Demoncrat Deception, Equivocation, and Hypocrisy About Abortion
The commentary in this article relates to the following video:
All of the people in the above video are legislators who derive ALL of their livelihood and importance from bribing otherwise FREE Americans protected by the Constitution to surrender ALL of their Constitutional rights in exchange for grants of statutory privileges. These statutes then are used in effect as a “license to sin” based on God’s definition of “sin”. Christians should not be using ANYTHING as a “license to sin”, and certainly not man’s law.
Do Christians Have a License to Sin?
https://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Basics/license_to_sin.htm
The only CIVIL law Christians can live under is the one that comes from our ONLY “lawgiver”, God. Isaiah 33:22. The source of law within any society is, in fact, is the GOD of that society, according to Rousas Rushdoony:
Why All Man-Made Law is Religious in Nature, Rousas Rushdoony
https://famguardian.org/Subjects/LawAndGovt/ChurchVState/WhyAllManmadeLawRelig.htm
Any attempt to REPLACE or CIRCUMVENT God’s CIVIL laws is a violation of the First Amendment and the First Commandment to serve God with all of our mind, soul, and strength. Christians cannot join any society or “benefit” from any aspect of the civil laws of a society that does this, because they violate the FIRST FOUR commandments of the Ten Commandments in doing so. See:
Delegation of Authority Order from God to Christians, Form #13.007
https://sedm.org/Forms/13-SelfFamilyChurchGovnce/DelOfAuthority.pdf
Below is how the U.S. Supreme Court describes how legislators in the above video BRIBE the people to give up constitutional rights to pursue privileges and inequality. What the people in the above video are proposing to do upon LOSS of a recognition of abortion as a PRIVATE right is replace it with a legislatively created PUBLIC privilege that destroys constitutional rights for those who accept the privilege:
The Court developed, for its own governance in the cases confessedly within its jurisdiction, a series of rules under which it has avoided passing upon a large part of all the constitutional questions pressed upon it for decision. They are:
[. . .]
6. The Court will not pass upon the constitutionality of a statute at the instance of one who has availed himself of its benefits.FN7 Great Falls Mfg. Co. v. Attorney General, 124 U.S. 581, 8 S.Ct. 631, 31 L.Ed. 527; Wall v. Parrot Silver & Copper Co., 244 U.S. 407, 411, 412, 37 S.Ct. 609, 61 L.Ed. 1229; St. Louis Malleable Casting Co. v. Prendergast Construction Co., 260 U.S. 469, 43 S.Ct. 178, 67 L.Ed. 351.
_____________
FOOTNOTES:
FN7 Compare Electric Co. v. Dow, 166 U.S. 489, 17 S.Ct. 645, 41 L.Ed. 1088; Pierce v. Somerset Ry., 171 U.S. 641, 648, 19 S.Ct. 64, 43 L.Ed. 316; Leonard v. Vicksburg, etc., R. Co., 198 U.S. 416, 422, 25 S.Ct. 750, 49 L.Ed. 1108.
[Ashwander v. Tennessee Valley Authority, 297 U.S. 288, 56 S.Ct. 466 (1936)]
A central theme of this website is focusing on definitions, who has the right to write them, and how allowing them to be defined by anything by God (the Creator) or the Constitution ALWAYS leads to deception and slavery. We cover this in:
Legal Deception, Propaganda, and Fraud, Form #05.014
https://sedm.org/Forms/05-MemLaw/LegalDecPropFraud.pdf
The following table is provided describing the euphemisms used in the above speech and their ACTUAL meaning to remove DECEPTION by the various speakers:
| # | Euphemism | Actual legal term | Comments |
| 1 | Right | Legislative privilege granted to consenting club members only | Legislation or a grant isn’t needed for a real private right. |
| 2 | Equality of rights | Superiority over children | Only legislative privileges can create inequality. Real law requires equality of all that legislation can’t take away. |
| 3 | My body | TWO bodies: mine and the one in side me | By what right does a woman speak for those who can’t speak inside them? |
| 4 | Reproductive Healthcare | Deathcare for children | An abortion is infanticide and murder that has a victim. Murder is not “healthcare” and certainly not “reproduction” but anti-reproduction. |
| 5 | Pro Choice | Pro Murder | A just society that protects all EQUALLY, including BOTH the mother and the OTHER person inside of her. The foundation of justice is equality of ALL parties affected by any behavior or action or choice. |
| 6 | All Americans | All BORN Americans | Infants or fetuses are not “Americans” |
| 7 | Civil rights | Legislative privileges | Civil rights are statutory and legislatively created. Constitutional rights are not civil rights, but “civil liberties”. Click here (Form #10.002) for details. |
| 8 | Personal decision | Decision of a public officer | Legislatively protected abortion as a public right is a privilege exercised only by public officers called civil statutory “persons” who have been granted special prerogatives by surrendering all of the constitutional rights in exchange for such privileges. |
| 9 | Harm | Financial damage | Democrats define “harm” on commercial basis. They say that the poor are disproportionately “harmed” by invalidating Roe. But what about the “harm” of murder to the “baby” who is a “person” and an “American”. Why aren’t they talking about THAT also? |
| 10 | Family | Everyone but the MEMBER of the family in the woman’s body | The fetus is a MEMBER of the family. You can’t protect “the family” without protecting ALL OF its members. |
Below is an example of Demoncrat equivocation with the phrase “my body my choice” and how it is twisted.
All of this equivocation is there to protect feminist advocates from societal backlash against the very damaging effects of their philosophy and the hyper-sexualization that mandates it, as described in:
Sex: The Cart Before the Horse-Nike Insights
https://nikeinsights.famguardian.org/forums/topic/sex-the-cart-before-the-horse/
The government speakers in the above video repeatedly emphasize a RIGHT to literally FORCE someone other than them to pay for their healthcare. In other words, a right to STEAL using the tax system. That so-called “right” is really then only a PRIVILEGE and a “license to sin”, because THEFT is always a sin that violates the Ten Commandments.
They also talk in the above video about the right to control “your own body”. Well, what about the right of SELF-OWNERSHIP, which implies the right to EXCLUDE any and all governments from using, controlling, or “benefitting” from your labor. If you own yourself, then the government can’t use civil legislation to make you a SLAVE or impose civil obligations upon you SUCH AS the PRIVILEGE to force SOMEONE else to allow you to murder an unborn baby. HYPOCRITES!
On the subject of abortion, the Bible declares it unbiblical:
Open your mouth for the speechless,
In the cause of all who are appointed to die.
Open your mouth, judge righteously,
And plead the cause of the poor and needy.
[Prov. 31:8-9, Bible, NKJV]
The unborn are the “speechless” in the above scripture. Who defends and SPEAKS for THEM? Certainly none of the Demoncrats in the above video.
For a little biblical history, abortion advocacy in old times was called “Molech Worship”, and it was a GRAVE sin:
The Tragic History of Molech Child Sacrifice
https://www.chabad.org/parshah/article_cdo/aid/4372130/jewish/The-Tragic-History-of-Molech-Child-Sacrifice.htm
Molech child sacrifice was invented to account for the consequence of “rooftop orgies”. Such indulgent orgies produced unwanted children, just like the fornication (sex outside of marriage) of today. We have the same phenomenon today.
Ending a life against their will or without their choice or informed consent is murder. The below image REALLY should say:
“Two bodies, one inside and one outside, but I’m the only one who gets to choose to kill the one that can’t speak because me and my reckless irresponsibility and promiscuity is more important”.
Yes, women should have a CHOICE. That choice, however, should limit itself to WHO they sleep with and making sure that the person they sleep with is married and committed to them and is willing to share the responsibility of parenting. If their sexual partner isn’t willing to do these things, they shouldn’t have sex with them and therefore would never have a NEED for an abortion. That’s the only RIGHTEOUS biblical choice that anyone has under God’s Laws. To endorse or protect any other kind of lifestyle, and especially fornication (sex outside of marriage) is biblical sin that should NEVER be “protected” by any form of legislation. All such secular legislation would constitute:
- Mutiny against God and His Holy laws.
- Biblical idolatry.
- A “license to sin”.
A balanced view of abortion by Jordan Peterson:
The most important question about abortion:
According to Prager U in the video above, at best, abortion is “irrational”. At worst, it is MURDER. What causes this irrationality? Hedonism and idolatry towards self. The reason liberals who advocate abortion try to “cancel” or censor people with the views in this article, is because they really have no rational defense for their hedonistic idolatry that would survive a civilized debate. Neither do drug addicts whose addictions are challenged. All that an addictive personality can do in response to a challenge to a denial of the thing they are addicted to is lash out. Sexual promiscuity and sex addiction is a form of drug addiction. The only difference is that the drug is naturally produced internally by the body and has a different name: Dopamine. More at:
Sexual Immorality/Sin-Family Guardian Fellowship
https://famguardian.org/Subjects/SexualImmorality/Sex.htm
In the above video, Prager concludes:
” A good society cannot survive by calling immoral things moral.”
We would add to that that:
“A good society cannot survive by abusing secular law to protect immorality in conflict with God’s law”. In other words, “using legislation as a license to sin or act immorally”.
The bible says of this kind of sin at the end of the Book of Judges the following:
“In those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did what was right in his own eyes.”
[Judges 21:25, Bible, NKJV]
The product of the above was nothing but sin and corruption. Today it’s not much different:
“In these days, everyone thought they were the king and did only ‘what feels or looks good’, rather than what IS good measured by the yardstick of God’s laws.”
Lastly, even “Norma McCorvey – “Roe” herself – the woman who represents the decision – had a surprising change of heart on the issue of abortion later in life. McCorvey started a “pro-life” organization “Roe No More” in 1997 and even filed in court in 2003 to try to have Roe v. Wade overturned. The attempt was unsuccessful.
https://subscriptlaw.com/roe-v-wade/
For more on the subject of this article, see:
- Life Topic (Abortion, Aging, Cloning, and Euthenasia) (OFFSITE LINK) -Family Guardian
- The Sanctity of Life (OFFSITE LINK) -Ligonier Ministries