Posted on 06/08/2012 3:49:52 PM PDT by wagglebee
Just how did the right to an abortion appear in the Constitution? It’s found in the Fifth Amendment, which reads in relevant part, “No person shall … be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” And the Fourteenth Amendment: “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” You see it there, right? The language dealing with the constitutional right to have an abortion?
What I see is that no person shall be deprived of life without due process. We have a constitution that is designed to protect life. But right now it is doing the opposite.
A “right to privacy” has been found to be implied within our Constitution. This sounds great at first glance. Everyone likes his or her own personal bubble. Everyone likes his or her privacy.
The case that laid the groundwork for this right to privacy was Griswold v. Connecticut. On June 7, 1965, the decision was issued in that case. Now, forty-seven years later we can see where that decision has taken us.
Back in the 1960s, Connecticut had a ban on contraceptives. This ban was challenged, and the case made it to the Supreme Court, where the Court found:
Would we allow the police to search the sacred precincts of marital bedrooms for telltale signs of the use of contraceptives? The very idea is repulsive to the notions of privacy surrounding the marriage relationship.
We deal with a right of privacy older than the Bill of Rights — older than our political parties, older than our school system. Marriage is a coming together for better or for worse, hopefully enduring, and intimate to the degree of being sacred. It is an association that promotes a way of life, not causes; a harmony in living, not political faiths; a bilateral loyalty, not commercial or social projects. Yet it is an association for as noble a purpose as any involved in our prior decisions.
With the right to privacy on the books, it was only eight years before the concept was expanded in the infamous Roe v. Wade case. Yes, the ability to abort one’s child was recognized in the Constitution under the right to privacy, a right that was established forty-seven years ago today.
A fundamental truth which cannot be repeated enough.
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
Surely there isn’t anything more personal than keeping one’s life. That ought to outweigh the privacy of more external things, if we did believe that the Constitution suggested a right to privacy.
Yet the apparent sure cure, suggested even by the Roe court, which is legal personhood of the unborn, has been shied away from by folks afraid it would create bizarre liabilities and responsibilities that go far beyond banning abortion.
“Penumbras and emanations”.
Pathetic. Outrageous.
I have no respect for arguments that belittle one's right to be left alone. And it's ludicrous that the right to murder an unborn baby could protected by one's right to be left alone.
Abortion (Roe v. Wade) and contraception (Griswold v. Connecticutt) created a Daily Double of Death.
Then came Lawrence v. Texas and the homosexual agenda.
Next up, if we don’t turn things around, is polygamy. Mormon “families” want to come out of the closet with their multiple child-wives.
God is not amused.
Thank you for keeping us up to date.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.