"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." - Edmund Burke

Both "Roe" and "Doe" oppose abortion decisions

"The U. S. Supreme Court's elevation of abortion-on-demand to the status of a "fundamental constitutional right" was accomplished with two decisions on January 22, 1973. The more famous of the two cases is the Texas case of Roe v. Wade. But of immense significance also is the neglected step-sister of this devastating decisional duo—the Georgia case of Doe v. Bolton. Now, after the passage of thirty years and the murder of over forty-eight million unborn children, the original plaintiffs are asking the courts to correct the fatal constitutional flaws of the two 1973 decisions and stop the carnage."

"Both women reveal in their sworn affidavits that they were manipulated and duped by their attorneys and had no intention of trying to legalize abortion. The former "Roe," Norma McCorvey, on June 17, 2003, asked U.S. District Judge David Godbey in Dallas to reconsider her case and rule the 1973 decision no longer valid. With almost blinding speed, Judge Godbey denied McCorvey's motion. Now, the former "Mary Doe," Sandra Cano, is asking for her day in court, petitioning the U. S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia to reconsider the 1973 constitutionalization of abortion—one of the most barbaric of all medical procedures."

- Adapted from http://www.eagleforum.org/court_watch/alerts/2003/aug03/Roe-and-Doe-8-28-03.shtml

"My case was wrongfully decided and has caused great harm to the women and children of our nation. I have an interest in stopping that harm and I have an interest in disclosing the facts which expose the weakness of the underlying assumptions which led to that incorrect decision.

"Virtually the entire basis for Roe v. Wade was built upon false assumptions. No meaningful trial to determine the real facts was ever held. The misrepresentations and deceptions that plagued Roe v. Wade are presented to this Court to show why there is a dire necessity for a trial to ensure that the true facts regarding the nature of abortion and the interests of women are heard. These facts, which were neither disclosed to me in 1970 nor to the plaintiffs of this case before they had an abortion, are critical for understanding the issues involved. They point out the deficiencies not only of the procedure in Roe v. Wade, but in the Court's decision which was rendered in a vacuum devoid of findings of facts. Consequently, we obtained a decision in Roe v. Wade based upon what abortion advocates wanted women to be able to do, not what women were truly capable of. In this case, witnesses and accurate, current, relevant scientific evidence are available to this Court, on all relevant fact issues. In 1973, in Roe, that evidence was neither offered nor available. We now have the benefit of twenty-seven years of experimentation. Such absence of evidence led to both a factually and legally unsound decision."

- Norma McCorvey, the "Jane Roe" of Roe v. Wade. Click here to read the entire statement.

If you have questions or know someone who would like more information, click here.

Post-abortion resources - click here.

What we did not know 35 years ago - click here