Skip to comments.
Let Roe go (A pro-abort sorta gets it)
WaPo ^
| 07-03-2018
| Megan McArdle
Posted on 07/03/2018 10:35:42 AM PDT by NRx
The extent to which Roe v. Wade has come to dominate American politics can be found in the anguished cries that followed the announcement of Justice Anthony M. Kennedys retirement from the Supreme Court. There are other issues that people care about, but Roe forms the centerpiece of any discussion about what a post-Kennedy court might look like.
I am myself uneasily pro-choice. Moreover, just a few days ago, I argued that the increasingly bitter judicial wars tearing apart todays politics can only be ended with more judicial deference to legislatures and to precedent. It stands to reason that I would be dismayed by the politically electrifying prospect that Roe might be overruled entirely. But I wouldnt be dismayed. Id be glad to see Roe go, as quickly as possible.
How can someone who calls herself pro-choice oppose Roe v. Wade? Let me count the ways.
The decision itself is a poorly reasoned mess. It failed to mount a convincing case that the Constitution contains language that can be read as guaranteeing a womans right to abort her pregnancy. Nor have the subsequent courts that amended and extended Roe managed to come up with a constitutional justification; its all emanations and penumbras and similarly float-y language that did little to convince opponents that Roe v. Wade was a good or necessary ruling. Even many liberal supporters of a constitutional right to abortion have voiced concerns about the way the Burger Court got us there; those critics include Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Front Page News; Government; US: District of Columbia
KEYWORDS: 115th; 2018issues; abortion; anthonykennedy; districtofcolumbia; meganmcardle; roevswade; scotus; trumpscotus; washingtoncompost; washingtonpost
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-33 next last
By no means perfect, but for someone who is pro-abortion, there are some impressive concessions and logical insights in here. This is worth reading in its entirety.
1
posted on
07/03/2018 10:35:42 AM PDT
by
NRx
To: NRx
Question for Progressive ideologues: Does the American
Declaration of Independence's stated philosophy of "rights" as, "endowed by their Creator" enter into this discussion? If it does, then
who can assert, with confidence, the "Creator's" decision on
when those rights are endowed?
Any doubt on that point might elicit serious skepticism about "destroying" life and liberty of babies.
"The God who gave us life, gave us liberty at the same time: the hand of force may destroy, but cannot disjoint them." - Thomas Jefferson
To: loveliberty2
Oooops! "disjoin," not "disjoint."
To: NRx
Wow. After having reread Roe a couple of days ago, I could have written a similar essay myself.
Even putting myself in the mindset of a pro-abort, the reasoning of Roe still looks embarrassingly bad. It looks like they started with a decision, and tried, but failed (badly) to convince that the Constitution backs it up. No discussion at all about when, in development, there appears a human being, with Constitutional rights.
To: NRx
She says shes uneasily pro choice, hmmm.
I wonder what that description of her position means to her.
5
posted on
07/03/2018 11:09:17 AM PDT
by
zerosix
(Native Sunflower..AMERICA! Designed by geniuses - now run by the idiots in Congress.)
To: AdmSmith; AnonymousConservative; Berosus; Bockscar; cardinal4; ColdOne; Convert from ECUSA; ...
...with more judicial deference to legislatures and to precedent... Id be glad to see Roe go, as quickly as possible... The decision itself is a poorly reasoned mess. It failed to mount a convincing case that the Constitution contains language that can be read as guaranteeing a womans right to abort her pregnancy. Nor have the subsequent courts that amended and extended Roe managed to come up with a constitutional justification; its all emanations and penumbras and similarly float-y language that did little to convince opponents that Roe v. Wade was a good or necessary ruling. Even many liberal supporters of a constitutional right to abortion have voiced concerns about the way the Burger Court got us there; those critics include Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
Thanks NRx.
6
posted on
07/03/2018 11:13:26 AM PDT
by
SunkenCiv
(www.tapatalk.com/groups/godsgravesglyphs/, forum.darwincentral.org, www.gopbriefingroom.com)
To: loveliberty2
7
posted on
07/03/2018 11:16:40 AM PDT
by
Sergio
(An object at rest cannot be stopped! - The Evil Midnight Bomber What Bombs at Midnight)
To: NRx
Wait until the left wakes up and realizes that amending respective state constitutions to ensure a right to 'bodily privacy' (gender neutral) will help build the coalition they so desperately seek.
My Ivy educated wife shares a similar perspective to the author. She completely understands the harm a disjointed SC decision has created. Like anyone who takes a shortcut, it's always, always comes back to bite you in the ass. Use the court to ram through by diktat, and 50 years later, you get a Trump.
This debate should have taken place in the electorate, where 300+ million people can decide for themselves within their respective state jurisdictions. And, once passed with large majorities, both the issue itself and the screwed up court process can be left to the historical record.
8
posted on
07/03/2018 11:25:54 AM PDT
by
semantic
To: NRx
She thinks it is OK to kill the baby when it was the result of rape--to kill an innocent person for the crime of another. Adoption exists.
I just had an email from a distant cousin who was conceived because her mother was raped. She was given up for adoption at birth and her adoptive parents are dead. I was able to help her find her biological mother some months ago and they had a very joyful reunion. She, her children, and her grandchildren would not exist if her mother had been persuaded to have an abortion.
To: Verginius Rufus
To: NRx
Roe v. Wade is on life support. It will likely be overruled within three years. Blue States will guarantee a right to abortion in their State Constitutions. Red States will enshrine a right to life in their State Constitutions. Purple States will passed mixed legislation. There will be calls by both sides for Congress to get involved, but it is unlikely it will in any meaningful way.
11
posted on
07/03/2018 12:02:28 PM PDT
by
Repeal 16-17
(Let me know when the Shooting starts.)
To: NRx
Nobody in their right mind can come close to interpreting that abortion is in the Declaration of Independence and Constitution. It’s pure insanity unless one is a Bolshevik Liberal.
12
posted on
07/03/2018 12:16:54 PM PDT
by
shanover
(...To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them.-S.Adams)
To: Repeal 16-17
"Roe v. Wade is on life support. It will likely be overruled within three years." I'd like to believe that, but I don't. The fact that this would be reasonable does not make it likely.
13
posted on
07/03/2018 1:15:16 PM PDT
by
Mrs. Don-o
(Stone cold sober, as a matter of fact.)
To: shanover
Its pure insanity unless one is a Bolshevik Liberal.Once in awhile, I read something thoughtful (like this) from a Liberal who is not a Bolshevik. Sadly, they are now the exception and not the rule.
14
posted on
07/03/2018 1:30:25 PM PDT
by
Vigilanteman
(ObaMao: Fake America, Fake Messiah, Fake Black man. How many fakes can you fit into one Zer0?)
To: NRx
<>The decision itself is a poorly reasoned mess.<>
She’s right. I read it thirty years ago and remember thinking what garbage it was.
Attack Roe on its merits and it will fall.
15
posted on
07/03/2018 1:45:43 PM PDT
by
Jacquerie
(ArticleVBlog.com)
To: NRx
Overturning Roe means it goes back to the states. Does Anyone really believe NY state is going to EVER outlaw baby killing?
16
posted on
07/03/2018 1:51:40 PM PDT
by
central_va
(I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn)
To: central_va
Yes, but incrementally.
- Restrictions on weeks of gestation (age of baby.)
- Ban abortions based on developed capacity of baby (heartbeat, brain waves).
- Strict limits on who can perform abortions, only MD's (no OPs, PAs, NPs, CNMs, etc.)
- Restrictions on age of mother (minors must get both parental and partner consent.)
- Married women living with spouse must get spousal consent.
- Mandatory county, state and federal reporting requirements including detailed demographics and wellness follow-up on each patient.
- Ban public funding or any kind to any organization that provides abortions (a biggie.)
- Restrictions on private insurance coverage (make it easy for most people to opt for plans that do NOT offer elective abortion.)
- Restrictions on doctors who can do them (e.g. must have admitting privileges at a hospital 25 minutes away or less.)
- Ban specific abortion methods (e.g. no D&E, D&X, Partial-birth, Saline, etc.)
- Restrictions on abortion pills --- this is becoming increasingly important.
- Doctors and nurses must provide full information that a medical (pill) abortion can be reversed within 24-48 hours if the second pill (Cytotec) has not yet been taken.
- Ban abortion advertising.
- Restrict crossing state lines to get abortion.
- Ban collecting, selling, offering, distributing baby cells, tissues or body parts for any reason (research, etc.)
- Abortion-seeking women must meet at least once (via Video? Skype? Anonymous interview?) with adoption-seeking couples.
- Detailed informed consent, comparable to what they have to give you for a gastric bypass (including sonogram viewed by pregnant mom.)
- Failure to offer complete informed consent makes the abortionist liable for damages, or even better, prosecutable for homicide.
- Robust public support for alternatives (e.g. adoption.)
- Public support for family-formation (marriage of unmarried partners); link all public benefits to marriage.
- Middle school and high school health classes should teach that abortion kills a child after his life has begun. (Planned Parenthood literature stated that before Roe vs Wade!!)
- Zoning restrictions for free-standing clinics.
- Requirement that clinics meet all standards for ambulatory surgery centers.
- Tax, defund, and regulate the abortion profiteers out of existence.
There's a lot you can do on many fronts, much of it directly related to patient health & safety and consumer protection, even in severely pro-abort states, even if you can't do it all at once.
17
posted on
07/03/2018 3:13:24 PM PDT
by
Mrs. Don-o
(Stone cold sober, as a matter of fact.)
To: NRx
Roe vs. Wade is shorthand for rulings that claim a right to abortion.
Roe vs. Wade was replaced by the Casey ruling of 1992.
Casey is the prevailing ruling.
To: Mrs. Don-o
All women should have to get written consent from the father of the baby with DNA testing and financial penalties for both the woman and the man who signed if the man was not the father.
Few would take the risk of being wrong.
Most would just have the baby.
To: Architect of Avalon
Great idea. We'll add it to the list!
I believe in banning abortion.
But technically, you don't have to ban abortion if you've made it unavailable, or --- better yet --- unthinkable.
20
posted on
07/03/2018 5:18:56 PM PDT
by
Mrs. Don-o
(Stone cold sober, as a matter of fact.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-33 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson