Pro-Life Advocates March to Dallas Courthouse Where Roe v. Wade Was Filed and Abortion Began

State   Micaiah Bilger   Jan 21, 2016   |   2:45PM    Dallas, TX

All eyes are on Texas this year as the U.S. Supreme Court is set to hear another monumental abortion case out of the Lone Star state. Almost 43 years ago, the state also gave us the infamous abortion decision Roe v. Wade.

Hundreds of pro-lifers gathered on Saturday in downtown Dallas, Texas to remember the fateful decision that led to 58 million legally aborted babies, according to the Dallas News. The rally was held near the Earle Cabell Federal Building where the lawsuit was filed in 1970, the report states.

“This is where Roe v. Wade began,” Bishop Kevin Farrell of the Catholic Diocese of Dallas told the crowd. “We cannot walk away and not commit ourselves to at least changing the mind and the heart of at least two or three individuals in the coming year.”

The event was organized by Texans for Life, the Catholic Pro-Life Committee and the Diocese of Fort Worth. WFAA 8 News reports more:

Pro-life supporters staged several protests across the city, including outside a local [abortion] clinic in Northeast Dallas.

“There are so many people out here who need help, and there are so many girls that are not really coming here to have an abortion,” [pro-life leader Don] Anderson said. “They’re coming here for help and they can get it in the clinic and we can give it to them.”

The largest gathering in opposition to abortion took place at the Dallas Convention Center. There, people from across the state attended the “March for Life” rally.

“A young woman had the courage to do something that I might not have had, and she changed my life and I just want to share the joy of life,” said Kris Kramer, the executive director for the Catholic Pro-Life Committee of North Texas.

Kramer credits a mother who many years ago gave up her baby for adoption. She says that stranger’s decision changed her life.

Keep up with the latest pro-life news and information on Twitter.

“I have an adopted son who is actually 25 years old,” Kramer continued.

Norma McCorvey, the Jane Roe of Roe v. Wade who later became pro-life, used to attend the Dallas pro-life march; but organizers said she could not be there this year because her health is declining. After McCorvey became pro-life, she petitioned the court to overturn the case that bears her name. The courts, however, denied her petition.

Through Roe, the U.S. Supreme Court opened the doors to abortion for any reason through all nine months of pregnancy in 1973. The decision led to more than 58 million unborn babies being legally aborted in the U.S. In the past four decades, pro-lifers have been working to restore protections for unborn babies and overturn the deadly court decision.

The new Texas case before the high court, Whole Woman’s Health v. Cole, is a result of those efforts. The Supreme Court announced in November that it will hear the lawsuit bought by abortion businesses against a pro-life Texas law responsible for closing abortion clinics that could not guarantee they could protect the health of Texas women. The law has been credited with saving the lives of more than 10,000 unborn children.

“The abortion industry doesn’t like these laws because abortion clinics would be forced to spend money to meet basic health and safety standards” said Carol Tobias, president of National Right to Life. “For them, this isn’t about ‘protecting’ the women they purport to help, it’s about preserving their cash flow.”

“If an abortionist closes up because he can’t meet these most basic medical standards, that’s a good thing for the mothers who would be targeted and the unborn children who would be killed,” said Tobias.

The Supreme Court will review the decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to uphold specific safety standards in House Bill 2, the Pro-Life Omnibus Bill passed by the Texas Legislature in 2013. When it reviews the ruling, pro-abortion President Barack Obama hopes the high court will ditch the pro-life law.

The new appeal will be heard by the nine justices on March 2, and a ruling in the case is expected by the end of June.

Texas Right to Life emailed LifeNews more about what the high court will do when it reviews the pro-life law.

“In considering HB 2, SCOTUS will consider the vague notion of “undue burden” as originally addressed in the Court’s 1992 ruling in Planned Parenthood v. Casey.  For over two decades, this nebulous standard has been used to dismantle Pro-Life legislation, and – although SCOTUS’ deference to the Fifth Circuit’s earlier ruling would have been a victory for HB 2 – the Pro-Life movement at large would welcome clarification of the tenuous “undue burden” standard,” it said.

“In their petition, CRR argued that HB 2 is at odds with the state’s interest to promote health since abortion mills have closed as a result of non-compliance with the increased safety standards set forth in HB 2,” Texas Right to Life added.

On the one hand, the abortion industry clamors for uninterrupted taxpayer funding for alleged “women’s healthcare,” denying the use fungible funds for abortion.  On the other hand, the abortion industry insists on the right to operate in the absence of the basic health and safety standards to which similar medical professions are held.”

“Until SCOTUS completes a review of the constitutionality of HB 2, the law’s safety standards are delayed from taking effect in Texas,” it noted.

hispanicsprolife4