For those of you concerned the preservation of the lives of the unborn against the 21st century Black Plague of abortion, read the following excerpt from an entry on the webpage of
Michael Peroutka,, candidate for the presidency of the United States.
But what can be done against procedurally sound acts, but unconstitutional acts of the Judiciary? Pro-lifers like to make a comparison between the Dred Scott decision and Roe v. Wade to demonstrate the fallibility of the Supreme Court. Why not use the same tactics to overcome the pernicious Roe decision as did 22 states after Dred Scott? Wisconsin "denounced the Supreme Court for 'assumption of power' and declared 'that the several States … have the unquestionable right' to exercise 'positive defiance' in behalf of their interpretation of the powers reserved to the States by the Constitution."[25] It has been more than 30 years and over 43 million puréed babies, and not one state out of fifty has interposed itself between the general government in Washington and a struggling life in the womb. The states have neglected their duties for 30 years; nonetheless, they are duty-bound to interpose to arrest the evil of abortion.
Wouldn't it be wonderful if states had the guts to do this? Why was the error of the Dred Scott decision something states were willing to stand against, while today the murder of millions of unborn babies is protected under the ridiculous guise of "a woman's right to choose"? Where are the sensible and life-respecting governors and legislators? Who speaks for the unborn anymore? Anyone??
The next paragraph from Peroutka's essay offers a wonderful suggestion:
A Constitutionally-minded state's Attorney General could open-up his copy of the state's laws, pull out the statutes still on the books declaring abortion illegal and prosecute, interposing himself between the Federal government and the unborn person he is trying to protect.[26] Absent an abortion law, is not a personal service contract to terminate a life (called a "hit" when the mark is born) homicide or manslaughter under Common Law, if not statute? A governor could pronounce that the shield of Justice will extend into the womb, unborn children will be protected against the enforceability of such illegal contracts and that he will call upon the Attorney General to prosecute the murdering abortionist and the people who consorted to have the unborn child "hit" under accomplice liability theory.
Again... we are SO brainwashed to accept the pronouncements of the Supreme Court as though they are from the very lips of God that I imagine not one of the 50 governors or one of the 50 attorneys general even thinks this is an option (if he would be willing to make such a stand, in the first place!) God, send us just ONE such brave and righteous man who is willing to take such a righteous position!
The full essay may be found at the following link.