There is no right to abortion in the Constitution of the United States. There is also no absolute right of privacy that establishes a "law free zone" in a doctors office. This is why Euthanasia is still illegal and many other acts that a doctor could perform in a supposed free privacy zone. Therefore Row vs Wade should be overturned as bad law and the states free to regulate abortion as they see fit. Again, let the people decide where to live and which state most closely resembles their beliefs.
The state or government should have no role in encouraging abortion as a "choice". Choice is like deciding between Coke and Pepsi not whether or not a person gets a chance to live. After the first trimester, you have to be pretty cynical to not consider that aborted fetus a future person. We are all concerned about how we will leave the world for the "next" generation. But it doesn't bother anyone to kill off that generation. I guess because less people means that the pristine earth is saved from a "climate crisis". Abortion being turned into the "right to choose" is another examples of conservatives allowing the debate to be defined in incorrect terms.
So the first goal of a Republican President should be to end public funding of abortion clinics. Next he should appoint constructionist judges. Then he should change the discourse on abortion so that the life of the "fetus" "embryo" or baby is at least considered in the discussion.
...At least any candidate that this Party endorses has to state simply "Abortion is morally wrong". Facts should always help a candidate.
This post is one element of the Grassroots Conservative Republican Platform 2008. To contribute to this effort, please comment on this post and help shape this platform. Send the link to your friends and lets take our party back to the conservative principals that lead President Reagan and that were the key to President Bush's victory in the election of 2000.
Note - It is my personal hope that Roe V Wade waste away as a relic of a time in America where we lost our morals and focused on self indulgence. To the point that the blessing of a baby became just another decision about our life's fun and experiences.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Thank you! Roe vs Wade was an early volley in the left's attack by using a court decision to get around letting the people decide.
Let's put this to a vote, and I guarantee that Roe v Wade will be overturned!
Whatever clause in the Constitution that says the government may not require citizens to donate blood, that is where the right to an abortion is found. It is unfortunate if you are willing to let someone die because you do not want to donate blood, but the government clearly does not have the right to force you to donate. The same rule protects a women's right to choose.
During the time abortion was illegal, women still found ways to have it done. I won't even go into the gorry details that these women endured. Providing it by law ensures that it is regulated and sanitary. At what point does the GOP ensure the life a fetus who cannot support itself outside the mothers' womb over the mother who is a contributing member of society. Just the fact she is considering abortion already sets up the unborn child for a life of difficulty. It will be subject to the possibility of not being adopted, unstable foster care, another mouth to feed for a poor mother. Not to mention the possiblity it could (from former possiblities) enter into the judicial system at a young age. Even a best case scenerio for this unborn fetus outweighs the negative effects of outlawing abortion. Well what about that unborn fetus? S/He could have become the president of the US. Sure and s/he could also become one of the millions of people already suffering because the majority of wealth is in the hands of the few. If the GOP wants to talk about morality, they should consider their own morality and their own actions rather than the actions of the people they pretend to serve.
I love the way that abortion advocates call baby's "fetuses". My wife and I recently had an ultra-sound and the BABY had the hiccups and was crossing and un-crossing it's legs. I cannot even imagine not considering my child anything less than a person already.
But, Ms Samantha won't go into the gorry details that these women endured to killed un-born children. She feels it is much better to kill un-born children when it is regulated and sanitary.
The left however does not stop with just legal abortion. They have to be funded by taxpayers and available without parental approval.
In her mind, a life of difficulty is worse than having no life at all. It is merciful for a mother who doesn't want a child to terminate a pregnancy.
Modern society has come so far from a clear right and wrong I don't even know if we can come back from it.
Dear Mr. BruceWMorlan,
Could you please specify what clause of the Constitution you are referring to? I know of no clause that guarantees the right to abortion.
The 5th Amendment states "nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." I know you will probably claim that Roe v. Wade was the due process of law. However, this was a case involving a womand v. the State of Texas. My question to you however, is when did the baby ever get to defend itself? Roe v. Wade was about a woman's right to choose. What about a baby's right to life? Consider how you would feel? What if your mother didn't want you?
Post a Comment