The mainstream media and social media outlets are buzzing with the move by some States to pass bills severely restricting, if not eliminating abortions, within their boundaries. Some have added criminal penalties for manslaughter for performing an abortion. This comes after the states of New York and Virginia passed laws that expanded and loosened the requirements pertaining to abortions within their boundaries and removed any criminal penalties for the killing of an unborn child during the commission of a crime.

Time-out for full disclosure and a brief history lesson…

  • I am a Catholic gentleman, 54 years-old, a father of two, and the recent grandfather of one
  • To me, personally, it is immaterial if there are laws permitting or outlawing abortion as the “act” remains the same either way and for those whose religion forbids abortion as the taking of an innocent life, the same applies no matter the legal status of the act itself.
  • Prior to the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade, abortion was legal in no less than 13 States for situations ranging from “cases of rape, incest, or in which pregnancy would lead to permanent physical disability of the woman” to “cases where the woman’s physical health was endangered.”
  • The Supreme Court, in Roe v. Wade, ruled that a Texas statute forbidding abortion except when necessary to save the life of the mother was unconstitutional. The Court arrived at its decision by concluding that the issue of abortion and abortion rights falls under the right to privacy. The Court held that a right to privacy existed and included the right to have an abortion. The court found that a mother had a right to abortion until viability, a point to be determined by the abortion doctor. After viability a woman can obtain an abortion for health reasons, which the Court defined broadly to include psychological well-being.
  • In 1890, this Constitutional “right to privacy” was first described by future Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis as “the right to be let alone” free from government interference. It is supported by the First, Fourth, and Fifth amendments and has been used to support the right to marry, the choice to have children, how to educate children, and many others. There are many strong precedents behind this “right to privacy.”

As I see it, two things are at play here. First, States are asserting their rights to legislate within their boundaries. This is something that has been slowly eroded by Federal statutes that require State compliance over the last 50 years and that pendulum is beginning to swing back from the current extreme. Second, there are well-meaning religious people in many States that would like to see abortions eliminated because they believe they are extinguishing a human life, but this completely ignores the concept of free-will and free-choice that most Judaeo-Christian religions preach. At the State-level, representatives have been elected and defeated on this single-issue. In New York, if you were not pro-choice, you were in the minority of elected officials and the majority passed an expansive abortion bill. In several other States (Georgia, Mississippi, Alabama, etc.), there was a pro-life majority elected and we are now seeing the results of that. In both cases, I see this as an attempt to legislate morality, at best, and to codify religious beliefs, at worst. A curious fact is that both Mississippi and Alabama were each part of those 13 states that permitted abortions before Roe v. Wade was ruled on.

So, how is this going to wash-out? Well, one very intelligent and thoughtful person whose opinion I don’t always agree with but always have to respect (my son) thinks that the extremity of the pro-life legislation is designed to force the issue all the way back to the U.S. Supreme Court. If that happens, I honestly think there is a real chance that the original decision in Roe v. Wade would be reexamined, but a very-slim-to-none chance that the current crop of Judges would see the “Right to Privacy” is not a valid Constitutional basis for the further limiting of abortion. There are numerous, very solid, precedents (some recent, some almost 100 years ago) for the Federal and State governments to have no say in marriage and childbearing choices based on the same “right to privacy.”

Others may think differently, but unless the Supreme Court is going to define at what moment human life begins, there is absolutely no basis for the level of regulation of abortion as currently proposed by Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, et. al.

The Abortion Rights Frenzy

Post navigation