Can Roe v. Wade be reversed?
The underpinnings of the "right to privacy" in this respect may yet be re-examined, since there will be a parental consent case on the roster during this term.
There are many ways to reverse Roe, and one of them is to use the liberals' "evolving standards of decency" argument against them. As medicine and technology permits more and more reliable means of contraception, there is no longer a need for women to engage in the destructive act of abortion, whose effects are now known to be emotionally traumatic for the mother and extremely painful to the fetus. An "evolving society" can no longer stand by idly as great injury and death is created in the name of "privacy" when, by virtue of increasingly effective contraceptive measures, the woman has had every chance to exercise dominion over her own body.
Further, standards of equality have also "evolved". The risk of having a child for the mother is not unlike the risk of having pay for one on the part of the father. In this, there are nine months of great inconvenience for the mother, compared to eighteen years for the father, who is often held accountable for child support. A decent society strives to equalize the risk of sexual behavior between men and women, and an argument that pretends that abortion does not disproportionately empower women over men, for many reasons, fails the test of time. Equality of choice requires equality between the sexes.
For these and many other reasons, the Court should hold that the "right" to privacy in this area is limited to the period before conception only.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment