4625
2
Re: TIME FOR A CIVIL DEBATE...FIRST ISSUE...ABORTION
This is a difficult issue to deal with because the opposite sides won't or can't acknowledge that the other side's position does have some merit. The more strident amongst the pro-choice side will not admit that aborting a fetus at or past seven months involves a serious ethical and moral dilemma, as that fetus is very nearly a person to any reasonable observer.
The the more radical amongst the anti-choice crowd can't or won't acknowledge that in the early stages of pregnancy, we are dealing with nothing more than a clump of tissue that has the possibility of becoming a person at some point in the future. Additionally, many, including myself, suspect the motives of some of the anti-choice crowd; I believe that some are actually using the issue to dis-empower women; after all, if one can assert governmental control over a woman's reproductive system, it is much easier to relegate that woman to a more subservient position vis-a-vis men. I also believe that another component of the anti-choice crowd do not like modern society's moral position regarding sexuality; and that by forcing women to carry all pregnancies to full term, promiscuity can somehow be curtailed.
My suspicions regarding the motives set forth above--that some of the anti-choice crowd care little about the life of the fetus, and have other agendas--is supported by the fact that some of that crowd cares little about human life in other situations.
With all that being said, I think the most workable position is one loosely based on the trimester system as described in Roe. Thus, in the first six months, abortion on demand, no questions asked whatsoever. At month seven, abortion only in the case of incest, rape, or to preserve the health of the mother. At months eight and nine, only in the case of incest, rape, or to save the life of the mother.
Another argument in preserving the legality of abortion is the fact that it will never go away, no matter how severe the penalty is. Were it to be outlawed, we would merely be creating another class of criminals. We have the highest per capita incarceration rate in the world; we don't need to feed the monster by creating another class of people to lock up.
Additionally, the specter of girls dying in alleys with bloody coathangers nearby has a basis in historical fact; I do not want the government causing a return to such a spectacle in my name.
I realize that I might have strayed from my usual Libertarian-constitutional stance of keep your government out of my business, but I have this nagging thought that the more developed fetus of months seven, eight and nine might be far enough along to deserve some form of legal protection; though pure viability of the fetus is not controlling in my opinion.
On a somewhat tangential note, I think the continued right to abortion is more strongly supported by an equal protection argument, rather than the right to privacy argument. Justice Ginsburg's dissent this week in Carhart eloquently sets forth the equal protection position, which may be more palatable to those who consider themselves strict constitutional constructionists.
This is a difficult issue to deal with because the opposite sides won't or can't acknowledge that the other side's position does have some merit. The more strident amongst the pro-choice side will not admit that aborting a fetus at or past seven months involves a serious ethical and moral dilemma, as that fetus is very nearly a person to any reasonable observer.
The the more radical amongst the anti-choice crowd can't or won't acknowledge that in the early stages of pregnancy, we are dealing with nothing more than a clump of tissue that has the possibility of becoming a person at some point in the future. Additionally, many, including myself, suspect the motives of some of the anti-choice crowd; I believe that some are actually using the issue to dis-empower women; after all, if one can assert governmental control over a woman's reproductive system, it is much easier to relegate that woman to a more subservient position vis-a-vis men. I also believe that another component of the anti-choice crowd do not like modern society's moral position regarding sexuality; and that by forcing women to carry all pregnancies to full term, promiscuity can somehow be curtailed.
My suspicions regarding the motives set forth above--that some of the anti-choice crowd care little about the life of the fetus, and have other agendas--is supported by the fact that some of that crowd cares little about human life in other situations.
With all that being said, I think the most workable position is one loosely based on the trimester system as described in Roe. Thus, in the first six months, abortion on demand, no questions asked whatsoever. At month seven, abortion only in the case of incest, rape, or to preserve the health of the mother. At months eight and nine, only in the case of incest, rape, or to save the life of the mother.
Another argument in preserving the legality of abortion is the fact that it will never go away, no matter how severe the penalty is. Were it to be outlawed, we would merely be creating another class of criminals. We have the highest per capita incarceration rate in the world; we don't need to feed the monster by creating another class of people to lock up.
Additionally, the specter of girls dying in alleys with bloody coathangers nearby has a basis in historical fact; I do not want the government causing a return to such a spectacle in my name.
I realize that I might have strayed from my usual Libertarian-constitutional stance of keep your government out of my business, but I have this nagging thought that the more developed fetus of months seven, eight and nine might be far enough along to deserve some form of legal protection; though pure viability of the fetus is not controlling in my opinion.
On a somewhat tangential note, I think the continued right to abortion is more strongly supported by an equal protection argument, rather than the right to privacy argument. Justice Ginsburg's dissent this week in Carhart eloquently sets forth the equal protection position, which may be more palatable to those who consider themselves strict constitutional constructionists.
Note: These are the most current (2/19/04) statistics available (there is a considerable delay with the collection of Abortion Statistics.)