Beyond the simple abortion debate

[toymachines]

Beyond the simple abortion debate
Ben Williams, SDNN

The murder of Dr. George Tiller, the Kansas physician who performed late-term abortions, provides yet another example of the fanaticism generated by the abortion issue. Both the “pro-life” and “pro-choice” sides of the debate are contemptuous of the other, which prevents serious attention to the premises on which the opposing opinions are based. In fact there are disagreements at several levels, including legal, ethical, theological and biological issues.

The legal issue seems straightforward. Abortion is legal, and anyone calling Dr. Tiller and others “mass murderers” is guilty of libel and potentially could be subjected to criminal charges based on “incitement” to commit a crime. However, given that the legal authorities have persistently failed to enforce legal injunctions against harassment, the likelihood of these legal avenues being pursued seems dim. However, what the continued failure to acknowledge the current legality of abortion indicates is that the more extreme elements of the “pro-life” movement feel little obligation to abide by the most sacred of American principles - the rule of law. Given they profess to be on the side of virtue, the issue is what overriding set of values causes them to ignore a necessary feature of any just society.

One possible answer is that many in the pro-life movement believe the legal basis of the famous Roe vs. Wade decision is illegitimate, a view shared by prominent jurists such as Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. The basis of this view is that the “right to privacy” on which Roe vs. Wade was predicated is in fact nowhere found in the Constitution and was fabricated for the political milieu of the 1970s.

Members of the 7-2 majority in the Roe vs. Wade decision acknowledged that the Constitution does not explicitly provide a right to privacy, but nevertheless argued that such a right is implied in the Bill of Rights, and, most importantly, in the Fourteenth amendment. Moreover, they did not create the right to privacy for the purpose of Roe vs. Wade, but rather were following the precedent set by an earlier case, Griswold vs. Connecticut... Read more

http://www.sdnn.com/sandiego/2009-07-21/blog-forum/ben-williams-beyond-the-simple-abortion-debate#ixzz0Lva9ApSK

[damntexdem]

1. The Ninth Amendment:

"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

[Demeter]

2. If One Violates Scalia's Privacy Sufficiently, Perhaps He Will Recognize It At Last