3/9: Thanks for participating! Hopefully Roe will be overturned and abortion will be a state issue once again. I believe abortion is murder, but the first step to severely limiting it is allowing states, not the Supreme Court, to legislate it.
Now this is worth blogging about.
In case you were asleep during Social Studies classes, the Supreme Court, part of the judiciary branch, is to interpret statutes, not write them. The abortion “law of the land” is unconstitutional. The court managed to find a strange, never before seen doctrine in the Constitution called “right of privacy,” which, as it turns out, gives women a right of privacy to kill their babies in utero. It was sitting there for 200 years waiting to be discovered by enlightened 20th century sages.
No more ranting and raving from me, if I can help it. I’m holding you to a higher standard, too. Put on your thinking caps:
1) For “pro-choice” readers, your assignment is to demonstrate how the Supreme Court will respond to Governor Rounds’s challenge of Roe based on the decision itself and the Constitution. You’re not allowed to resort to emotional rants about “right wingers” or “theocracy” or use anecdotes about a friend who was raped to argue your case. You may mention rape in your answer.
2) For pro-life readers, based on Roe and the Constitution, lay out your argument supporting the ban on abortion and how you might defend it before the Supreme Court.
You don’t have to be a lawyer to answer these questions. It may surprise you to know that “regular people” should be able to articulate their opinions on these issues. The goal is to stimulate a discussion about laws challenging Roe.
Update: Download a PDF copy of HB 1215, the bill Governor Rounds signed into law. The statute reads pretty much like former state laws outlawing child killing.
Update II (3/8): Well, the discussion hasn’t gone quite the way I’d hoped, but at least it’s civil. Some grasp the concept better than others.
It’s very difficult to refrain from jumping into the comment section, but I must. I don’t have the time or patience to respond to individual entries. Keep it civil, make arguments, and support them as best you can, people. That’s the point of this exercise.
A note of clarification: While individuals have the right to be “left alone,” they most certainly do not have an absolute “right of privacy” to do whatever they want with their bodies. A few people have implied or written that the right of privacy as defined in Roe has always existed. That is and will always be nonsense. Our rights are not absolute nor should they be. When the exercise of our rights impinge on others, the action is no longer considered a right. See Bogus Rights.
Another blogger tries to wade through this mess.
Update III: For my comments on rape and incest, see Part II of the March for Life series.