Wake Up Call to Trump MAGA EVANGELICAL CHRISTIANS who believe our current Justices will overturn Roe vs Wade
For a true snapshot into how utterly corrupt our so called Conservative Supreme Court and Judiciary system is read and compare these brief commentary. Who are they kidding?
A 1973 Supreme Court decision, Roe v. Wade, legalized abortion by a 7-2 vote. Six of the seven justices in the majority were Republican appointees. The only Democrat appointee, Byron White, voted against Roe v. Wade.
In fact, in every year since 1969, the United States Supreme Court has been controlled by a majority of Republican-appointed judges. There has not been a Democrat-appointed Chief Justice since 1953.
Currently, there are seven Republican appointees and two nominated by Democrats. Obviously, if the Republican majority has wanted to overturn Roe v. Wade at any time since 1973, they had the votes to do so. Why haven’t they?
Just Days After Confirmation, ACB Faces Decision on Abortion Case
The Supreme Court may be faced with a major abortion case soon, making it one of the first cases Justice Amy Coney Barrett could decide on.
The Supreme Court on Monday decided it would consider the Mississippi attorney general’s petition to review the state’s 15-week abortion ban. The court should announce its decision whether it will take up the case as soon as next Monday.
Yes, the day before the election.
This is the result of Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch petitioning the Supreme Court in hopes that it will clarify the meaning of viability in the context of abortion.
Fitch is appealing a decision made by a lower appeals court which determined that the ban was unconstitutional.
In the seven-page supplemental brief, Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch pointed to separate abortion-related cases where federal appeals court judges have extracted different interpretations of the Supreme Court’s decision in June Medical Services v. Russo — the court’s most recent abortion case which struck down a Louisiana abortion regulation,” CBS News reported.
If the court decides to take up the case, Barrett will immediately be subject to public pressure and scrutiny.
Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 court decision that deemed abortion constitutional, was frequently asked about during Barrett’s confirmation hearings earlier this month.
Democratic Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar asked Barrett about her views on super-precedents, or cases that are considered to be “well settled.”
“I’m answering a lot of questions about Roe … which I think indicates that Roe doesn’t fall in that category,” Barrett responded, according to NPR.
In the past, Barrett’s signature also appeared on a pro-life advertisement in the Notre Dame Law School newspaper, where she attended and later worked as faculty.
“We renew our call for the unborn to be protected in law,” the advertisement said, according to ABC News.
Barrett’s confirmation is a victory for Pro-Life activists, as she solidifies the conservative majority on the Supreme Court.
The Roe v. Wade case would prove to be one of the most controversial cases ever tried by the Supreme Court. The implications leading to the Supreme
The court case itself, as well as the immediate aftereffects, are ones that are still being debated today by numerous factions.
The main issue disputed in Roe v. Wade was women’s rights to an abortion. At the time, several states had restrictions considering abortion, ranging from the overall ban of the practice to allowing abortion through approval of a medical panel. Furthermore, it would be the opposition of several religious factions that would lend for more controversy to the issue, specifically when the Supreme Court rendered a decision in favor of allowing abortion to be a legal practice.
Roe v. Wade would become the landmark United States Supreme Court decision on the issue of abortion. Even though the courts would render abortion a legal practice, they also implemented certain restrictions, such as the right to abortion is limited depending on the stage of pregnancy. Additionally, the courts provided for a viability clause, which was defined as the fetus’ potential for survival outside of the womb of the mother, even if artificial aid is to be implemented. Medically speaking, viability occurs at about the seventh month of pregnancy. However, it can occur beforehand.
Roe v. Wade would have Constitutional implications on several levels. Firstly, those using the Constitution in opposition to abortion rights cited that there was no implicit provision regarding the issue in the Constitution. Because of this reason, many believed that such a right should be within the power of the states to resolve and decide to implement. Chief
Justice Warren E. Burger, however, would delve into Constitutional law further by examining its contained provisions, and thus, being able to confirm the decision to grant the right to abortion within the scope of Constitutional laws.
The Supreme Court would rule that abortion was a fundamental right provided by the United States Constitution. Initially, the decision was based upon the Constitution’s Ninth
Amendment. It was argued that the Ninth Amendment rights granted to the people would encompass a woman’s decision to have an abortion under the interpretation that the Ninth Amendment would protect inferred rights not specifically enumerated by the Constitution.
However, it would be the The Fourteenth Amendment that would be more applicable
in the case for further protecting the right to privacy based on the Constitution’s Due Process Clause. It was also ascertained that abortion rights where protected by the Bill of Rights as a whole, wherever provisions to the right of privacy, such as marital, familial, and sexual matters are discussed. The Judges’ majority decision on Roe v. Wade itself proves to exhibit how complicated the case actually was, for it was divided into twelve
sections plus a preface, which include all of the considerations that were evaluated
to render the decision in favor of Roe.
One of the most important clauses contained therein would be the Justices’ application of the Constitution without having implemented any particular sentiment or emotion regarding the case regardless of personal views. They would apply the Constitution without any reservation, regardless of the outcome of the decision. The majority opinion also states that the decision would also be applied in concurrence with medical views and history, for abortion, was not just a legal issue, but a health issue. Overall, the judges would conclude that the purpose of the Constitution was not to evaluate conflicting issues or ideals, but rather to provide for rights and regulations the commonwealth could agree upon to govern the country as a whole.
It is without a doubt that the final decision of the Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade would end in controversy and such disputes are still encountered today, with various grassroots movements existing that oppose abortion, as well as religious entities stating their beliefs on the matter. Those that support abortion rights have gone so far as citing the Thirteenth Amendment, claiming that denying abortion rights would compel a woman to forcefully bear a child and undergo pregnancy, which can be considered “involuntary servitude”. Even though this argument has not necessarily been evaluated in terms of Constitutionality, it proves to be yet another viewpoint that uses Constitutional law against abortion bans.
During the confirmation hearing of our new Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett was asked several times about her views on Roe V Wade. She did leave a heavy hint saying that Roe V Wade wasn’t a closed case. Also we all know Justice Barrett is a staunch Catholic and advocate for Pro Life. Saying this, however, we must remember that Justice Barrett is a very staunch Constitutionalist. Over and over again I have personally heard her say her job is to uphold the US Constitution. Her love of our US Constitution is moving and quite powerful. Please note her countenance in her swearing in ceremony:
Saying this, why would we think she’d throw out the extensive rights afforded women through the US Constitution that was hammered out in Roe V Wade? Read my Blog below about our US Constitution and how it was man’s creation and certainly not God’s.
If I’m wrong and the Supreme Court overturns Roe V Wade, this will be a huge prophetic sign of the coming Noahide Laws. Please See my Blog below about Noahide Laws in the Zionist Trump MAGA Blog: AntiZionism is NOT AntiSemitism
The US Constitution is NOT ordained by God, but rather man.
The Purpose of the study is not to speak out against the United States Constitution but rather show how our entire Government was ordained and established by the Constitution as the will of man and not by God. Our constitution and government as amazing as it is, is flawed as in any form of government. Today during this Trump MAGA Evangelical crazed era, there are sadly too many Christians who venerate our Constitution and Trump. This is blasphemy and therefore the reason I want to Blog my disagreement on the MAGA Evangelical craze which I’m seeing more so called Christians venerating the US Constituion. Please see the link regarding the Trump MAGA Evangelical-Zionist-Jesuit Coalition (1) in notes below. I as both an American who loves and serves God as well as love my country the United States of America, believe that God allowed the United States to break free from England and form a new government in the new world for his divine and ultimate purpose that would eventually usher in the end times in which ultimately Jesus Christ, the King of Kings and Lord of Lord’s will return and rule forever. Amen!
Let’s begin this study from the Bible regarding government.
Romans 13:1-7 King James Version (KJV)
13 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.
2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:
4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.
5 Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.
6 For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God’s ministers, attending continually upon this very thing.
7 Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.
Examining the above scripture in context we observe the meaning of the phrase, “the powers that be are ORDAINED of God to mean God by His divine, predestined purpose, and plan has set up each government to rule over mankind on this earth. Please note this verse is not speaking exclusively for the United States of America’s governed laws as given to us in the Constitution, but rather “all” forms of government that are for good works and not terror for the benefit of the governed. In short, God by design for his ultimate purpose sets up government (all government).
Unfortunately there are many who take ordained out of context and use the ecclesiastical meaning of the word which means God appointed government as His divine ministry over the governed and the church existing as part of such. This is actually blasphemous because it is Jesus Christ who is the head and government of the body of Christ and not a human secular government. Please see our study on Brick and Mortar Churches and the 501C3 government tax plan for churches are not Biblical in link (2) below. It is only the antichrist spirit that strives since the time of Cain through Nimrod and to present to use a human, secular government over man. God only allows and permits for his divine purpose the rise and fall of government – all government including the tyrannical evil empires throughout history.
In a nutshell God instructs us in Romans chapter 13 that all authority comes from Him and Him alone and that any power that is directly ordained by God will have as its ultimate source God. This is why in Acts 5:29 KJV Peter says, “We ought to obey God rather than men.” meaning that if there is a conflict amongst authorities, the highest authority wins out. Period!
Now, focusing on the US Constitution the supreme law over our government:
Any US History student knows full well that the US Constitution was born from the Declaration of Independence. The Declaration of Independence was nothing more than a letter of apology for revolution note (3) below and in all truth a declaration to violate Romans 13:1-7. Determination of what government is good or bad is extremely subjective. During the time of the American Revolution there were a great number of Americans who strongly opposed the rebellious spirit of the American Patriots against the God established government of Great Britain.
I find it alarming that a vast number of Evangelicals lift up the US Constitution as a divine document that was directly ordained and established by God. They use “out of context” scripture in the Bible, see note (4) below to back up these outrageous statements. Tragically low informed, non Bible reading sycophants line up and drink the Kool-Aide.
There exists an overwhelming amount of secular legal arguments proving the US Constitution is not based on Religion or the Bible or God. As a few see notes (5) and (6). More compelling and biblically based letters written by various scholars that strongly opposed America’s independence from Great Britain and the forming of a rebellious government, declaration of Independence and subsequent Constitution. ” The most appropriate place to begin a study of the biblical arguments against the American Revolution is with the hermeneutics and views concerning proper preaching held by the Loyalist ministers. Hermeneutics (one’s method of interpreting the Bible) played a critical role in determining which side of the conflict clergymen took. In their sermons, as a general rule, the Loyalist preachers appealed more to the Bible and held to a more literal and contextual interpretation of the relevant texts of Scripture than did the Patriot preachers See note (7). This is substantiated by a tragic story of a devout Christian theologian parting ways with his son who supported the revolution of America from English established government in note (8). There is a study to be found in the numerous accounts of Loyalist who strongly dissented the American revolution in note (9).
Following the Declaration of Independence the US Constitution was drafted. Although a brilliant document that allowed the United States Government to thrive as probably the greatest social experiment in human history, the document itself is not biblical whatsoever in its mention of God. (3) . Does this make sense to any open minded individual that our foundational law was directly ordained by God?
And contrary to studies found in note (4) the Constitution is not in any aspect ” biblical” in nature. The only aspect that is biblical about the US Constitution as a whole is that God has allowed this document to govern mankind as He does in any government of man clearly delineated in Romans 13:1-7.
Next subject demands the question:
Is freedom of religion a biblical concept?
Yes according to numerous so called Christian apologetic studies on the subject found in link below in note (10) and used by rabid Christian Evangelicals and those others who venerate the Constitution going hand in hand with religion.
However, right off the bat we see a serious conflict. Let’s examine the Preamble and the 1st Amendment closely:
We read the Preamble of the Constitution “
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
In this Preamble do we read that God has ordained this Constitution? No. It’s clearly written that the People of the United States have ordained and establish the US Constitution. ” The stirring opening words of the Preamble, “We the People of the United States,” make it clear both who is establishing the government and for whose benefit it exists. There is no consent required beyond the will of the people for the people to govern themselves.” See note (11) below:
Let’s look at the 1st Amendment?
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
(description of the 1st Amendment:
First Amendment guarantees freedoms concerning religion, expression, assembly, and the right to petition. It forbids Congress from both promoting one religion over others and also restricting an individual’s religious practices. Etc.. Please read the link descriptions of terms in notes below.
“The First Amendment to the Constitution, ratified in 1791, provides that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” The absence of references to a deity in the Constitution is consistent with the strict religious neutrality of the entire document. (Additionally_)… the Constitution is hardly a document glorifying top-down power. On the contrary, the theory of government underpinning the United States Constitution is popular sovereignty. The government derives its legitimacy from the consent of the governed, not from an assembly of elders, not from a king or a prelate, and not from a higher power.” (11)
Please find these words in the Bible or scripture that can harmonize with the 1st Amendment meaning of expression of and free exercise of “religion”:
The First Amendment’s Establishment Clause prohibits the government from making any law “respecting an establishment of religion.” This clause not only forbids the government from establishing an official religion, but also prohibits government actions that unduly favor one religion over another. It also prohibits the government from unduly preferring religion over non-religion, or non-religion over religion. Note (11)
First Amendment’s The Free Exercise Clause reserves the right of American citizens to accept any religious belief and engage in religious rituals. Free-exercise clauses of state constitutions which protected religious “[o]pinion, expression of opinion, and practice were all expressly protected” by the Free Exercise Clause. The Clause protects not just religious beliefs but actions made on behalf of those beliefs. More importantly, the wording of state constitutions suggest that “free exercise envisions religiously compelled exemptions from at least some generally applicable laws.” The Free Exercise Clause not only protects religious belief and expression; it also seems to allow for violation of laws, as long as that violation is made for religious reasons. In the terms of economic theory, the Free Exercise Clause promotes a free religious market by precluding taxation of religious activities by minority sects. Note (12)
Does this sound like biblical doctrine: In 1802, President Jefferson wrote a letter to a group of Baptists in Danbury, Connecticut, in which he declared that it was the purpose of the First Amendment to build ”a wall of separation between Church and State.”
In conclusion we know what God thinks about humanity and human reasoning including government and we know that God will establish is kingdom that will never end.
Since the word of God states that the heart of man is deceitfully wicked, who could know it, and since God’s divine government of THEOCRACY was in the Old Testament and will be in the coming Kingdom of God in the Millennium, how could a “mob rule” a government ruled by the will of the people mentality be considered ordained by God? Even the constitution itself is full of amendments and language attempting to safeguard lofty ideals against tyranny safeguards . A separate subject for another day perhaps.
Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?
2 The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the Lord, and against his anointed, saying,
3 Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.
4 He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision.
5 Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure.
6 Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion.
7 I will declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.
8 Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.
9 Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel
Jeremiah 17:9 King James Version (KJV)
The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?
John 2:24 King James Version (KJV)
But Jesus did not commit himself unto them, because he knew all men,
John 18:36 King James Version (KJV)
Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.
Revelation 2:27 King James Version (KJV)
27 And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father.
Revelation 12:5 King James Version (KJV)
5 And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne.
Revelation 21:1 King James Version (KJV)
21 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.
4. . https://www.christianityeveryday.com/what-does-the-bible-say-about-the-declaration-of-independence/
5 . https://constitution.findlaw.com/amendment1/annotation01.html
7. God against the Revolution: The Loyalist Clergy’s Case against the American Revolution by Gregg L. Frazer, Copyright 2018, Published by: University Press of Kansas DOI: 10.2307/j.ctv80ccxh Pages: 320
8. A devout theologian disowns his son’s support of the American Revolution based on the unbiblical nature of revolution and anarchy against God’s appointed Government
9 . Loyalist Newspapers during the Revolution
11. Promoting one religion over others. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/establishment_clause
12. Freedom to accept any religious practice. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/free_exercise_clause