Every abortion needs court permission
In supporting abortion-on-demand, Corin Salnave asserted a woman’s right to choose abortion-on-demand, a right the Supreme Court construed out of the “shadow of a penumbra” emanating from Amendments I (search & seizure) and XIV (due process & equal protection).
The Declaration of Independence begins by mentioning three rights: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The last of these might stretch to include terminating an inconvenient or unwanted pregnancy that would adversely affect a woman’s life, but only at the cost of terminating the “life” of an unborn child, including its full potential as a human being.
Other Constitutional amendments specifically enumerate several “rights” and freedoms, including the Fifth Amendment’s right not to be deprived of life without due process.
We already have statutes on the books in many states making it a felony to endanger the life or health of an unborn child, either by the parents or a third party. I wonder why no anti-abortion group has challenged Roe v. Wade under the “due process” clause of the Fifth Amendment, by demanding that any woman show in open court good reason for terminating her pregnancy before being allowed to terminate the life of her unborn child.
The real “right” that Ms. Salnave asserts is the right of a woman to have sex-without-consequences with any man she doesn’t like well enough to marry. If a woman never intends to marry, tubal ligation is an option, as is adoption. Many people are forced to adopt babies from other countries because they can’t find an American baby to adopt.
