Strengthening Constitutional Self-Government

No Left Turns

Ted Olsen on Gonzales v. Carhart

Is the glass half-empty or half-full? Taking Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s dissent as an indication that Griswoldian privacy doesn’t satisfy anyone, he concludes:

Ginsburg’s dissent shows that Roe has few supporters left. The question is: What will replace it? Absolute personal autonomy? Or justice and mercy?

Read the whole thing.

Discussions - 5 Comments

Why should any one approach "replace" it? Following on Peter's post below castigating Democrats, I thought that it was a grave error to shut down moral debate on abortion. Does that analysis only go one way?

A new Roe v. Wade, this time based on some concept of "equality," would be a disaster. If the Dems get another seat on the Court, the glass will not only be half-empty in regard to abortion, but completely empty.

Brett,

The debate Olson proposes can occur in the public sphere at least as well, if not better than, in the judiciary. My practical preference is for the debate to occur at the state level, but to have such a debate, Ginsburg's notion of equal autonomy can't be read into the Constitution.

"This way of thinking reflects ancient notions about women's place in the family and under the Constitution—ideas that have long since been discredited."
- Ginsburg

Uhhh, well, the Supreme Court did use ancient notions of when there was life inside the woman to help justify Roe v. Wade.

Why the problem now? Oh yeah, it dilutes the power that the woman has over the unborn. Interesting how that works.

Ginsburg states what I have been saying all along, that is, abortion was touted as a way to break the power that men had over women.

The problem, though, is that abortion has not negated any power that men had over woman, that was done via other ways.

Leave a Comment

* denotes a required field
 

No TrackBacks
TrackBack URL: http://nlt.ashbrook.org/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/10424