The Silent Issue

If being wanted becomes a requirement to qualify for being alive, then we are all in trouble.

While abortion foes are often described as the ???religious right???, one need not be particularly religious nor a political conservative to understand the clear logical problems of Roe v. Wade. Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided because it took what was obviously a political question out of the democratic process, overruling the laws of 46 states. Even many liberal law professors will admit the reasoning behind the decision was seriously flawed. A person can be pro-choice and still understand Roe v. Wade was decided incorrectly. In fact, one of the dissenters against Roe v. Wade was Supreme Court Justice Byron White - a pro-choice, lifelong loyal Democrat who was appointed to the court by President Kennedy. While he didn???t think states should necessarily pass laws restricting abortion, he understood that nothing in the Constitution prevented such laws at the state level. He thought that the majority in Roe completely made up the idea that the Constitution ???values the convenience, whim or caprice of the putative mother more than the life or potential life of the fetus". In short, the issue of whether abortion should be legal is a decision for a legislature, not for the Court.

One can't help but look at Europe, where people aren't so twisted around by this issue because abortion laws are made by the legislative branch, and see that settling this issue in the judicial branch is a huge mistake. Interestingly enough, most European laws wouldn???t even be allowed under Roe. For example, many European countries have a 12-week gestational limit on abortion, and several require counseling or certain conditions like preserving the woman???s life or health before allowing an abortion. Is Europe secretly some bastion of religious-right thinking? Nobody believes that; but their laws, unlike the sledgehammer that the Roe court used, are nuanced in response to the complexity of the issue.

Should abortion be made illegal in this country? Maybe. Maybe not. Maybe yes under certain circumstances and not in others. It???s a very difficult question. But that critical issue is one that ought to be settled in the legislative branches of the states, not by nine unelected lawyers in Washington, D.C. That's why Roe is a poor decision, and why many good-hearted conservatives and moderates remain deeply troubled by it.

And again, Emmel, abortion is not simply a religious issue, although it is a moral one. So is the murder of full-grown humans. You have no problem with legislation against this type of murder, why is the murder of younger humans any different? And to 1truechristian1: Obama has said the first thing he will do in office is to get rid of the law that states minors have to have parental consent for abortions.

Sure, there are other issues that affect life --poverty, pollution, prejudice, etc. But there are many ways to deal with those issues. And --- the real issue--- if I don't have a basic right to life, what do my other rights matter (right to a living wage, right to a clean atmosphere, right to live without bias, etc)? Those arguments put forth by Kmiec don't address that basic question. And if Obama does what he has promised to do, and signs the Freedom of Choice Act, there will be no way to work for restrictions on the state level. The Act will
abolish all restrictions.

I believe that in time the consciousnesses of the American people will be raised and they will see abortion for what it is---the most basic violation of a civil right. In the end, apart from the moral teachings of particular churches, we're dealing with a civil rights issue here. Some day, a critical mass of citizens will see this, and abortion will end.

The definitive issue is "What is the unborn?" If the unborn is not a person, then we may do with it as we please. If the unborn is a person, then abortion for the past 40 years has been genocide and oppression of the highest order, making Hitler's treatment of the Jews look like a fist-fight.

For those who feel this is OK, god bless you
http://www.nrlc.org/ABORTION/pba/diagram.html

How about elect a president that will actually work to make it easier to care for born children (reducing the fear that causes some to choose abortion).

My sister was 12 and a victim of incest in our troubled family - carrying a child to term would have seriously risked her life. I like many cannot support Palin's belief that abortion is not right for victims of incest / rape.

I liked McCain of 2000 but not McCain of 2008 who has melded himself to the far right and the questionable choice of Palin.

I am a woman. I am a Catholic. I believe that life begins at conception and any mechanical means to end that life is wrong. HOWEVER, I am pro choice. I believe it is a woman's right to make whatever decision she needs to in her life. I do not believe the government should be able to determine what a person does with their body. I do not believe it is my place to make a decision for someone else. I have enough on my plate just making my own decisions. Anyone with half a brain will know that legal or not, abortions will continue to occur. While they are legal, there is a safe environment for women to go to. If they become illegal again, women will be having them in alleys and back room closet in unsterile. unsafe conditions.

If you will allow Pro-life and Pro-choice, you must allow Abortion vs. Subjugation. You are advocating the subjugation of the pregnant woman to the dictates of someone else's conscience. That is slavery. There is nothing in scripture that speaks to abortion. Nothing. Since nature is the foremost abortionist, how could there be? If the crackpot idea of calling a fertilized egg a person is considered reasonable, then I submit that any woman who asks for a pregnancy test or any test to ascertain the health of the fetus is considering abortion. No tests of any kind including pregnancy test should be given to any woman who declares herself Pro-life. There is no exception to allow abortion in the fanatic's mind, ergo no tests. In other words, let the Pro-life woman die if that is the price of preventing abortion. There is no point in saving the Pro-life mother's life whatsoever. If the baby can be saved, so be it. Otherwise, aborting the fetus is murder and the mother is the murderer. You want orthodoxy, you got it. Does the god of the old or new testament say anything proscribing abortion? Nothing, except to posit that a deity impregnated a young Jewish girl, and the husband was not allowed to put her aside.

Setting aside partial-birth abortion, Obama does not even oppose live-birth abortion, a process whereby the doctor medically induces labor by inserting medication into the birth canal near the cervix causing the cervix to be stimulated and open early. When this occurs, the small second or third trimester pre-term, fully formed baby falls out of the uterus, sometimes alive. It is then not killed but, rather, "left to die," which can take as long as eight hours. Make no mistake, this is a baby - in one particular reported incident, 1/2 pound and 10 inches long - bigger than a hamster, bigger than some other fully grown species in the animal world. This is not just urban myth, it is fully documented in senate hearings - Hearing on H.R.4292, The "Born-Alive Infant Protection Act of 2000." Obama opposed this act that would protect infants that survive an abortion. It's not a secret, it's not sensationalism, it's the truth. How far are we going to go? With every choice to support abortion or choice not to do anything, we go further and further down the slippery slope. Where will it end? Will our collective conscience be so numb at some point that is seems logical to kill a child if we no longer want it? It may take awhile to get there, but don't be surprised...

In the history of the world, no government, ofther than dictatorships (and there is some question as to th success of these), has ever succeeded in legislating morality. In this country doing so infringes on th liberty guaranteed by our constitution. Although the government has in the last few decades has infringed much on our liberties, a line must be drawn somewhere. Since our constitution specifically prohibits the government establishment of a state religion, it leaves moral issues with the individual, as they should be. Your morality, or lack thereof, is a matter between you and the God you believe in and not a matter for government control.

has anyone stopped to think, hey the republicans are responsible for roe-v-wade to begin with. well, it's true. 5 of the 6 rep nominated judges ruled for it. the republicans have had at least a 6/3 majority since, currently they hold a 7/2 majority. when will we realize that this issue is being used to divide us and to prop up an otherwise morally bankrupt party. the republicans are responsible for and have had the votes to change roe-v-wade for 35 years and yet the country has been told how voting for a democrat will hurt the pro-life cause. wake up america!!!

Human life begins at conception. That is a scientific and objective fact. The unborn are not destined to be goats or rabbits. Abortion is the taking of an innocent human life regardless of the circumstances of conception. Saying that murder is wrong is not merely a religious belief. All laws are the imposition of a belief system. Otherwise, all behavior would be permissible.

Abortion kills "unborn babies"....BUT illegal abortion maims and kills women. Abortion has been around for a long time...and the only thing that changes is if it is legal or not. Desperate women do desperate things. There are MANY already borns that are deserving of help.....that seem to be conveniently forgotten too much of the time.

It's interesting how the author uses quotation marks for pro life, but not for pro choice. The slant is obvious just from that use of punctuation. Either both should be in quotations, or neither.