Replies

The most dangerous thing about Roe V wade is that the SC created a concept (privacy) that did not exist in the orginal constitution in order to base its ruiling on.
The "penumbral" right to privacy was created in Griswold v. Connecticut (1965), which was a contraception case.

Roe has generally been interpreted as building on the "penumbral" right of privacy to establish a general substantive due process right to "liberty." Since "liberty" is a term not defined in the Constitution in practice it means whatever the Supreme Court says it means. It's a indefensible opinion in terms of Constitutional law, because abortion is clearly one of those subjects the Constitution leaves to the legislatures. In recent years the Supreme Court has made relatively clear that Roe's (and Griswold's) theory will be limited to reproduction issues and will not be extended to other subjects, such as assisted suicide.

NARAL is lying when they say overturning Roe would make abortion illegal. Overturning Roe would just return the subject to the legislative process where the Constitution put it in the first place.

The "penumbral" right to privacy was created in Griswold v. Connecticut (1965), which was a contraception case.

Which if taken to its logical conclusion should yield a result that the government has no right to pass any laws restricting any behaviors lest they violate the right to privacy. That of course is nonsense.