Did the Supreme Court Play A Major Part In Destroying Morality in America??

By actually rewriting the First, Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments and changing America for the worse.

The infamous Alabama Ten Commandments Monument in the rotunda of the state judicial building

Courtesy Montgomery Advertiser the Ten Commandment monument installed by Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore

Prior to 1940, this was none of the federal government or Supreme Courts’ business! On October 30, 2001, three Alabama attorneys—Stephen Glassroth, Beverly Howard, and Melinda Maddox uttered the magic spell “it's unconstitutional” because of “separation of church and state”, another hallucination of the Supreme Court! They were represented by the Southern Poverty Law Center, the American Civil Liberties Union of Alabama, and Americans United for the Separation of Church and State! U.S. District Judge Myron Thompson ordered it removed and Moore refused. He eventually was removed from office and the monument moved outside the courthouse.

Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U.S. 296, May 20, 1940

In doing my research, I can think of two examples of judicial activism that dwarf the rest. The first is Cantwell v. Connecticut because in this case, the Supreme Court actually rewrote the 1st Amendment. I am sure you are aware that the Supreme Court took prayer out of schools, had Ten Commandment displays removed, found the obscure phrase in a letter from Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists "separation of Church and State", which actually meant the opposite of what it was twisted into, with people now thinking it is actually in the Constitution. The 1st Amendment actually says, " Congress shall make no laws regarding religion, “NOR PROHIBIT THE FREE EXERCISE THEREOF ". Since courts work from precedents previously set, good or bad, re-quoting Jefferson, "the Constitution, on this hypothesis, is a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form they may please", what was the beginning of this usurpation? May 20, 1940, the day the Supreme Court decided Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U.S. 296 (1940). In 1940, the Supreme Court amended the 1st Amendment by adding three words. It now has 48 words “Congress and NO STATE shall make no law . . . ”

Newton Cantwell and his two sons Jesse and Russell were Jehovah Witnesses. In 1938, they went door to door in New Haven, Connecticut. Cassius Street was a neighborhood with many Roman Catholics. The Cantwells would play a phonograph record titled “Enemies” which attacked the Catholic Church. There was an incident between Jesse Cantwell and two residents over the recording. Police were called and Newton Cantwell and his sons were charged with inciting a breach of the peace and soliciting money for a religious organization without a license. They were convincted and the case eventually went to the Supreme Court.

Prior to the Cantwell case, disputes involving the separation of church and state were left to the states. The state constitution and laws drew the line between church and state. Consequently, the separation between church and state varied from one state to another. The people in each state through their elected representatives decided how religion and government would interact. This of course was the intent of the First Amendment. It is an undisputed fact that the Framers of our Constitution intended religion issues to be left to the states. Unless the Federal Government was directly involved somehow, federal courts would not intervene.

From the time the Supreme Court came into existence in 1790 until 1940 there were approximately 12 to 15 cases which could be classified as religion cases. This is true because the Framers of our Constitution gave the Supreme Court a very limited role in this area. Unless the Federal Government was involved, the Supreme Court stayed out of the case.

By expanding the jurisdiction of the First Amendment to include the states, the Supreme Court ruled that the state governments must obey the First Amendment. This effectively transferred power from the states to the Supreme Court for religion cases.

The most important effect of the Cantwell case was to transfer power. Power over religion was transferred from the states to the Supreme Court. Essentially, religion law in the United States became federalized in 1940. In addition, the separation of powers for religion law within the Federal Government does not exist. The Supreme Court alone has almost all the power. The President and Congress can affect religion law only at the margins. The federal takeover of religion law has been so complete that if you deleted the religion clauses in the state constitutions very little would change. The state religion clauses are largely worthless. Only the First Amendment counts or to be more precise, only the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the First Amendment counts. 

All other later cases regarding prayer in schools, displays of the Ten Commandments, etc., include Cantwell as a court precedent!

Fun fact: Neither party in the Cantwell v. Connecticut case even referred to the 1st Amendment! Activist judges on the Supreme Court made a bogus claim that the Fourteenth Amendment required them to apply the First Amendment to the states.

Intentionally or not, the Supreme Court removing prayer from the public schools was instrumental in creating intolerance for religion, particularly Christianity and Judaism. They created the idea that prayer is offensive speech. Today, many people are ‘offended’ if they can hear someone pray in public. Offended seeing a Christmas tree or a Menorah in a public place. Forbidding a private moment of silence at a sporting event. Regarding the Ten Commandments, even if you took out the parts referring to God, (which of course is where they came from), you still have a template for living a moral life. Honor your father and mother, don't murder, don't steal, don't commit adultery, etc. Gone from public view as reminders. Interestingly, Louisiana is close to becoming the first state to require display of the Ten Commandments in classrooms in all state funded schools.

A culture of immorality and death was created in America

Most egregiously, the avalanche of a complete moral breakdown of American society was started. Of course, there are other factors, which I argue have their origins in the overreaching of the Supreme Court. Fatherless homes came from welfare and the “Great Society”, where the state paid to support children if no father was present. The more you had, the more money you got, where we got the term “baby daddy”, or multiples thereof, undoubtedly influenced by a society without morals and virtue. “White Privilege” and other nonsensical ideas playing a part in individuals having no problem randomly assaulting someone or shooting them for no reason whatsoever! Look at the headlines every day. Again, a virtueless society. Kids used to take guns to school because they were on the shooting club or to hunt afterwards. Granted, these school shooters are for the most part on horrific psychotropic drugs. Your morals and virtue still have to be horribly corrupted or nonexistent to even consider randomly shooting innocent people. Then we get to abortion….

Roe v Wade

The Supreme Court singlehandedly “legalized” the most diabolical mass genocide in history because it wasn't against an enemy but our own children.

When I think about the actual genocide that the Supreme Court created with the Roe v Wade ruling, I always think of a particular verse in a powerful Neil Young song called “Keep On Rockin' the Free World”:

I see a woman in the night
With a baby in her hand
There's an old street light (near a garbage can)
Near a garbage can (near a garbage can)

Now she put the kid away and she's gone to get a hit
She hates her life and what she's done to it
There's one more kid that'll never go to school
Never get to fall in love, never get to be cool

That happened 63,459,781 times during the time Roe v Wade made murder “legal”!

Let that sink in…

Here is a link to why the song was written. It was written the day before the show and was performed live by Young for the first time with the band The Restless on February 21, 1989, in Seattle at the Paramount Theater without any prior rehearsal. Since there is no video to that performance, this is the official video.

Texas had a law that only permitted abortion to save the mother's life. Norma McCorvey, who had already had two children and gave both up for adoption, had become pregnant with her third child and wanted an abortion. Her two attorneys, Sarah Weddington and Linda Coffee, decided to file a lawsuit against the local Dallas County District Attorney Henry Wade and utter the magic spell, “it's unconstitutional.” McCorvey became the legal pseudonym “Jane Roe” in court records. It eventually made it to the Supreme Court where, as Jefferson feared, “The Constitution, on this hypothesis, is a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form they may please.” The Supreme Court bizarrely found a right to privacy in the 9th Amendment:

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

The court held that a woman’s reproductive right was implicit in the created right to privacy, which they transposed into the 14th Amendment, declaring abortion a private right covered under the “Due Process Clause”!

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

An estimated 63,459,781 babies’ lives have ended since Supreme Court decision Roe v Wade Jan. 22, 1973. To put that in proper perspective, the death toll from WWII was less at 40 to 50 million! Joseph Stalin probably murdered 60 million. Mao Zedong 40 million possibly up to 80 million. Hitler murdered 17 million. Compared to the other mass murderers, America included, Pol Pot was a real amateur at a mere 1.7 to 2.5 million murdered.

Of that 63,459,781, over 20,000,000, certainly a disproportionate high amount, were black babies. Planned Parenthood Clinics are conveniently set up mostly in minority neighborhoods. Apparently, this is not a concern, yet prisons allegedly being overpopulated by minorities is. If black lives matter, where is “Black Lives Matter” on this?

This was the brainchild of the patron saint of Planned Parenthood, notorious racist, eugenicist, KKK collaborator and actual inspiration to the Nazis, Margaret Sanger to “control the population of the darker inferior races.”

To carry out her population control plans, her organization, American Birth Control League that she founded in 1921, opened its facilities in predominantly black, immigrant and poor areas of New York City.  (This would be the template for the majority of Planned Parenthood clinics.) In 1939, with the help of wealthy Americans moguls (such as Clarence Gamble, of Procter & Gamble, and Mary Lasker) launched her racially motivated population control scheme that she called “the Negro Project”, recruiting black preachers to sermonize her population control message.

On the extermination of blacks:

We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities.  The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members. - Margaret Sanger’s December 19, 1939, letter to Dr. Clarence Gamble, 255 Adams Street, Milton, Massachusetts. 

Fun fact: If you look up Margaret Sanger in Wikipedia, you'll see not one word of this!

How monstrous that black ministers, like “man of God” Senator Warnock of Georgia, participated and condoned the actual extermination of their flocks!

How monstrous, for that matter, all the other churches, regardless of denomination or race, that are also pro-choice or pro-abortion and do the same to their congregations!

Some scholarly legal opinion on Roe:

Iconic conservative judge Robert Bork wrote, “Both Roe and [Planned Parenthood v.] Casey are, in fact, crass violations of the rule of law; they are not rooted in any conceivable interpretation of the Constitution and have nothing to do with ‘constitutional terms.’”

Watergate special prosecutor Archibald Cox added, “The Justices read into the generalities of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment a new ‘fundamental right’ not remotely suggested by the words.”

Harvard Law Professor Laurence Tribe admitted, “One of the most curious things about Roe is that behind its own verbal smokescreen, the substantive judgment on which it rests is nowhere to be found.”

Even the late Justice Ginsberg commented how poorly written Roe v Wade was and she fully expected it overturned someday.

The most egregious convolution of law is that if a mother is injured or killed and the baby she was carrying died in the process, the prosecutor will pursue a single or double homicide charge. Yet if she chose to abort it, it's all good!

A Harvard-affiliated children’s hospital made a wild claim that kids can know they are transgender before even coming out of the womb. 

So now it's not just a “clump of cells”? It is a reasoning human being when it's convenient to argue a bizarre point. Seriously??

From the late Nat Hentoff

Nat Hentoff was a staunch liberal and longtime Village Voice columnist. He was also a jazz and country music critic. He became a vehement supporter of life from conception to natural death. This article explains how he developed his opinion. Hentoff claimed to be an atheist. A link to an article from a friend which casts doubt on that. However, his words here are spot on:

I begin my talks to students and faculty eager to dissect my heresy with a quote from the second edition of a standard medical textbook, The Unborn Patient: Prenatal Diagnosis and Treatment, published by W.B. Saunders Company, a division of Harcourt Brace, in 1991. The editors--all medical school professors at the University of California at San Francisco and experts in fetal treatment--are Michael Harrison, Mitchell Golbus, and Roy Filly.

God is nowhere mentioned in the textbook. The first chapter begins: ''The concept that the fetus is a patient, an individual whose maladies are a proper subject for medical treatment as well as scientific observation, is alarmingly modern. Only now are we beginning to consider the fetus seriously--medically, legally, and ethically.''

In recent years I've interviewed a number of physicians engaged in research on prenatal development. Without exception, they emphasize that human life is a continuum--from the implantation of a fertilized egg in the uterine lining to birth to death. Setting up divisions of this process to justify abortion --as in Roe v. Wade--is artificial. It's a denial of biology. Whether in the fourth or 14th week, it is the life of a developing human being that is being killed. (Emphasis mine) The American Medical News (June 20, 1994)--a weekly publication of the American Medical Association--has reported an analysis of the beginnings of human life by Dr. C. Ward Kischer, a professor in the department of anatomy at the University of Arizona College of Medicine. I commend it to Professor Reed:

''Every point in time is part of a continuum. Therefore, every point in development derives its significance from the previous point. Scientific 'spin doctors' have invented and promoted such bogus biology as 'pre-embryo' and 'stages of individuality,' and have duped many physicians who know little about human embryology. Many of them are now using this pseudo-science to justify human embryo experimentation. The Nuremberg trials settled this question conclusively.''

The Nuremberg trials were concerned solely with human beings, as I am.

In the February 18, 1990, Journal of the American Medical Association, Dr. Joel Hylton, a physician in Thomasville, North Carolina, who had people like Adolph Reed Jr. in mind, wrote:

''Who can say that the fetus is not alive and is not a separate genetic entity? Its humanity...also cannot be questioned scientifically. It is certainly of no other species. That it is dependent on another makes it qualitatively no different from countless other humans outside the womb.'' (Emphasis added.)

Dr. Hylton added: ''It strikes me that to argue that one may take an innocent life to preserve the quality of life of another is cold and carries utilitarianism to an obscene extreme. Nowhere else in our society is this permitted or even thinkable--although abortion sets a frightening prospect.''

So now that we have it established scientifically that life begins at conception, what rights do these human beings have that are being violated? What we are talking about here is an arbitrary conviction and execution.

Fifth Amendment: No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, nor be deprived of life or liberty, without due process of law.

Sixth Amendment: The accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.

Eight Amendment: nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Especially egregious considering the “method of execution”, ie, the abortion itself!

Fourteen Amendment: No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

The trigger for the overturning of Roe v Wade was Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health, where Mississippi passed a law that there will be no abortions after 15 weeks.

The majority opinion came from Justice Alito. Here is the full text.

The Opinion Conclusion:

Abortion presents a profound moral question. The Constitution does not prohibit the citizens of each State from regulating or prohibiting abortion. Roe and Casey arrogated that authority. We now overrule those decisions and return that authority to the people and their elected representatives."

My opinion: Since every state Constitution is subordinate to the U.S. Constitution through the Supremacy Clause, and abortion clearly violates all the rights in the Constitution I previously detailed, how can states make laws that allow abortion?

The next phase? Euthanasia and assisted suicide becoming “fashionable.”

It became commonplace to get rid of you before you were born. Even murdering newborns is on the table! Progressing to killing you or helping you kill yourself at any stage along the way, under the B.S. guise of “death with dignity.” Ten states already have assisted suicide laws, with more to follow. I wrote previously about Canada being a culture of death with a paraplegic military veteran asking for an accessibility ramp and getting offered a suicide kit instead!

How far behind is America? We’re right on the doorstep! Thank the Supreme Court for contributing to the collapse of morality in America! Yet, we actually need to blame ourselves, because it couldn’t have happened unless “We the People” allowed it. Recalling what the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, John Jay said:

America belongs to “We the People.” It does not belong to Congress. It does not belong to special interest groups. It does not belong to the courts. It belongs to “We the People.”

While recalling the warning of a friend of America:

America is great because America is good, and if America ever ceases to be good, America will cease to be great.

- Alexis de Tocqueville