R
Reformed_Rob
Guest
Hello,
In this weeks issue of “The Economist” magazine (p.40), there is an interesting article about the potential pro-abortion benefits that could result if Democrats “disowned” so to speak the infamous Roe v. Waderuling. That is, if Democrats stopped harping about how abortion is a fundamental right of privacy, or sought to have it overturned alltogether.
The essence of the article is this, I think it could be interesting to discuss, and maybe, who knows, pro-abortion Democrats could be sneaky and take this approach to advancing abortion rights in USA someday!!
Most rich countries other than the U.S. have solved the abortion problem by popular/legislative vote on the issue. There were debates, etc, and eventually a triumph of abortion rights. The people realized they had spoken, and the majority won out. No examples are given, anyways…
The Republicans have generally had the better of the abortion wars, (a fact many Democrats will admit), because they argue that it was ramrodded by the judicial system, and done so on shaky grounds. Shaky grounds such as a “penumbras” that are essential to give life to the Bill of Rights (Justice William Douglas, *Griswold v. Connecticus, *1965). Remember back when artificial birth control was a big issue? I don’t but the Griswold case has a lot to do with that. Basic ruling was that the Constitution has “penumbras” that flow naturally from it to protect privacy of citizens. And marriage has private aspects.
The Economist article argues that, based upon Gallup polls since mid 1970’s, about. 80% of Americans want abortion to be legal, either in all cases (21-31%) or in some circumstances (51-61%). Therefore, according to the article, the pro-abortion D’s should turn the tables on the conservative R’s, and, since they’ve got public opinion on their side already, put the R’s in an akward situation.
Democrats stick by Roe v Wade simply because it’s a flag marking victory for liberal progress, and why should they give up ground? Well, perhaps to call the R’s bluff! Relying on judges to advance the liberal agenda allowed conservatives to seize the mantle of populism. Roe has given R’s a free ride; they can claim to oppose abortion in the comfortable knowledge that it will never be banned. But imagine if Roe were overturned… How many R’s would vote for a ban on abortion that only 1 in 5 Americans support? The conservative coalition would be split asunder.
_________ Ah, Democracy after the Fall!! ____________
The parts in blue are more or less direct quotes from the Economist article.
Interesting, what do you think?
In this weeks issue of “The Economist” magazine (p.40), there is an interesting article about the potential pro-abortion benefits that could result if Democrats “disowned” so to speak the infamous Roe v. Waderuling. That is, if Democrats stopped harping about how abortion is a fundamental right of privacy, or sought to have it overturned alltogether.
The essence of the article is this, I think it could be interesting to discuss, and maybe, who knows, pro-abortion Democrats could be sneaky and take this approach to advancing abortion rights in USA someday!!
Most rich countries other than the U.S. have solved the abortion problem by popular/legislative vote on the issue. There were debates, etc, and eventually a triumph of abortion rights. The people realized they had spoken, and the majority won out. No examples are given, anyways…
The Republicans have generally had the better of the abortion wars, (a fact many Democrats will admit), because they argue that it was ramrodded by the judicial system, and done so on shaky grounds. Shaky grounds such as a “penumbras” that are essential to give life to the Bill of Rights (Justice William Douglas, *Griswold v. Connecticus, *1965). Remember back when artificial birth control was a big issue? I don’t but the Griswold case has a lot to do with that. Basic ruling was that the Constitution has “penumbras” that flow naturally from it to protect privacy of citizens. And marriage has private aspects.
The Economist article argues that, based upon Gallup polls since mid 1970’s, about. 80% of Americans want abortion to be legal, either in all cases (21-31%) or in some circumstances (51-61%). Therefore, according to the article, the pro-abortion D’s should turn the tables on the conservative R’s, and, since they’ve got public opinion on their side already, put the R’s in an akward situation.
Democrats stick by Roe v Wade simply because it’s a flag marking victory for liberal progress, and why should they give up ground? Well, perhaps to call the R’s bluff! Relying on judges to advance the liberal agenda allowed conservatives to seize the mantle of populism. Roe has given R’s a free ride; they can claim to oppose abortion in the comfortable knowledge that it will never be banned. But imagine if Roe were overturned… How many R’s would vote for a ban on abortion that only 1 in 5 Americans support? The conservative coalition would be split asunder.
_________ Ah, Democracy after the Fall!! ____________
The parts in blue are more or less direct quotes from the Economist article.
Interesting, what do you think?
I took a gander and I realized that I did in fact misunderstand and jumped in on that one paragraph, thinking the article was talking about the US. I’m sorry. 