Connect with us


5 Reasons Roe v. Wade Must Be Overturned

There are many, many reasons Roe was a terrible decision, both legally and morally, and it’s hard to argue that anyone who believes in the founding principles of our country would oppose it.



From the moment Justice Anthony Kennedy announced his retirement from the Supreme Court, the left has been absolutely losing their minds over the possibility of Roe v. Wade being overturned.

Of course, for Christians, and anyone else who respects the sanctity of life, this is fantastic news, despite the fact that there’s no sure guarantee Kavanaugh’s confirmation will automatically result in one of the worst SCOTUS decisions of all time being overturned.

However, there have been a few conservatives, most notably Tomi Lahren, who have tried to argue that overturning a Supreme Court decision that has resulted in the legal slaughter of 60 million + unborn children wouldn’t be politically expedient for Republicans. 

Trending: K-Mac Drops the Hammer on Mad Max with Official Censure

There are many, many reasons Roe was a terrible decision, both legally and morally, and it’s hard to argue that anyone who believes in the founding principles of our country would oppose it.

take our poll - story continues below

Is the Biden Administration Destroying Our Constitution?

  • Is the Biden Administration Destroying Our Constitution?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Christian Post contributor Jerry Newcombe (who did not mention Lahren in his arguments) recently broke down five very good reasons Roe v. Wade should be overturned.

First of all, he says, is that the decision was all based on lies.

The main lie was that an abortion was needed for Roe (whom we later learned was Norma McCorvey) because she was supposedly gang-raped. But that was not true. McCorvey just wanted an abortion, and her attorney falsely promised to help her get one, knowing full well it could not happen in time (since cases that go up to the Supreme Court take time to adjudicate).

That’s not the only lie surrounding the case, either. Another was how many women died each year from illegal abortions, which at the time, abortionist Bernard Nathanson told the media was about 10,000 women illegal.

He later admitted that he made the number up from thin air, but a willing media reported it as if it were gospel truth. In 1972, the last year before Roe, the CDC reports that 39 women died from illegal abortions in America. That may be 39 too many, but it’s a far cry from 10,000.

Stunningly, Newcombe says, both McCorvey and Nathanson became pro-life Christians following this landmark case.

The second reason Roe must be overturned is that it has no real constitutional basis. 

While Tomi Lahren claimed on The View last year that she was pro-choice because she was a “constitutional,” it turns out her knowledge of constitutional law is about as substantial as her ability to describe one who adheres to the constitution.

Newcombe says that even pro-choice legal scholars admit that Roe was a terribly reasoned decision.

The whole thing was based on the “right to privacy,” which is not spelled out in the Constitution. Instead it comes from “Griswold vs. Connecticut”(1965), which stated: “…specific guarantees in the Bill of Rights have penumbras, formed by emanations from those guarantees that help give them life and substance…Various guarantees create zones of privacy.”

What is a “penumbra”, Newcombe asks? For the answer, he refers to Alliance Defending Freedom lawyer Mike Farris who explains it’s an obscure astrological term that essentially boils down to made-up phrases based on loose interpretations of the Bill of Rights. Farris explains:

“And these made-up phrases, like the emanations coming from the penumbras of the Bill of Rights is just so much hooey that allows a judge to do whatever he wants to do. And it substitutes the rule of law for the rule of a judge’s personal proclivities.”

Newcombe adds:

Roe is part of a recent tradition that views the Constitution as a living document subject to change—leading us to be governed by the whims of a handful of judges with lifetime tenure.

The third reason Roe must be overturned refutes one of the core reasons the left feels so passionately about Roe: abortion hurts women. Abortion regret, a very real and common struggle post-abortive women face, is rarely discussed on the left.

Thankfully, many of the walking wounded have found healing through the cross of Jesus Christ. But the scars can remain. One pro-life woman put it this way: “For millions of American women, abortion is a heartache that will never go away, even after conversion. They may be healed, but the heartache will never go away.”

The fourth reason Newcombe gives for why Roe should be overturned is simple:

Sixty million American lives have been snuffed out since “Roe.” What a moral travesty.

And finally, the most important reason of all for Roe to be overturned: God opposes abortion. 

This reason is the only one that ultimately counts. God says He opposes the shedding of innocent blood. What must He think of the wide-scale deliberate slaughter of the innocents?

All of us reading these words should be grateful that we escaped the abortionist’s knife. Tragically, tens of millions of our fellow Americans were not so fortunate.

We live in a nation of laws–laws that are based on our divinely determined natural rights. There would be no United States without the biblical principles on which our nation was founded, and the fact that our nation has strayed so far from its founding philosophy to the point that we’ve allowed the snuffing out of millions upon millions of young lives has thrown our country into serious moral crisis.

There’s still a long fight ahead of us to overturn Roe, but whether or not it ought to be overturned is beyond discussion for anyone who believes in the American experiment and what it stands for.





Pelosi Gets Ripped for Tone Deaf ‘Thank You’ to George Floyd

Even the mainstream media savaged Madam Speaker.



Some of our elected officials really cannot read the room, and Nancy Pelosi seems to be one of them. The House Speaker has been at the forefront of the racial issues that our nation is facing today, which is all fine and good.  This is America, after all, and it certainly doesn’t appear as though we’re seeing liberty and justice for all right now. But the issue is in how Pelosi portrays her feelings on the subject that has many in America cringing. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., is facing intense backlash after she thanked George Floyd for “sacrificing your life for justice” Tuesday following the conviction of former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin on murder and manslaughter charges. Speaking alongside the Congressional Black Caucus shortly after the verdict was handed down, the top House Democrat looked to the sky and said, “Thank you, George Floyd, for sacrificing your life for justice. “For being there to call out to your mom,” Pelosi went on. “How heartbreaking was that? [To] call out for your mom, ‘I can’t breathe.’ “But because of you and because of thousands, millions of people around the world who came out for justice, your name will always be synonymous with justice,” the speaker added. The callous nature of Pelosi’s “gratitude” was off-putting for many, even within the mainstream media sphere. “Nancy Pelosi thanks George Floyd for being murdered,” Huffington Post editor Philip Lewis summed up. “What in the actual f,” New York Post columnist Karol Markowicz reacted. “Ummm… he didn’t sacrifice his life… he was brutally, horrifically murdered. What the hell is this,” Guardian writer Hannah Parkinson tweeted. “Sacrifice implies he had a choice,” LA Times reporter Melissa Evans similarly wrote. “Oh, that is very bad. Very, very no,” GQ correspondent Julia Ioffe expressed. “real [W]hite person wearing kente…

Continue Reading


Maxine Waters Escapes Censure, Goes on MSNBC to Gloat

It certainly doesn’t appear as though Waters has learned her lesson.



Maxine Waters is no stranger to controversy, especially when it comes to her vision of the role of violence in the political process. Back in 2018, the California Congresswoman told a group of constituents that they should confront staffers for then-President Donald Trump. “Let’s make sure we show up wherever we have to show up,” Waters told a crowd in California over the weekend. “If you see anybody from that cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd, and you push back on them, and you tell them they’re not welcome anymore, anywhere.” Then, just days ahead of the jury’s deliberations in the Derek Chauvin trial, Waters again suggested that Americans should be “more confrontational” regarding the case. This comment drew widespread criticism from her colleagues in Congress, and Maxine was soon facing a censure by House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy. Now that this effort to admonish Waters has failed, the longtime Democrat seemed to take a victory lap on MSNBC. On MSNBC’s “The ReidOut” Tuesday, Waters knocked the censure efforts led by House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif. The vote to table McCarthy’s censure resolution was 216-210 and split along party lines. “Of course, I’m criticized all the time, and of course, the Republicans make a target of me, but as you know, I am passionate on these issues,” Waters told host Joy Reid. “I’m so sorry that it causes pain oftentimes with my colleagues. Many times they’re in these districts where they are frightened, where they have a lot of racism, where they haven’t moved to the point that they can have a decent conversation about these issues and sometimes it’s very difficult for them. “But they stood up with me today,” she added. “They put…

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Best of the Week