Abortion Veto for Dads

It has been suggested that, Roe V Wade (1973) is the first example of Judicial Activism in the West.  Like Canadian Judicial Activists have done since the Canadian Charter was created in 1982, the US Court in Roe V Wade (1973) claimed the right to Rule against the Legislative Houses the grounds of their Statues being "un-Constitutional". This is the premise that the Legislatures must work within the confines set by it's own Contract with it's people, the US Constitution.  Agreed.  What made Roe V Wade (1973) different was that a majority of the Judges used powers granted them by Statute to enforce WRITTEN bounds on legislation to enforce the JUDGE'S PERSONAL VIEWS which they claimed to be operative though absent in the written text of the US Constitution.  Neither could these newly "activist" Judges demonstrate their Decision was in keeping with the practice of previous Courts. 

In the Roe V Wade (1973) example, Justice White noted the US Judiciary's hijacking of Legislative powers in his Dissenting Opinion,

"I find nothing in the language or history of the Constitution to support the Court's judgment.  The Court simply fashions and announces a new constitutional right for pregnant mothers and, with scarcely any reason or authority for its action, invests that right with sufficient substance to override most existing state abortion statutes."   

See also Pellman, Adrian, LLB  reporting a History of Judicial Activism in the UK. 

Roe V Wade is possibly the first example of the Judicial Mysticism we in Canada have seen with increasing frequency since 1982 in the Courts of "Femi-Nazi" Beverley Mclachlin.  Mclachlin in defending her policy of Judicial Activism refers to a "higher power" to which Judges may refer when they are at odds with the Statutes of the legislative bodies.

It is an interesting fact that a philosophical basis for Judicial Activism and Abortion Activism isn't hard to find.  One of the original Femi-Nazis Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood and Adolf Hitler were both Believers in Eugenics (directed Human Evolution)  and shared many religious views, including the notion of a "Master Race" (or is that Master Class, Beverly?). 

More than likely both Sanger & Hitler would have subscribed to Haeckel's, Theory of "Phylogenic Recapitulation" , 1866,  (complete rubbish) to make their objectives less repugnant to the misguided observer.  Haeckel's idea was that the Evolutionary Path of embryo's Phylogeny (species) is "Recapitulated" from fertilization to birth by moving through  a series of less evolved Species to increasingly more evolved forms until birth.  Haeckel's farcical drawings have been widely distributed.  You've no doubt seen them in your schoolbooks.

It is impossible for any of these to be "blood relatives" because their dissimilar chromosomal numbers forever bar them from having offspring together.  They are similarly barred from having a common ancestor.   Set aside for the sake of argument, the humanity of a human fetus.  Forget the legal contrivance to exonerate medical practitioners of criminal charges by deeming unborn children "Non-Persons" until they have survived birth. 

In Canada the WRITTEN Charter Rights twice precludes discrimination between Male and Female Parents.  It is our contention that Fathers already have the Statutory Right to equal participation in the care and fate of a "fetus", whether you regard the unborn child as Person, Property, or something in between.  The Natural Fathers' Consent must therefore be obtained before the destruction of any unborn child who is sadly unwanted by their Mother.  Both Natural Parents must be participant in any parenting decision.  Abortion is not just a "Woman's issue"  it is a Natural Parent's Issue.  The Abortion Veto for Dads is a humane, gender neutral and Constitutionally required alternative to the 'Planned Parenthood" approach.