Who has choice? It’s not women! It was only doctors who were authorized to kill, to decide when to kill and what procedures to use. Yes, in Roe v. Wade choice was given only to doctors.

In this episode of Life Matters, Brian Johnston explorers the confusion that many individuals have regarding what happened onJanuary 22, 1973. The Roe v. Wade decision is actually quite direct and explicit. There is no right of a woman to a woman’s own body. Justice Blackmun, the author of Roe, was not giving women the right to do whatever they want, whenever they want, and especially with a very difficult medical procedure like human abortion.

Blackmun was explicit in both Roe, and in particular in Doe v. Bolton - only doctors would be authorized to kill. Specifically, they were to be free to decide when, where, how and for what reason, even for no reason in particular, to perform a human abortion.

They were the ones given a choice.

Later, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, attempting to teach feminists that they still had not achieve their goal, underscored that Roe and Doe did not give women the right to choose. It only gave them a right to ask. All authority of the medical decision was to be made by a medical doctor, the now killer, the abortionist.

Brian reminds listeners that because of human psychology, and, in particular, the phenomenon known as attachment theory, human beings are emotionally supportive of young creatures, particularly young mammals. The wide eyes, mewling and ‘baby sounds’ bring an innate adult reaction. That would include human babies, but for some people canine babies – puppies are even more emotionally attractive!

But the crime of abortion is not that cute babies are killed and that OUR emotions are stretched by that action. The crime is that this is a human being has been killed.

That is the most startling culture change that ever hit our society. Doctors were now to kill their fellow human beings and explicitly to ignore the Hippocratic Oath. Western medicine was now destroyed.

The most trustworthy and honored profession in society has become the most evil and diabolical profession. Doctors, regardless of their personality, are under tremendous financial, sociological and cultural pressure to endorse, and when put upon, to end the lives of their fellow human beings. The foundation that Western Civilization was built on - protection of innocent lives - was now terminated.

The physician was now transformed to a paid killer.

A cursory look at the current practice of medicine reminds us that there are bizarre ideas and values, and sociological confusion, allowing doctors to say and do things that are explicitly harmful to their patients, but that was not the case before January 22, 1973.

In every state, the laws of that state regarding killing or harming were reflected by the ethos and guidelines of the medical profession, and the medical regulations, the laws, of the various states fell in line with that. Before Roe v. Wade doctors didn’t kill babies because doctors didn’t kill anyone.

The Oath

We must restore the Hippocratic Oath. We must focus on what the crime is, who the perpetrators are. If we make the mistake of focusing only on the victims, on how old they are, when they die, on what situations (rape, incest, difficult social circumstances) if that becomes the action of the pro-life movement, we have lost our way . We must restore the Hippocratic Oath to the medical profession. The laws of Georgia in 1973 were actually very good and reasonable and did allow doctors to determine if there were unusual circumstances, because a panel of three different doctors experienced in childbirth determine if this was indeed a problem pregnancy. They could exercise their medical judgment, and the state could still hold them responsible. That law of Georgia, which was overturned in Doe v. Bolton, was ironically one of the best state laws that protected human beings because it protected doctors from the temptation to kill.

Unless we focus on who is exercising choice, who is the perpetrator, and restore that profession to its once noble position, we cannot win. At present, the pro-life movement is not winning. It is viewed as emotional and emotions can be arbitrary. It is viewed as religious and religious doctrines can also be confusingly arbitrary.

The Hippocratic Ooath was founded on the principles of natural law and the laws of nature and nature‘s God. Coincidentally, that was also the premise that America’s founders insisted be our guideline in making law.

Restore the Oath. That should be our goal.

In this episode of Life Matters, Brian Johnston discusses the actual nature of how a republic works. It works by representing the people through elected representation. These representatives exist at every level of government and through diversified jurisdictions .

Brian interviews Scott Peotter, a long-time pro-life advocate who has served in local jurisdictions and has enforced just laws on the most local levels, including city council.

In July 2023, Gavin Newsom attempted, in his role of governor, to force the Temecula school board to promote LGBTQ doctrines and accept Planned Parenthood abortion mandates in that district. The school board, by a very narrow margin, insisted that they are held accountable and will be accountable for the assets of that particular school district and that the governor was functioning as a dictatorial autocrat.

The school board prevailed.

It is critical to understand, if you care about the direction of our country, that we are a nation and a government that is, “of the people, by the people, and for the people” in the words of Abraham Lincoln, America’s first Republican President.

If you desire for your nation, state, county or community to embrace good values in the civic realm, you absolutely must be aware, and then be involved in your local community.

In this episode of Life Matters, Brian interviews Alex Schadenberg of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition. They discuss in depth the recent failure of California Senate Bill 1196 by Senator Blakespear.

The irony is that the bill was not defeated by pro-life efforts. The bill was actually attacked by other pro-death organizations, lobbyist and legislators. Why would other pro-death advocates attack this measure?

The prospects of passage in the California legislature are very good - the progressive Democratic Party holds a super majority in both houses. The governor would’ve gladly signed off, as he himself has been supportive and wrote of participating in the intentional killing of his own mother before it was even legalized in California.

SB 1196, would no longer allow a need for terminal diagnosis, would make provision to kill those who are not a sound mind, and would remove most qualifying limitations on assisted suicide. The reason the bill was stopped is they knew it would likely pass, and that passage would send alarm bells to an otherwise sleeping public.

Assisted suicide is going on in California medical facilities. Assisted suicide is, in fact, the intentional killing of a depressed person. It is happening now and as the death lobby knows, because of media coverage or perhaps lack of coverage, most Californians have no idea California doctors are killing patients.

Brian and Alex point out that ‘choice’ whether it be in abortion or in euthanasia, does not actually refer to the patient. It is a medical decision and it is the choice of the doctor to do the abortion, it is the choice of the doctor to perform euthanasia. So when the term ‘choice’ is applied to these procedures, it doesn’t mean protecting a patient. It means protecting the choice of a killing doctor, a doctor who is blatantly defying the oath that made the medical perfection respected. That Hippocratic oath is now gone.