STATE ‘PERSONHOOD’ AMENDMENTS ARE REALISTIC AND TIMELY
31 March 2008
Seven Catholic Bishops and some other pro-life advocates who share the goal to end the slaughter of the innocents do not support state personhood legislation or constitutional amendments because they believe such means are not realistic, timely, or the best way to do things. Herein are reasons to support state legislation and amendments for personhood of all humans from fertilization.
As a prosecutor in the city of Corpus Christi, Texas, from 1958 to 1968, I prosecuted Texas criminal abortion laws, and since 1973 I have represented many pro-life advocates in criminal and civil trials and appellate defense, and have served as an officer of Texas Right to Life, Inc., and Corpus Christi Right to Life, Inc. Presently I serve as president of Corpus Christi Right to Life, Inc. and advisor to American Life League, and for the past 50 years I have been in courtrooms, in elected public office, at the abortion clinics, in jail for my convictions, and recently on the web site CorpusChristiRighttoLife.com
I have appealed several cases to the highest courts in Texas and three cases to the United States Supreme Court with the proof that all human beings are persons from fertilization, but there were not four judges on the Supreme Court who wanted the truth to be made public, so they did not grant Certiorari. Boushey v. Texs 804 SW2 148, TX Appeals 1990.
The Roe decision failed to give any justification for reading an exception for unborn children into the scope of the term "person" as used in the fourteenth amendment, and no valid justification appears from other sources. On the contrary, history, science, logic, laws and justice all reject such arbitrary limitation on personhood as birth or viability.
As a matter of fact a national amendment is not the only way to provide protection for all innocent humans, because unborn humans are already included in the Preamble of the Constitution which states that the Constitution is made "…for ourselves and our posterity…" and unborn children from fertilization are existing flesh and blood posterity.
The Supreme Court stated in Roe v. Wade, "…If…personhood [of the unborn] is established…the fetus’ right to life is then guaranteed specifically by the Fourteenth Amendment." (410 U.S.113,157, 1973) The determination of personhood is the duty of Congress under Art. 5 of the 14th Amendment, and Congress has already defined persons in 1 U.S.C.1, "In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, unless the context indicates otherwise…the words ‘person’ and ‘whoever’ include…individuals." The Supreme Court has accepted as Congressional defined "persons" corporations and other legal fictions for 14th Amendment protection, so how could the Supreme Court deny due process and equal protection to living flesh and blood innocent human beings, who are "individuals" by the best evidence of DNA, accepted by all courts.
The Supreme Court did not limit where the proof of "personhood" could come, even though Art. 5 of the 14th Amendment placed enforcement duty on the Congress, who until the present has failed their duty, and will never do with a pro-abortion Democratic majority. The Supreme Court based Roe on a one witness written statement, so there is no reason why it cannot reverse Roe on the DNA evidence and all other credible evidence from whatever source, but will be more inclined to hear a states evidence based on hearings and facts.
State constitution amendments are realistic to reverse Roe because state legislators have a sworn duty to protect all innocent humans in their state, and using legal methods are better than the means of civil war, which was the only way to overturn judicial legalized slavery at that time. Now ‘personhood’ is conclusively proven by DNA evidence that "Individuals" are "Persons" as defined in 1 U.S.C. 1 by Congress who have authority and duty to enforce the 14th Amendment "Right to Life."
State constitution amendments are timely because the national judicial and congressional authorities have failed to provide the most basic human and constitutional "Right to Life" for 35 years, with no indication that they will uphold their oaths of office and protect all innocent humans under the 5th and 14th Amendment. Another timely reason is that most surgical abortions are becoming obsolete because of early abortifacient drugs and devices, and the determination of "personhood" is the only way to protect unborn humans from the time of fertilization.
It may not be the best way to reverse Roe because the United States Constitution places the primary duty on Congress, but it may be the best way at this time, because as responsible citizens we cannot tolerate continued legal murder of thousands of helpless innocent humans every day.
Cliff Zarsky, JD, KGCHS
cc:
Most Reverend Charles J. Chaput
Most Reverend Arthur N. Tafoya
Most Reverend Michael J. Sheridan
Most Reverend Wilton D. Gregory
Most Reverend J. Kevin Boland
Most Reverend Michael W. Warfel
Most Rev. George Leo Thomas
, D.D., Dioceseof Helena
515 N. Ewing, Helena, Mt. 58624-1729, Diocese of Great Falls/Billings
Great Falls, MT 59501-3939, Diocese of Savannah
601 E. Liberty St., Savannah, GA 31401, S.L.D., Archdiocese of Atlanta
680 West Peachtree Street, N.W., Atlanta, Georgia 30308, S.T.D., Bishop of Colorado Springs
228 N. Cascade Avenue, Colorado Springs, CO80903-1322, D.D., Bishop of Pueblo
100N. Grand Avenue, Pueblo, CO 81003-2984, O.F.M. Cap, D.D., Bishop of Denver
1300 S. Steele St., Denver, Co.80210-2599