2008 Woodie Awards
Abortion rights not guaranteed anywhere in Constitution
By: Ryan Martin
Issue date: 4/13/06 Section: Opinion/Editorial
- Page 1 of 1
|
The word "privacy," which has been used to justify abortion rights for women, is never mentioned in the U.S. Constitution. If someone could point out to me where the word "privacy" exists, I will recant my basis for my position on the issue at hand. Even if it did exist, privacy rights shouldn't override the right to life.
Abortion rights shouldn't exist because the amendment used to justify it has been misinterpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court. The 14th Amendment to the Constitution was ratified July 9, 1868, just after the Civil War. It was meant to protect the emancipation of African-Americans, not to grant abortion rights to women. The amendment requires states to provide equal protection under the law, along with due process to all persons - not just to citizens - within their jurisdictions.
There are five sections to the 14th Amendment, but the first has been misinterpreted by the Court. The section states, "No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
Women's privacy is never mentioned. Where is the so-called right to choose? It's just not there.
What is there, instead, is a provision that allows states to prohibit abortions by legislation. The fifth section of the 14th Amendment states, "The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article." Congress can create such legislation so long as it doesn't "abridge the privileges and immunities" of U.S. citizens or deprive anyone of life, liberty and property. The law also established that fair, legal proceedings must be held and every person, not just citizens, have equal protection of the laws.
The pro-choice side argues that laws banning abortions are state acts that deprive women of liberty and, in cases where performing an abortion due to health reasons, life. However, states also ban murder, which abridge a person's liberty, but it's done because murder is wrong. Also, by law everyone, not just citizens, are granted equal protection of the laws. This means that a fetus should be granted equal protection of life and liberty. The 14th Amendment states these rights belong to "any person." A fetus may be immature, but it has everything it needs to be a complete human being. Therefore, a fetus should have equal protection of the laws because it is a person.
Abortions need to be regulated because they let people escape the responsibility of sex. If you make a mistake, you must pay for it. How pitiful to think that a person would rather destroy a child than pay for their mistake for nine months. How sad
indeed.
Many arguments are also made for the two most debated areas that include abortion - rape and incest. I've always wondered why so much debate is spent on topics that involve a vast minority of abortions. According to the Guttmacher Institute, a nonprofit organization that focuses on sexual and reproductive health research, of the total number of abortions performed only one percent of those women were impregnated by rape or incest. These two topics are extremely sensitive and complex. However, there is one common factor - they all involve an innocent party or the child. A woman may have been raped and incest may have occurred, but a life was created. That should never be taken away from an innocent person.
The bottom line: abortion rights are unfounded in the Constitution, but it does allow states to regulate abortion. You only have to read the document to find out.
Ryan Martin, a senior journalism major, is a staff writer for The Journal.