I have comments on just 2 sections right now.
"J.D. Giorgis" wrote:
>
> If you've ever wondered about the difference between
> Europe and America on abortion, then this is a
> fascinating article.
>
> JDG
>
> Abortion in America
>
> The war that never ends
>
> Jan 16th 2003 | WASHINGTON, DC
> >From The Economist print edition
<great snippage>
> America went down the alternative route of declaring
> abortion a constitutional right. (The only other
> country that has done anything comparable is South
> Africa.) A seven-to-two majority of justices struck
> down state abortion laws on the grounds that
> reproductive rights are included in a fundamental
> right to privacy which�rather like freedom of speech
> and freedom of religion�is guaranteed by the
> constitution.
>
> It would be hard to design a way of legalising
> abortion that could be better calculated to stir up
> controversy. Abortion opponents were furious about
> being denied their say. Abortion supporters had to
> rely on the precarious balance of power on the Supreme
> Court. Legalisation did not have the legitimacy of
> majority support. Instead, it rested on a highly
> controversial interpretation of the constitution
> (abortion rights are clearly not enshrined in the
> constitution in the same plain way that free speech
> is). By going down the legislative road, the Europeans
> managed to neutralise the debate; by relying on the
> hammer-blow of a Supreme Court decision, the Americans
> institutionalised it.
See, THAT's what was wrong with Roe v. Wade.
If they'd just done something to strike down the Texas law, and sent it back
to the state lege, and let all the various 50 states experiment with laws to
come up with one that passed the Supreme Court test of Constitutionality,
there would have been debate and discussion.
It's not the Supreme Court's place to *make* legislation, just to interpret
law under the light of the Constitution. I maintain that what the Supreme
Court did in Roe v. Wade was nothing short of unConstitutional and illegal,
in and of itself.
We studied the Constitution in US History in 11th grade. We went over a
number of important Supreme Court decisions. This one *really* stuck out as
*not* being what the Supreme Court is supposed to do. And our teacher
didn't comment on this -- he waited for *us* to say something about it, and
let us discuss it as a class with minimal input from him. That's one of the
things I most appreciate about that particular teacher, his setting things
up to get us into a place where we *thought* about things.
Totally unrelated comment, regarding a different paragraph much later on:
> Abortion politics have also had a marked influence on
> foreign policy. Since the 1970s, America has
> introduced strict rules governing the distribution of
> family-planning assistance to developing countries. In
> 1973 Jesse Helms, an intractable former senator from
> North Carolina, introduced an amendment to the Foreign
> Assistance Act prohibiting the use of federal money to
> support abortions overseas. In 1984 the Reagan
> administration imposed the �Mexico City Policy�
> prohibiting overseas NGOs from receiving American
> funds if they performed or promoted abortions, even if
> they did so with their own money. (This has since
> become the subject of much symbolism: one of the first
> things Mr Clinton did on coming to office was to
> abolish this rule, and one of the first things Mr Bush
> did was to reimpose it.) In December last year the
> head of the American delegation caused a stir at a
> United Nations conference in Bangkok when he declared
> that America �supports the sanctity of life from
> conception to natural death�.
That statement by the American delegate -- HA. As long as there is a death
penalty in the US, that statement cannot be made by anyone representing the
government.
(Now, I'm *only* commenting on the dichotomy between the statement and the
existence of the death penalty.)
That's all that triggered a *great* desire to comment. The entire article
was an informative and lucid description of the situation, and I appreciate
the opportunity to have read it.
Julia
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
