Privacy and life
Jan.22marksthe34thanniversaryofRoev. Wade, when our Supreme Court held that women have a Constitutional right to privacy, and that includes abortion.
The word “abortion” is not found anywhere intheConstitution.Interestingly,theword“privacy” is also totally absent. Yet, the Court said that a Constitutional right to privacy is found “emanating from a penumbra” of the liberty clause of the Constitution. This is pure nonsense, and these verbal gymnastics are a perfect example of judicial activism.
Notwithstanding the lack of legal justification for the decision in Roe v. Wade, one has to ask oneself why should any right to privacy allow an expectant mother to abort her baby. Indeed, all rights under the Constitution have limits, and there are many things which occur inprivatethatthelawdoesnotallow.Beforesocietycansaythatsomeone’srighttoparticipate in a certain activity is derived from his or her right to privacy, it must first answer the question, “The privacy to do what?” In the case of abortion, the question is not whether a woman has a right to privacy, but whether her right to privacy supersedes her child’s right to life. To saythatitdoesistocontendthateveryrightexpressedintheConstitutionhaslimits,exceptthe one which is not expressed, but had to be contrived “emanating from a penumbra.”
Ofcourse,theonlylegitimateanddecentview is that when one individual’s “choice” will cost anotherhumanbeinghisorherlife,that“choice” cannot be considered a matter of privacy. Clare M. Clegg Ponte Vedra, Florida