull and forced open to
enlarge the skull opening. A suction catheter is then used
to remove the brain tissue. This machine is 29 times more
powerful than a household vacuum.
CHEMICAL/MEDICAL ABORTIONS involve the
administration of drugs specifically intended to abort the
child or drugs which, at least part of the time, may prevent
implantation.
Emergency Contraception (EC) – Plan B: EC contains
synthetic (not naturally occurring) progesterone and is a
large dose of the common birth control pill. It is designed
to be taken within 72 hours after ‘unprotected sex’.
EC works in 3 ways. It attempts to stop ovulation, stop
fertilization by impeding the transportation of sperm to the
egg, or stop implantation by altering (thinning) the lining
of the endometrium so that the embryo cannot implant and
receive nourishment from the mother. The first 2 methods
are contraceptive, but if they fail, the third method causes
an abortion, since it occurs after fertilization.
Ulipristal Acetate (UPA) – ella is a selective progesterone
receptor modulator (SPRM). SPRMs block the action of the
hormone progesterone, which is necessary for ovulation
and implantation and maintaining the lining of the uterus to
support the embryo. Mifepristone (RU-486) is also an
SPRM. ella is billed as an EC, even though it acts similar
to RU-486. It is designed to be taken within 5 days of
‘unprotected sex’ and is thought to inhibit or delay
ovulation in order to prevent fertilization. However,
ovulation may have already occurred. ella can also alter
the lining of the uterus, which will prevent an embryo
from implanting, causing an abortion.
RU-486 – Mifeprex (The Abortion Pill): Mifeprex blocks
the action of progesterone, which is needed to maintain the
lining of the uterus and provide oxygen and nutrients for
the child. Mifeprex is used with Cytotec (misoprostol).
Cytotec causes uterine bleeding, which can be profuse,
strong contractions and expulsion of the child. A woman
receives the Mifeprex pills on the first visit, returns 2 days
later for the misoprostol, and a third visit is required to
verify that the abortion is complete. The ‘failure’ rate of
this method is 8% at 7 weeks, and up to 23% at 8 or 9
weeks. If the child survives this abortion attempt, there is
a higher risk of mental and/or physical birth defects from
the misoprostol.
Hormonal Contraceptives: All hormonal contraceptives
including the pill, mini pill, patch, vaginal ring, intrauterine
device (IUD), or injection can work in one of 3 ways:
prevent ovulation, prevent fertilization or prevent implantation.
As stated earlier, the first 2 methods are contraceptive,
but if they fail, the third method causes an abortion.
Risks and side effects from abortion include breast cancer,
post-abortion grief which may result in emotional and
physical disturbances (including depression, insomnia,
nervousness, guilt and regret, alcohol and drug abuse, and
suicidal thoughts), complications in future pregnancies
(including excessive bleeding, premature delivery, placenta
previa, retention of the placenta, cervical damage and
sterility), pelvic inflammatory disease (PID), uterine
perforations, and tubal (ectopic) pregnancy. Risks from
hormonal birth control include blood clots, ectopic
pregnancy, bacterial infections, increased susceptibility to
the AIDS virus and increased risk of cervical and breast
cancer. Studies have also shown an increase in sexually
transmitted infection rates since EC became widely
available. 

Sources: Human Life Alliance, ‘Do you have an open mind?’, and www.all.org

Randall K. O’Bannon, Ph.D., NRL Director of
Education & Research, commented in National Right
to Life News Today on December 1st and 2nd on the
latest CDC report. The US Centers for Disease Control
(CDC) recently released their abortion surveillance
report for 2011. There was a significant drop in the
number, rate and ratio of abortions in the US. (Note:
the most populous state, California, as well as
Maryland and New Hampshire did not submit data).
The Guttmacher Institute (a nonprofit research
organization that supports abortion) issued a report
earlier this year that also showed a notable drop in the
number of abortions. The CDC reported 730,322
abortions for 2011. The Guttmacher Institute reported
1,058,470 for the same year. The Guttmacher Institute
surveys abortion facilities directly. The CDC relies on
state health reports. This explains the higher number
reported by Guttmacher. Therefore, Guttmacher’s
numbers are viewed as more accurate. However,
Guttmacher only issues reports every few years. The
CDC reports annually, and tracks the same variables
most years.
The 2011 total is the lowest number of abortions
reported by the CDC since California, New Hampshire
and at least one other state were dropped in 1998. The
abortion rate of 13.9 (number of abortions per 1000
women ages 15-44) is the lowest recorded rate since
1973. The abortion ratio (number of abortions for
every 1000 live births) was 359 in 1980. The abortion
ratio for 2011 was 219 – quite a significant drop.
Women aged 29 and younger had 71.7% of the
reported abortions in the 2011 CDC report. 32.9%
of these were women aged 20-24. Overall, teens
accounted for 13.9% of all abortions in 2011. In 1980,
teens accounted for 29.2% of all abortions.
The abortion rate for women 30-34 did not drop as
significantly, and the abortion rate for women 35-39
went up 1.4% and for women 40 and over there was a
7.7% increase. O’Bannon questions whether this could
reflect a generational attitude difference (younger
women more pro-life) or the result of more pre-natal
genetic testing which results in abortion after a
negative diagnosis.
More abortions were done at less than 8 weeks
gestation in 2011 (64.5%) than in 1973 (36.1%). More
than 1/3 of all abortions are now done at 6 weeks or
less. O’Bannon notes the significant increase in the use
of chemical abortion methods. However, most abortions
(79.4%) still fall under “curettage” which includes
manual vacuum aspiration, suction aspiration, D&E
(dilation and evacuation) and other surgical methods.
Abortions at 14 weeks gestation or more accounted for
8.7% of all abortions. 7,325 were done at 21 weeks or
more.
The Wednesday STOPP report of December 3, 2014
issued by Stop Planned Parenthood noted that the CDC
report showed that abortion ratios throughout the entire
period were highest among girls under the age of 15, and
that abortion ratios decreased from 2002 to 2011 for
women in all age groups except those under 15. The
STOPP report noted that a Planned Parenthood fact
sheet acknowledges that adolescents are more likely to
have an abortion at 21 weeks gestation or later.
Most abortions (85.5%) involve unmarried women.
46.4% of all abortions were repeat abortions with 25.5%
having one previous abortion, 11.6% having 2 and 9.3%
reporting 3 or more previous abortions. 60% of all
women reported having had at least one previous live
birth. 19.6% had at least 2 children and 13.9% had 3 or
more. O’Bannon notes that this indicates a need to
address the needs of the young, single mom as well as
the high school teenager.
Race and ethnicity are more difficult to report, since
the states track this information differently or not at all.
However, O’Bannon reports that abortion rates for
Hispanics dropped more than those for non-Hispanics,
and that although African Americans make up 14.2% of
the US population, African American women accounted
for 36-38% of all abortions in the US in 2011. Abortion
rates for African Americans did go down over the past
10 years, but are still much higher than other groups.
The black abortion rate is 25.8 versus 7.8 for white. The
black abortion ratio is 381 abortions for every 1000 live
births and 126 abortions for whites. O’Bannon states that
these numbers indicate a need to increase the pro-life
outreach to minority communities.
Dr. O’Bannon notes that although the number of
abortions has dropped significantly over the past 20
years, women are still dying from abortion. 10 women
are known to have died in 2010 (CDC abortion mortality
figures are always behind by one year). For 11 years, 6
or more women have died from abortions. He notes that
the risk of death from abortion figures reported by the
CDC for the past decade are actually higher than it was
for the previous one. He acknowledges that we have
made progress, but there are still many ways for us to
save unborn babies and their mothers.

Websites

“God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are a gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed, I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that His justice cannot sleep forever.”

Thomas Jefferson, 1781

Media

Changing Attitudes on Abortion

s

Handicap/Down Syndrome

Handicap / Down Syndrome

Note: The article transcripts above have been generated from original source text. While the transcript rarely is inaccurate, thing happen. For a 100% percent accurate copy of any of the above articles, click the download button to get a PDF.

Post Abortion

Post Abortion

Websites

Help Resources – Pregnancy & Post Abortion

Pregnant? Need help? 24-hour hotlines:
International Pregnancy Hotline:  1-800-395-HELP [optionline.org]

Birthright International hotline:  1-800-550-4900

Note: The article transcripts above have been generated from original source text. While the transcript rarely is inaccurate, thing happen. For a 100% percent accurate copy of any of the above articles, click the download button to get a PDF.