Norma McCorvey’s death has been widely acknowledged, and that is as it should be. However her counterpart, “Doe” of Doe v. Bolton the companion case to “Roe” issued the same day by the Supreme Court, essential to understanding abortion jurisprudence in America, was largely ignored by the dominant media at her passing a few years ago. That person Sandra Cano, was never for legal abortion, but was used, lied to, to be the litigant in producing essentially abortion on demand for virtually any reason for all nine months of pregnancy in the United States. We still have the most anti-life unrestricted abortion regime in the Western world. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Both local newspapers here acknowledged Norma McCorvey’s death on the front page. Both, in using the AP dispatch (obituary) in the first paragraph acknowledged her pro-life activism. However they did not exercise the common technique of using irony to attract readership in the stories headline (as we demonstrate in ours). We can excuse the AP or the local headline writers on that aspect including for the reason that pro-abortion types, normally repelled by the truth, might stumble on it if they read the article about who was once their cause celeb.
While referring to McCorvey’s change of heart about the legality of abortion, not covered in the AP obituary was any mention of her criticisms of the pro-abortion movement for their willingness to manipulate, use (and abuse) women for doctrinaire ends.
McCorvey never aborted the child she lied to say was conceived by rape. While her admission of the lie about rape is mentioned in the obituary, closing the loop that the case at bar resulting in Roe v Wade was based on a lie is not made.
Pro-aborts will probably read her bio and think she really should have aborted that child as messed up as her life at the time would appear. It would have been all for the better don’t you know. Much of what motivates pro-abortionists is esthetics. They saw Norma as a dissolute tattooed carnival tramp, an untermench, child of the same, the perfect type to focus sympathy for the cause of less children from the unfit, the underlying motivation of pro-aborts more so than “women’s rights.”
So for abortion propagandists it is OK to lie about rape, the end (abortion) justifies the means to legalize it. But the girl child Norma McCorvey did not abort, was adopted out to desiring parents. That human being, a child of God, as far as we know lives and walks at some 47 years of age, in spite of the “good intentions ” of the pro-abortion crowd. She in part is why Norma came to be pro-life, while the pro-abortion crowd remains pro-death.
References to abortion jurisprudence in the United States is usually short-circuited by referring to Roe V. Wade. As is well known now, although rarely reflected on by dominant media, that case was based on a lie, many lies actually, but especially rape as the instigating justification for the particular case in Texas, a state that at the time protected all unborn human life from abortion. But the companion case, about a Georgia law allowing abortion for limited health reasons, Doe V Bolton, is essential to understanding how far-reaching legal abortion is in the United States as the Supreme Court overturned even that law. We know now that that case was also based on a lie. Sandra Cano, the litigant “Doe” in Doe V. Bolton never wanted an abortion, was always against it, was lied to, but was used to create a regime of abortion on demand without meaningful restriction for the entire nine months of pregnancy.
When she passed in the fall of 2014, there were very few secular media references to her passing. And those that did mark her passing tended to be conservative. Why is that? We believe it is part of the frequent refusal by secular media to face and truthfully analyze the extent of abortion legalization in the US and that the entire regime was based on lies. They are vested in the lies and obfuscation having perpetrated them both, and continuing to do so in spite of occasional lapses of truth telling.
From the Washington Times Sandra Cano, the ‘Mary Doe’ of landmark abortion case, dies (excerpts)
Her dying wish was for people to “pray for the end of abortion in America and pray for her family,” Allan Parker, president of the Justice Foundation in Texas, which represented Ms. Cano for 14 years, said Wednesday.
Ms. Cano was the unidentified “Mary Doe” in the 1973 Supreme Court case that challenged Georgia’s restrictive abortion laws. When the high court struck down the Georgia laws, other state laws restricting abortion were also swept away. Together with a companion case, Roe v. Wade, the court cases resulted in the legalization of abortions for any “health” reason during an entire pregnancy.
But Ms. Cano testified to Congress that “cunning, wicked lawyers” used her to “twist the American court system” in a fraudulent way.
She said she sought help in 1970 from the Atlanta Legal Aid office because she was unhappily married, unstable and pregnant with her fourth child. She also insisted that she thought the papers she signed for Ms. Hames and other lawyers were about divorce and child custody, not abortion. . . .
Ms. Cano, who never had an abortion, said she learned the full truth about her case when she went to court in 1988 to have records unsealed.
“I did not seek an abortion nor do I believe in abortion,” Ms. Cano told the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2005. “Yet my name and my life is now forever linked with the slaughter of 40-50 million babies.”
In 2006, Ms. Cano vainly sought a rehearing of their cases at the Supreme Court. Other efforts the challenge the decisions in their cases also failed.
Here is a synopsis of the Legal effects of Roe V. Wade and Doe V. Bolton Read the entire article for a brief on the full extent of Supreme Court abortion jurisprudence.
Roe v. Wade 1973 Relying on an unstated “right of privacy” found in a “penumbra” of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Court effectively legalized abortion on demand throughout the full nine months of pregnancy. Although the Court mentioned the state’s possible interest in the “potentiality of human life” in the third trimester, legislation to protect that interest would be gutted by mandated exceptions for the “health” of the mother (see Doe below).
Doe v. Bolton 1973 Companion case to Roe, Doe broadly defined the “heath” exception so that any level of distress or discomfort would qualify and gave the abortionist final say over what qualified: “The medical judgment may be exercised in the light of all factors–physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman’s age–relevant to the well being of the patient. All these factors may relate to “health.” Because the application of the health exception was left to the abortionist, legislation directly prohibiting any abortion became practically unenforceable.
After twenty-three years of obfuscation this 1996 article from the Washington Post admitted the legal situation as the partial birth abortion debate was heating up. See at right. Twenty years after that article appeared the obfuscation still continues in much of the media both in reporting and allowing pro-abortion flaks to get away without correction saying that abortion was legalized only in the first trimester. Indeed the first broadcast report we heard of Norma McCorvey’s death was on Fox News Saturday morning and the female reporter referred to McCorvey’s as the Roe of Roe v. Wade, the case that legalized abortion to a “limited” extent. Under the Roe/Doe legal regimes there is nothing seriously limited about the legality of abortion in the United States, including the “right” to dismember infants able to survive outside the womb as long as they have not exited the birth canal.
More reading: Cano Versus Doe The Real Story of the Woman Behind Doe v. Bolton
The Sandra Cano Story