<p>I was watching This Week With George Stephanopoulos on ABC. Some of the speakers said that it's not only conservatives who believe abortion isn't protected by the constitution, but a lot of liberals as well.</p>
<p>a lot of liberals said that the Roe v. Wade case was sloppily argued and there wasn't really any verification of whether or not the constitution protects the right to abortion.</p>
<p>what do you guys think?</p>
<p>My view is that there is nothing in the constitution that explicitly says you can't have an abortion. But then the constitution hardly mentions many of the issues we are dealing with today.</p>
<p>Which is why the Supreme Court should not be involved in deciding things that the Constitution doesn't even mention. The only purpose of the Supreme Court is to INTERPRET the Constitution based on what it says, not to make NEW policy. </p>
<p>In fact, I think abortion should be an issue decided by individual states. Nowhere does the Constitution give the federal government the right to make abortion policy, so that right should be reserved for the states.</p>
<p>That is my grandparent's view on the issue. Abortion is secondary to them, the main fact is that "state's rights" were overruled.</p>
<p>Right. And even if you disagree with the "state's rights" idea, then at least Congress should be making policy deciding legality of abortion--not the Supreme Court.</p>
<p>All this judicial acitivism lately is disturbing; deciding what to do with abortion is definitely not the role of un-elected justicies.</p>
<p>I find it quite disturbing as well, particularly since it is being decided by men, who will never ever become pregnant.</p>
<p>I'd have to agree that it needs to be handed to the states.</p>
<p>But I think a lot of people are afraid of that- because many states I'm sure will move to ban it (especially in the South).</p>
<p>I find it annoying, like someone said, that a bunch of infertile old men would be deciding on this feminine issue. But then in Asia they're starting to have men on ads for tampons.</p>
<p>Of course the Constitution protects my right to have an abortion!!!</p>
<p>^100% agreed! 4th Amendment!</p>
<p>I'm just waiting for some of the religious ones to come over.</p>
<p>not explicitly to a degree everyone agrees</p>
<p>I don't think it does, and I support amending it to make the right to choose explicit.</p>
<p>i kind of don't like amending it b/c i think it's the vagueness that has made the Constitution endure all the years. if u suddenly start adding explicit clauses it kind of deters the meaning.</p>
<p>It has always seemed like a form of discrimination against one sex to me.....the woman. I do not support overturning Roe v Wade but what provisions are the Evangelicals making to provide for the children who will pour into the system as a result of their desire???</p>
<p>To all of you supporters of the in-utero "rights of the fetus," keep in mind that the Supreme Court, when arguing Roe v. Wade, did not specifically take into account whether the Constitution itself allowed for legalized abortions. The issue was whether state bans on the practice violated the constitutional right to privacy. In essence, if the state can regulate whether or not people can get abortions, then what prevents state legislatures from banning plastic surgery, liposuction, contraception, organ transplants, in-vitro fertilization or any number of other demonstrably safe procedures it may or may not find tasteful. What has been proven numerous times over the years in the abortion cases is that the process of getting an abortion is one between doctor and patient - and not between patient and state. This is protected in the Fourth Amendment and the interstate commerce clause. The Supreme Court, when it argues in favor of abortion rights, is not displaying "judicial activism" but doing exactly what it is supposed to: interpreting laws that are self-evident through constitutional law and judicial precedents. You would be hard-pressed to argue that the rights of the fetus (not legally or physically a complete person) outweigh those of its already-born mother. Moreover, to unilaterally overturn Roe v. Wade on the basis of "moral values" would be the worst kind of judicial activism imaginable. Just think for a few moments before you threaten women's rights with your ill-advised proposals.</p>
<p>The 14th amendment could be interpreted to, but the legacy of Roe v. Wade really comes out of the wording of the opinion.</p>
<p>crazyschtick has said it best so far.</p>
<p>Slightly, but not completely unrelated: I'm sure some people on here have read Freakonomics, but if you haven't, check it out. It's an easy read--you could finish it in one sitting--and while I'm skeptical of books that are skeptical of "conventional wisdom," the book is really well presented.</p>
<p>Anyway, the economist Steven Levitt (whose work Freakonomics is based off of) co-wrote an essay connecting legalized abortion with the crime drop that occured in the 1990s. Basically, all the would-be criminals just simply weren't born. Of course this doesn't account for the whole drop, and he recognizes this, but I don't see how anyone could refute his findings (of course, I'm not an economist).</p>
<p>So, thinking backwards, it's likely that the illegalization of abortion would mean an increase in crime down the road. Morality aside, I think that's a good enough argument to keep abortion legal.</p>
<p>The constitution doesnt give you the right to have an abortion and i dont think it should. If you argue that you have the right to it, what the heck happened to that baby's rights to LIFE, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? If you argue for your rights cause you're irresponsible and got yourself knocked up, then you're a hypocrit cause you want things that benefit you, but you could care less about the things that will benefit the baby.
that being said, juliusmonky...what are you talking about? that every abortion only kills the future criminals in the world? yea, what about the potential future Einsteins and world impacting presidents? you think that the women who decide to have abortions just know that they are having a future criminal? yea right
also, even if you are completely pro abortion, dont you know that women get seriously injured or even die from having them. and have you ever seen an actual procedure - like the movie 'silent scream'? yea why dont you watch that and then tell me 1)that the fetus isnt a baby, and 2)that they dont recognize the danger in their environment and 3)that every woman should have the right to have someone rip her baby apart inside of her <- it doesnt look pleasant.
Just please dont argue the facts unless you know them and that you think that by not being allowed to have an abortion you dont have equal rights. we arent allowed to murder each other either so are they taking away those rights too?
And Remember - Your mom was prolife - you should be too</p>