Abortion

 

Published 3/28/06

 

Now that the power has shifted on the Supreme Court, the abortion issue is once again being debated among the state legislatures.

 

The main point of contention between the pro and anti-choice groups seems to be the question of what constitutes a human being.  Since humans are highly complex organisms, this definition defies consensus.  What constitutes a human being is simply a matter of one’s opinion.

 

What the people on both sides of the issue need to consider, I think, is whether it is right for one group to impose its opinion upon another.

 

I think Roe vs. Wade was inappropriate because it did just that. America seems to be evenly divided on the abortion issue so, is it right, or even effective or practical, to have 51 percent of the populace impose its views on the other 49 percent?

 

Ratification of our Constitution required the approval of 9 of the 13 states.  Ratification of any amendments to the Constitution requires the approval of three fourths of the states.  This is with good reason.  It was understood that establishing the rules of government with the approval of only a simple majority would never be effective.  I think the same holds true as well for such controversial issues as abortion.

 

As the anti-choice side knows, just because one side loses a legal battle in no way means they’re going to change their thinking or stop trying to make their view prevail.

 

We should remember, though, that regardless of how fervently we believe in our particular view, if there is no objective, uncontestable fact confirming its validity, it is simply an opinion. And laws based upon nothing more than one group’s opinion are practically the definition of tyranny, and have no place in a nation or state that calls its people free.