Sunday, December 14, 2014

Abortion and the Ridiculous Amendment

There are certain issues in the domestic political realm that have always been and will probably always be 'ballot topics.' Every election, specifically but not exclusively the presidential race, these issues become major points of policy objective. Of course, each candidate's platform will contain some form of policy projections depending on the person's party and personal objectives. And again, while these policies and the political promises they embody vary widely, there are some issues that will always be present and for so many elections have ended up being the deciding factors for many voters. Sometimes these hotbed topics are appropriate issues to be regarded during candidate selection, such as is the case in policy regarding taxation and immigration law. But some issues should no longer be issues up for discussion, restriction or reform; and these topics often become part of a candidate's platform because of the strong emotional response they elicit from the American population.
For much of the twentieth century women have struggled to be heard and considered in the political realm. The first national convention for women's rights was held in 1850 but it wasn't until 1920 that women were given the right to vote or stand for electoral office; seventy years is a very long time for anyone to lobby for recognition. (This is not to discredit or leave out mention of the struggle many racial minorities have experienced in the political arena). But I digress.
The point I have been trying to make, that women's rights has been an issue for debate for over a century, is really the root of the real issue I wanted to discuss. In 1973 the supreme court ruled that in the case of Roe v Wade, a woman's decision to have an abortion is a private one and therefore protected by the 14th Amendment's due process clause, which includes a right to privacy. 
Regardless of where you stand personally on the issue, it should at least be easy to acknowledge that the government shouldn't have a say in this and that it should be a private decision for a woman to make. But given that Amendment 1 was just passed the ease I just spoke of is not a common position, at least not in this region of the country. The language in the amendment is ambiguous and ambiguity allows wiggle room that could very quickly solidify into more restrictive policy. Again, its not a matter of what you or I think is right because we have the freedom to elect never to participate. The issue I take with it all is that in outlawing abortion (or at least making it nearly impossible to be able to) the government (and the American populace, because it was an issue up for vote) has been given the power to act paternalistically; but if I remember correctly, no one really likes that type of behavior, right? Ultimately we have subjugated the rights of a significant percentage of the population to that of another.

No comments:

Post a Comment