The inalienable right to life possessed by every human being is present from the moment of initial formation, and all human beings shall be entitled to the equal protection of persons under the law.
A Letter to Senator Cruz
Bill Fortenberry
Senator Cruz,
I would like to thank you for your recent video recognizing that prenatal children are entitled to protection as persons within the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment. I have been fighting for this recognition in the State of Alabama for several years, and it is exciting to have a presidential candidate speak so boldly in support of this cause.
I would also like to challenge you to reconsider a statement that you included in your video. When speaking of the type of legislation that you support, you said that you are in favor of “legislation that defends the rights of all persons without exceptions, except to save the life of the mother.” I wonder if you would be so kind as to take a moment to consider the possible danger of a life of the mother exception.
Did you know that the fact that the Texas law allowed abortions in order to save the life of the mother was specifically cited as the reason that the Roe Court denied Texas’ claim that the prenatal child was a person?
1. Texas argued: "it is the position of the State of Texas that upon conception we have a human baby, a person within the concept of the Constitution of the United States."
2. Justice White: "If you’re correct that the fetus is a person, then ... the state would have great trouble permitting an abortion ... in any circumstance ... to save the life of the mother or her health or anything else?"
3. Justice Marshall: "could the State of Texas say that if it’s for the benefit of the health of the wife, they can kill the husband? ... If it comes to a situation for the benefit and the health of the wife that the husband has to die, could they kill him?
4. Justice Rehnquist: "doesn’t the fact that so many of the state abortion statutes do provide for exceptional situations in which abortion may be performed ... suggest that the absolute proposition that a fetus from the time of conception is a person ... is at least against the weight of historical legal approach to the question?"
5. Justice Blackmun – Majority Opinion: “When Texas urges that a fetus is entitled to Fourteenth Amendment protection as a person, it faces a dilemma. Neither in Texas nor in any other State are all abortions prohibited. Despite broad proscription, an exception always exists. The exception contained in Art. 1196, for an abortion procured or attempted by medical advice for the purpose of saving the life of the mother, is typical. But if the fetus is a person who is not to be deprived of life without due process of law, and if the mother's condition is the sole determinant, does not the Texas exception appear to be out of line with the Amendment's command?”
If you were defending a law which prohibited all abortion except when necessary to save the life of the mother, what would you say to the Court to demonstrate that such a law does not contain the same flaw as the Texas abortion ban?
One of the most frequently cited conditions for which a life of the mother exception would allow an abortion is that of ectopic pregnancy. The claim is often made that, unless the doctor aborts such a pregnancy, both the mother and the child will die. However, I have discovered more than 400 documented cases of live births from ectopic pregnancies and two documented cases of successful transplantation of ectopic children into the womb. There are known solutions to this condition which do not involve killing the child, but these solutions are seldom considered in America because abortion in such cases is so acceptable. How many other supposedly life threatening pregnancy conditions could have known solutions which do not include killing the prenatal child?
Please reconsider the impact of having an exception to a no exception clause. If the prenatal child is really and truly a person under the protection of the Fourteenth Amendment, then there can be no viable exception to that protection. Either every prenatal child is entitled to equal protection and due process or none of them are.
I am posting this letter on my website, and I would love to share your response to it as well. Thank you again for your bold statement in defense of life. I look forward to hearing more from you on this matter.
In Christ,
Bill Fortenberry
PersonhoodInitiative.com
I would like to thank you for your recent video recognizing that prenatal children are entitled to protection as persons within the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment. I have been fighting for this recognition in the State of Alabama for several years, and it is exciting to have a presidential candidate speak so boldly in support of this cause.
I would also like to challenge you to reconsider a statement that you included in your video. When speaking of the type of legislation that you support, you said that you are in favor of “legislation that defends the rights of all persons without exceptions, except to save the life of the mother.” I wonder if you would be so kind as to take a moment to consider the possible danger of a life of the mother exception.
Did you know that the fact that the Texas law allowed abortions in order to save the life of the mother was specifically cited as the reason that the Roe Court denied Texas’ claim that the prenatal child was a person?
1. Texas argued: "it is the position of the State of Texas that upon conception we have a human baby, a person within the concept of the Constitution of the United States."
2. Justice White: "If you’re correct that the fetus is a person, then ... the state would have great trouble permitting an abortion ... in any circumstance ... to save the life of the mother or her health or anything else?"
3. Justice Marshall: "could the State of Texas say that if it’s for the benefit of the health of the wife, they can kill the husband? ... If it comes to a situation for the benefit and the health of the wife that the husband has to die, could they kill him?
4. Justice Rehnquist: "doesn’t the fact that so many of the state abortion statutes do provide for exceptional situations in which abortion may be performed ... suggest that the absolute proposition that a fetus from the time of conception is a person ... is at least against the weight of historical legal approach to the question?"
5. Justice Blackmun – Majority Opinion: “When Texas urges that a fetus is entitled to Fourteenth Amendment protection as a person, it faces a dilemma. Neither in Texas nor in any other State are all abortions prohibited. Despite broad proscription, an exception always exists. The exception contained in Art. 1196, for an abortion procured or attempted by medical advice for the purpose of saving the life of the mother, is typical. But if the fetus is a person who is not to be deprived of life without due process of law, and if the mother's condition is the sole determinant, does not the Texas exception appear to be out of line with the Amendment's command?”
If you were defending a law which prohibited all abortion except when necessary to save the life of the mother, what would you say to the Court to demonstrate that such a law does not contain the same flaw as the Texas abortion ban?
One of the most frequently cited conditions for which a life of the mother exception would allow an abortion is that of ectopic pregnancy. The claim is often made that, unless the doctor aborts such a pregnancy, both the mother and the child will die. However, I have discovered more than 400 documented cases of live births from ectopic pregnancies and two documented cases of successful transplantation of ectopic children into the womb. There are known solutions to this condition which do not involve killing the child, but these solutions are seldom considered in America because abortion in such cases is so acceptable. How many other supposedly life threatening pregnancy conditions could have known solutions which do not include killing the prenatal child?
Please reconsider the impact of having an exception to a no exception clause. If the prenatal child is really and truly a person under the protection of the Fourteenth Amendment, then there can be no viable exception to that protection. Either every prenatal child is entitled to equal protection and due process or none of them are.
I am posting this letter on my website, and I would love to share your response to it as well. Thank you again for your bold statement in defense of life. I look forward to hearing more from you on this matter.
In Christ,
Bill Fortenberry
PersonhoodInitiative.com