Amendments lX and X, and abortion

Quicksearch

Blog Administration

RSS Readers

Monday, September 26. 2022

Amendments lX and X, and abortion

As I have noted in the past, abortion is surely a complex political topic. The Dobbs decision returns it to the states of the US and I feel ok with that. It's a big country with many views of morality, ethics, religion, etc.

The reason I reference the US Constitution's Amendments lX and X is because, in some ways, I agree with Justice Blackmun that there is a "penumbra of privacy." Freedom of the individual is not limited to the Constitution, quite the opposite in fact. The purpose of the Constitution was to give governments only limited and necessary power. On the other hand, is abortion a kind of murder? I do not know, but it's hard for me to view it as medical care. It is medical, yes. Can it be an individual conscience issue?

Predictably, Prof. Tribe in the NYRB wrote Deconstructing Dobbs. He feels it's a religion issue.

Your views are welcome, whatever they may be except for appeals to convenience. Children are never convenient. Most of life is inconvenient.

Posted by The Barrister in Hot News & Misc. Short Subjects at 15:31 | Comments (15) | Trackbacks (0)

Trackbacks

Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments

Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

It is at the very least the death of a human being.

#1 BobJustBob on 2022-09-26 16:24 (Reply)

If the court was serious about a "penumbra of privacy" then the reasoning of Roe and Casey would apply to a number of other medical procedures and treatments.

The failure of the court to extend this "penumbra of privacy" beyond the right of a woman to kill her unborn child demonstrates the unseriousness of the argument.

#2 egd on 2022-09-26 16:47 (Reply)

Just because it is religious dogma does not mean that it isn't science. Let's "follow the science." At conception, there is life that could be sustained by transplanting the fertilized egg to another woman or an artificial womb. The fertilized egg -- now a fetus -- is not part of the woman's body. Consider this argument as more logical, cogent and scientific than Tribe's: https://youtu.be/VvaO7-7kIls

#3 Peter Lorenzi on 2022-09-26 17:36 (Reply)

At first, when I was young, I wasn't completely opposed to abortion but I still saw it as killing an unborn human. As abortion was pushed and evolved to birthing a child and leaving it on the operating table to die I became very opposed to it. But by then I had grandkids and great grandkids and some 80 years of life experience. I cannot understand late term abortion or those who would approve of it. I think that abortion in the first 15 weeks might be a reasonable compromise and I think that anyone considering abortion should be provided with options and 24 hours to decide.

I simply cannot identify with those who rabidly support late term abortion up to and including birth. That is murder in my opinion. Say what you will about my opinion that up to 15 weeks being reasonable while abortion at birth is murder but that's the way I see it.

As for privacy. Did they demand proof of vaccination??? Many who did are the same people who believe killing a baby is between the "mother" and her doctor and no one else. Reconcile that if you can.

#4 OneGuy on 2022-09-26 18:28 (Reply)

It is an individual, unique from his mother and father, with certain unalienable rights. It's government's role to protect his rights from those who would violate them.

#5 jack walter on 2022-09-26 18:30 (Reply)

Science has progressed to the point where a desperate woman could be trying to save her premature child while a child/fetus of the same age is being destroyed at the behest of another desperate woman.

I think we should stop arguing about when life begins because we will never agree. But at 12 weeks we can definitely see that the “fetus” is a tiny human being and abortion certainly extinguishes a life. A 12 or 15 week limit gives a woman length of time to decide if she wants the child. Beyond that there should be exceptions for gross fetal abnormality or to save the LIFE of the mother. Abortions due to rape or incest are a tiny proportion of abortions currently performed but I would grant exception if the case is reported and proven.

Conservatives can win on this issue. It isn’t everything, but it is where the American people apparently now stand and as science progresses, future arguments can be made for further restrictions. I am a conservative and in a world where reliable birth control is widely available and there is little excuse therefore for an unwanted child abortion should deed be rare.

Republicans should run on this and take what we can get now. If Democrats win on this issue, the opportunity for abortion through the ninth month will be available in every state.

My 2 cents…

#6 Lhfry on 2022-09-26 19:01 (Reply)

Hard to understand anyone who agrees with the crystal ball gazing of Blackmun. But I found the right to abortion between the guarantee to gay marriage and the right to groo,

#7 Comrade Obama on 2022-09-26 21:04 (Reply)

According to science(TM), a new human life (a baby) begins at conception.
Discussing when it's OK to kill a child--eight weeks after conception, 15 weeks after conception, or 40 weeks after conception--is a fool's errand. Whether aborted three or 36 weeks after conception, the baby is dead.
The only difference is the size of bag that will hold the baby's pieces.
The abortion debate determines whether our society permits killing babies or doesn't. There are two sides...no middle ground.

#8 Mark on 2022-09-26 22:39 (Reply)

The "penumbra of the Constitution" is bu ll sh it. It's leftist wordplay for relativism and changing the meaning of the law to suit your agenda. Might as well just say someone is sorta pregnant.

#9 mike on 2022-09-26 22:49 (Reply)

As a young woman in back bay boston , I had a chance to interview an abortionist. My central questions were who were his clients and why did they do it. His reply was they were the wealthy young women attending harvard, wellesley,etc. Colleges in the area. They came bacj, frequently, because they could not be bothered taking any precautions. Many decades later i interviewed two mature women. One a grandmother, the other never married. They both states they aborted, or to use their terminology, a human baby, because it was inconvenient. The grandmother wished she had killed at least one more of her children and she was not kidfing. Make no mistake about it....women are not the gentler sex. As for late term? Almost full term organs are much more profitable.

#10 Judith on 2022-09-27 00:01 (Reply)

At some point, we just all need to compromise but that is not in the Spirit of the Times.

Those that advocate absolute prohibition leave no room for charity to many women who could benefit from it and deserve some understanding. Have a heart!

Those who want essentially legal infanticide are morally repugnant to me.

Use of surgical abortion as a birth control method when those that prevent conception are now freely available is decadent and expensive.

The first 15 week rules (or some such) strike me as where most people and legislatures will land and I would satisfied.

#11 Whitehall on 2022-09-27 04:54 (Reply)

I have a heart, for that innocent baby, and for the “mother” who frequently greatly regrets her actions.

#11.1 Mark on 2022-09-27 09:10 (Reply)

I understand your sentiments but where would you compromise with those on the other side, thinking that it all about a woman's choice?

Both sides have arguments that have validity. If we all can't "give a little, take a little" then we're doomed to perpetual acrimony.

Shouldn't we "lower the temperature?"

#11.1.1 Whitehall on 2022-09-28 03:18 (Reply)

I have the greatest respect for the IX and X amendments to the constitution . So did Dredd Scott have " No Rights Which the White Man was Bound to Respect " ?: If he jumped state lines he did . A black man is either a person or not .

And if the fetus , blob of flesh , baby etc .. has nothing resembling human right from conception to crowning , then Amendments IX and X might be appropriate , otherwise , this is Dred Scott all over again .

This , then , is the public conversation that needs to be had .

BTW : if Tribe believes that this is a religious issue , what is his justification for the abortion of a healthy baby 1 week before it's scheduled birth ???

#12 treefroggy (Link) on 2022-09-27 18:19 (Reply)

Thou shall not murder

#13 jake on 2022-09-28 12:12 (Reply)

Add Comment

Name
Email	(Your e-mail will not show in your comment)
Homepage
In reply to
Comment	By commenting on this site you agree to the site rules listed here. Email addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for email notifications. Quick reference guide: [i] italics [/i], [b] bold [/b], [u] underline [/u], [url] (web address) [/url]. More tips here. Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (word), underscore are made via _word_. E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications. To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly. Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above: BBCode format allowed
	Remember Information? Subscribe to this entry

Maggie's Farm

Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page

Categories

Quicksearch

Links

Blog Administration

RSS Readers

Monday, September 26. 2022

Amendments lX and X, and abortion