I think Morrigoon's post shows why, Roe, while to my mind a sensible pragmatic decision, has muddied the abortion debate. If we take out the woman's penumbral constitutional right to privacy and stop debating how when and if, with the advance of science, a fetus might be deemed a person with due process rights, we're left with the typical "ick or not ick" legislative decision--the type of decision that will have to be argued about if Roe goes.
We make these legislative decisions all the time: killing and eating your own chicken is not ick. Killing and eating your own dog is ick. Roe had the ick/not ick balance down fairly well since, as has often been pointed out, pregnancies often terminate naturally in the first trimester anyway. Terminating an advanced pregnancy on a whim--something I assume happens approximately never--would be ick.
I predict that when Roe goes away--and it will if McCain wins--even states with the most burdensome restrictions, having won the larger point, will end up with statutes looking something like ick/not ick. At any rate, everyone should get used to discussing issues without resorting to constitutional crutches.
__________________
Live now-pay later. Diner's Club!
|