---

---

Equal rights for our posterity

---

Posted: October 25, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern

On Nov. 7, the people of South Dakota will be asked to vote yes or no on Referred Law 6, which restores protection for the right to life of their posterity in the womb.

For the first time since the Supreme Court's unconstitutional Roe v. Wade decision, the issue of equal rights for posterity will be decided by a vote of the people, rather than the dictates of unelected federal judges usurping the people's right to decide issues of faith and conscience for themselves.

Constitutional requirements

When they passed the law restoring equal rights to children in their mother's womb, South Dakota's legislators acted upon their sworn obligation to uphold the Constitution of the United States. In the Preamble to the U.S. Constitution, the people of the United States plainly declare their will to ordain and establish a government that will "secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity."

(Column continues below)

With these words, we acknowledge in our posterity an equal right to the security of person and property that constitutes the foundation of liberty, including the provision of physical security that is the first prerequisite of its enjoyment.

When the Supreme Court justices invented the so-called right to abortion, they disregarded the will of the people plainly declared in the Constitution; they trampled upon the equal status accorded to our posterity; and they forswore their oath to uphold the Constitution – an oath that clearly binds them to respect and not depart from its stated goals.

Because they took this action in plain defiance of the Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, their opinion was both arbitrary and unlawful.

Moreover, speaking for the derelict majority, Justice Blackmun acknowledges that the issues involved in Roe v. Wade touch upon areas that cannot be decided without reference to the faith and conscience of the people. He even cites the record of both religious and philosophical views on the subject matter.

But issues that are inextricably involved with, and therefore must infringe upon, the established religious views of the people are matters on which the First Amendment to the Constitution withholds all lawmaking authority from the federal government ("Congress [the lawmaking body of the federal government] shall make no law respecting [i.e., on the subject of, with regard to] an establishment of religion") and which it reserves, by the language of the 10th Amendment, to the states or to the people ("The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people").

Guiding principles

When they protected the equal rights of posterity in the womb, South Dakota's legislators acted with respect for their own sworn duty, under the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, to respect the rights and privileges of citizens of the United States, and in particular to assure all persons equal protection of the laws.

They acted upon the right of the people of South Dakota to act on this matter in a manner consistent with the religious conviction of the majority, which, as duly elected legislators, they may constitutionally claim to represent.

As is their right under the provisions of South Dakota law, opponents who question whether a majority of South Dakotans really uphold the equal rights of their posterity petitioned to have the law referred to a vote of the people.

Because this issue cannot be decided apart from the faith and conscience of the people, it is right and necessary for South Dakota's voters to consult their faith and conscience as they consider how they shall cast their vote. It makes sense that they should seek counsel and guidance from the moral and spiritual leaders in whom they normally confide.

Since the majority of South Dakota's voters profess to be of Christian faith, many will resort to the Scriptures, and to the pastors, priests and other religious leaders they trust. There is no question under our constitutional system that they have the right to do so.

Though some opponents of Referred Law 6 have falsely claimed that the Bible says nothing about when life begins, this statement is easily disproved.

When speaking to the Prophet Jeremiah, The Lord declares, "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations." (Jeremiah 1:5)

The Psalmist affirms to God that "My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately woven in the depths of the earth. You saw my unformed substance; in your book were written, every one of them, the days that were formed for me, when as yet there were none of them." (Psalm 139:15-16)

In the New Testament account of Mary's meeting with her cousin Elizabeth (Luke 1:39-45), we are told that when both were infants in their mothers' wombs, John the Baptist "leaped for joy" when Christ drew near.

In word and deed, the Scripture affirms that individual human life is present not just from the moment of physical conception, but from the moment of conception in the mind of the Creator, God.

Equality and fairness

The Declaration of Independence summarizes the civic principles of American life. It agrees with this biblical perspective when it affirms that we are all created equal and endowed by the Creator, God, with our unalienable rights.

The Declaration goes on to say that "to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."

By destroying our respect for the principle of human moral equality from the moment of creation, the unconstitutional Roe v. Wade decision shatters the very foundation of our right to govern ourselves, our right to be a free people. Protection of our posterity in the womb is therefore not just another political issue. It is an issue that touches upon the deepest foundations of our whole way of life in liberty.

The opponents of Referred Law 6 have especially relied upon the argument that it is an extremist measure, because it does not allow children of rape and incest to be executed for the sins of one of their parents. It is unfair, they say, for victims of rape and incest to be forced to bring such children into the world.

We all agree in sorrowing for these victims. This is why the South Dakota legislators made special provision for state-funded support and aid for women in these painful circumstances. They did not go so far as to authorize that an innocent life be taken so that another could be comforted, compounding one tragic injustice with another. They listened to and heeded the voices of actual rape victims, who reported that for them the broken heart that resulted from the guilt and pain of feeling complicit in the murder of their child was worse than the pain that resulted from the crime perpetrated by another.

This is what Christian believers would expect, since Christ made clear that it is better to suffer evil than to do it.

Our future at stake

At times when the survival of our Constitution and liberty are at stake, we do not hesitate to ask that our young men and women risk and give their very lives in its defense. Well, the survival of our Constitution and our liberty are at stake in the choice South Dakotans will make about Referred Law 6. Should we hesitate to ask some sacrifice in the cause for which so many Americans have sacrificed their all so that we could live in freedom?

Opponents of Referred Law 6 appeal to our all-too-human concerns with our own circumstances, our own pain and our own self-interest. The South Dakota legislators appeal to our love of justice, fairness, and liberty.

On Nov. 7, the voters of South Dakota will make their choice for or against the rights of our posterity, for or against the equality which our Constitution confers upon them, for or against the right of self-government built upon respect for that principle of equal rights for all. They will make a choice that will, in Abraham Lincoln's famous words, "nobly save or meanly lose this last best hope" for human dignity, justice and true freedom.

We should pray that everyone who professes to believe in and rely upon the Creator, God, will go to the polls determined to respect His will.

---

Related special offer:

Framed Declaration of Indpependence

---

Former Reagan administration official Alan Keyes was U.S. ambassador to the United Nations Social and Economic Council and a 2000 Republican presidential candidate. Be sure to visit Alan Keyes' communications center for founding principles, The Declaration Foundation.