With two or three¹ current U.S. Supreme Court justices being followers, if not champions of Humanism, the future of the law relies on an understanding of Humanism versus Natural Law, or Originalism.

The generations going forward will either adhere to Natural Law, or slide downward to Humanism. Everything, from farming to global currency valuations depends on, well, simple values established for over two thousand years.

This blog is about 1500 words, equivalent to about 6 pages of a paperback novel. So, you can read this in about 5 minutes, or; may I suggest only taking a couple of paragraphs at a time. One of the main questions I pose is if two of the Supreme Court Justices, Kagan and Sotomayor, are even qualified constitutionally to swear their oaths of office. We can readlily apply the same criticism to the Biden appointee, Kitanji Brown Jackson, who is so in opposition to Natural Law that she refuses to even attempt to define ‘what is a woman.’

The first Declaration leading to our Constitution gave credit to the guidance and example of Natural Law, i.e., ‘laws of nature and nature’s God.’ Humanism positions itself with the wants and ‘needs’ of society, whether from a democratic plurality or small groups with an organized, even violent message. Populism, in a democracy, has the power to supersede Natural Law which is what makes it dangerous, and why we need strong moral leadership in the form of a constitutional republic, and Justices who properly interpret the constitution.

Humanism is listed lower in the heirarchy of ‘laws’ discussed by Thomas Aquinas, with Natural Law in a superior position. The Bill of Rights was criticized by some framers as it explicitly restated inalienable rights as already implied by the constitution itself.²

The term of art Natural Born Citizen in Article II has been suppressed and conflated with lesser statutes because the framers avoided defining, explicitly, what ‘natural born’ meant. It was just ‘understood.’ One could say the framers felt they lacked jurisdiction to openly declare a definition, similar to the Jewish tradition of not reading out loud the Hebrew name of God as written in the bible. It just was.

As for the issue of abortion, the Humanist reasoning in Roe v. Wade interwined the constitution’s rights of privacy and the question of when ‘life’ begins, not relying on biology but the Elizabethan ‘quickening.’ They did this to satisfy the urgent demands of pro-abortion ‘feminist’ groups in order to deny unwanted, unborn children any civil rights. Meanwhile, those who recognized the superiority, the authority of Natural Law over Humanism, applied inalienable rights to all phases of pregancy.

Another example of Humanism are so-called ‘Sanctuary’ states and cities. All state and local governments are aware of federal immigration law. The law is well-codified in the INA to be enforced by DHS and ICE. Those wishing to enter the United States require passports from their home country and visas for extended stays.

Accepting persons of unknown identity or origin and issuing them official state ID has far reaching consequences, effecting not only law enforcement but our elections. The Biden administration opened the borders in direct violation of federal statute and the result are millions of unknown persons. President Trump has declared a massive deportation program, but without the illegal aliens properly processed in the first place, where do you send them? I suggest back to Mexico, who participated in the invasion through their cartels and allowing unhindered passage across their tiny Southern border (500 miles, almost half being rivers) and then through the entire length of Mexico.

Illegal aliens in general are denied visitation or immigration. But, there are also exclusionary statutes still in the INA, generally identifying ‘enemies’ of the state under increased scrutiny or outright denial. Communists and proponents of Marxism are barred. Polygamous persons or peoples are as well. Those laws are still on the books. It isn’t a stretch to extend interpretation of exclusionary laws on those who flouted our border entry policies.

However, Sanctuary states and cities have Democratic and Liberal governments who decry ‘nativism’ and opened their doors to ‘illegal’ aliens, providing them with protection from law enforcement and deportation. Non-Profit and church-allied groups were formed, many funded by your tax dollars, to provide illegal aliens legal representation and housing.

Supreme Court cases such as Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202 (1982) forced the states to fund primary education for children of illegal aliens, making it illegal to demand tuition from their non-citizen parents. The Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act of 1986 forced hospitals to give care to non-citizens. These laws, and ‘birthright citizenship,’ acted as a draw for even more illegal entry into the United States to the degree that social services became overburdened, closing some hospitals. Schools and other government programs now require interpreters or English-as-second-language curiculum. It was claimed in the 1990’s that the inrush of illegal aliens to use ER services for medical care added 33% to our health insurance premiums.

So, the Sancturary States, Deportation, and Abortion direct us back to the question of Natural Law and Humanism. There are at least two Supreme Court associate justices who are dedicated to ‘humanism,’ which undermines Natural Law and therefore the Bill of Rights itself. A valid question is that by ascribing to Humanism, does that undermine if not invalidate their Oaths of Office and adherence to the U.S. Constitution?

Even more insidious, liberal states adopted laws requiring drivers’ licenses, i.e., official state ID’s, issued to persons of unknown identity or origin. Bill Clinton signed Motor Voter into law, connecting MVD records to Voter Rolls. Federal law such as the 2003 Help America Vote Act mandated the states accept ‘holographic’ declarations of identity on voter registration forms.

As I have written in previous blogs, sanctuary cities could be organized to harvest mail ballots, groups targeting illegal alien populations large enough to disenfranchise ‘qualified citizen voters,’ one sanctuary city having enough votes to overwhelm huge Red majorities, enough to flip the entire state ‘Blue.’ Three such counties (Philadelphia, Fulton, Maricopa) flipped their states by an average of 0.58%, the election night totals showing Trump ahead by 35%. Those electors were enough to flip the entire country from Trump to Biden.

So, while Democrats declare ‘nativism’ and put signs up saying there is no such thing as an ‘illegal person,’ journalism ‘style books’ replacing ‘illegal alien’ with ‘undocumented migrant,’ the argument of intentional invasion and even ‘replacement theory’ has merit because it is promoted, organized, and benefitting only one particular party.

When Democrats took the White House and both houses of congress in 2021, they immediately revoked President Trump’s border enforcment and signaled to all the world our borders were open, no enforcement. In fact, we now know that billions of taxpayer dollars (discretionary FEMA funds controlled by Sec. Mayorkas) were spent in transport, housing, and voter registration of illegal aliens.

On Day One of President Trump’s second term of office, he and his Border Czar (unlike Kamala Harris, he is formerly of Border Patrol and ICE), will mount the largest deportation effort in U.S. history, undoing the lawlessness, if not treason, of the Biden Administration. There will be major lawsuits blocking deportation, but Democrats will be walking into the courtroom with ‘unclean hands.’

But, this article is about Abortion.

For a more focused discussion on the unconstitutionality of any state or federal law legalizing abortion, go to https://paraleaglenm.com/2022/05/12/does-the-constitution-permit-abortion-to-be-codified-or-can-women-be-issued-a-license-to-kill/

Progressive activism for abortion in the 1960’s led to Roe v Wade in 1973,³ and the arguments in Roe examined the history of activism for womens’ rights. Doctors were against abortion,⁴ but later anti-abortion laws were primarily to stop midwives and other practioners from performing them. Mazurek v. Armstrong, 520 U.S. 968 (1997) overturned an appellate court that claimed restricting abortion to licensed physicians undermined the ‘right to abortion.’ The abortionist in Mazurek was not a doctor, and based her damages on a misinterpretation of the constitutional ban on Bills of Attainder. That particular constitutional Act can be applied to abortion, but not as it was in Mazurek. I discuss this in a previous blog post.⁵

Simply put, Humanism is a departure from Natural Law, putting the wants, desires, and impulses of human nature in control. We see it in the insistence of states issuing drivers’ licenses, unwilling to deport illegal aliens (perhaps seeing them as a voting block) which has led to massive voter registration abuse and unconstitutional disenfranchisement of ‘qualified citizen voters.’

As for abortion, Humanism turns its back on biblical bans on premarital sex,⁶ going so far as to remove the term of art ‘bastard’ from legal lexicons, considering the word ‘fornication’ as archaic.⁷ The victory of Humanism over marriage law corrupted the word ‘sex’ in the 14th Amendment, conflating the two biological genders from nouns to verbs describing ‘sexual acts or perversion,’ and later many ‘sexes’ per se as in LGBT ad infinitum. It seems a choice of perversion changes your sex, your gender, shifting all manner of laws to burden conservatives who do not recognize ‘alternate’ lifestyles or Same-Sex Marriage; and by taking personal and moral stands against these new ‘genders,’ conservatives are facing non-judicial administrative Human Rights fines and penalties. (See: Bills of Pains and Penalties)

Premarital sex has diluted marriage, and no-excuse community property divorce generally makes marriage too great a financial risk. U.S. marriage rates are half what they were only a few decades ago.⁸ So it is not a surprise that approximately 95% of abortions are not only in the first trimester, but due to financial concerns of the single mother; the male being unavailable or unreliable for support.

1. Today, Assoc. Justice Kitajni ‘What is a Woman’ Jackson argued that irreversible gender-‘affirming’ surgery on minors is a human right equivalent to mixed race marriage. ↩︎
2. Modern cultural examples of Humanism include Scientology, an organized religion without a god, relying solely on an individual’s personal ethics and morality. Star Trek, a science fiction franchise, promotes a future in which science prevailes and any ‘gods’ were merely beings from more advanced civilizations. ↩︎
3. https://www.npr.org/2022/05/04/1096154028/the-movement-against-abortion-rights-is-nearing-its-apex-but-it-began-way-before ↩︎
4. Doctors were also against federal mandates for mRNA vaccines, promoting instead clinically-proven success of Hydroxychloroquine. The NIH also lauded Ivermectin as effective treatment for COVID and SARS, but ‘deleted’ their NIH library page on Ivermectin prior to Emergency Use Authorization of mRNA vaccines. Doctors were threatened, some even organizing to sue federal government agencies after those agencies pressured states to cancel doctors’ licenses to practice medicine if they prescribed Hydroxychloroquine. President Trump and Peter Navarro fully supported Hydroxychloroquine but were attacked by federal agencies (Fauci) and the media. Peter Navarro was later attacked and imprisoned. DA’s and prosecutors have been trying to put Donald Trump in prison, his so-called ‘hush money’ conviction still awaiting sentencing. President Biden’s illegal border policies have burdened our social and law infrastructure, causing death and mayhem. But President Trump’s plan to distribute Hydroxychloroquine would have avoided Biden’s business shutdown and social distancing mandates, the drug suppressing viral shedding and ending the pandemic. ↩︎
5. https://paraleaglenm.com/2022/05/12/does-the-constitution-permit-abortion-to-be-codified-or-can-women-be-issued-a-license-to-kill/ ↩︎
6. The bible records exceptions made, Jesus commented on Moses allowing divorce due to the ‘hardness’ of their hearts, or insistance. Matthew 19:8. There are many biblical references to prostitution/fornication https://biblestudyforyou.com/bible-verses-about-prostitution/ and there is the story of Joshua sparing Rahab the prostitute. ↩︎
7. For centuries, Bastards (illegitimate children) had no rights of succession, similar to the denial of such rights to the unborn; except the unborn did have rights of succession which were negated, at the discretion of the mother, by the legalization of abortion. This is just one of the conflicts of law swept aside in the Roe court dismissing civil rights for the unborn when granting the mother discretion to abort. Loss of Rights of Succession to Heirs is part of Bills of Attainder, barred by the Constitution in Article I Sec 9 Clause 3. ↩︎
8. https://www.npr.org/2022/05/04/1096154028/the-movement-against-abortion-rights-is-nearing-its-apex-but-it-began-way-before ↩︎