Tag Archives: Abortion

38th Anniversary of Roe v. Wade

I’ve included the video from the CBS News report on January 22, 1973 as the Roe v. Wade decision was made final. It’s interesting to see the spin put on the decision those 38 years ago.

This week, I was asked to contribute an article on this anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision. Truthfully, I’ve avoided the subject matter entirely over the past year with the column because it’s such a divisive subject matter (even for myself).

I’ve published two articles this morning regarding the Roe v. Wade decision from a principled position I believe in. It’s interesting for me to note that during the early seventies, what the Supreme Court said and ruled on isn’t entirely what we have now. In the midst of the feminist movement, the Roe v. Wade case focused on giving a woman the right to an abortion so that in the case of rape, incest, or to protect  her health, she would not have to carry the pregnancy to term. The case emphasized these potential incidents as the reasoning for granting legal status to women and their doctors and not the government. The Roe v Wade decision was based on this criteria and from a perspective that allowed its use for birth control.

This point is emphasized by Norma McCorvey, “Jane Roe” in the case, because she alleged that she had been raped and was seeking an abortion for that reason. As it turned out, McCorvey later recanted the rape story and was seeking an abortion because she already had a child and didn’t want another (It should be noted that McCorvey actually carried the baby she wanted to abort to term and never had the abortion). The case and reasoning for it were based on fraudulent information. As it is, the decision reads as if abortions are the decision of the woman and her doctor as if that decision is solely based on the health of the woman. When in fact this is rarely the case.

Knowing this information, I decided the articles would focus on the fact that outlawing abortions shouldn’t be the focus of those in the Pro-Life movement. Instead, the focus should be on the education of those seeking an abortion as to what their options truly are with an emphasis outside of having the abortion.

The issue of abortion is not about it being legal or illegal, it’s about education. Statistics prove that through education abortion rates continue to fall. Think of the scene in “Juno” where she is about to get an abortion but a classmate protesting outside the clinic tells her that her baby already has fingernails and she stops. Education is the preventative of abortions in this country.

With the aid of advanced imaging of babies in the womb (including those in 3D), more and more woman are opting to keep their babies than not. By current statistics, abortions are at their lowest rate since the year following the Roe v. Wade decision.

Please read my two recent Examiner.com articles by clicking the links below:

\”Is Roe v. Wade\’s Decision still Viable?\”

\”38 Years After Roe v. Wade: What is Legal Doesn\’t Have to Be Right\”

You may also be interested in reading an article I wrote in October about how the battle to overturn Roe v. Wade has hurt religion.

Change Hearts, Not Laws: How the Battle to Overturn Roe v. Wade Has Hurt Religion\”

 

Change Hearts, Not Laws: How the Battle to Overturn Roe v. Wade Has Hurt Religion

This is not about being pro-choice or pro-life. It’s about how the desire to overturn Roe v. Wade’s legal precedence by pro-life advocates has done little to win support for religion in general. We’re an extremely divisive nation and at the heart of that divisiveness is fear – the fear of rights being taken away by other Americans. If you look at the mosque near ground zero debate both sides are in fear. One side is in fear that their nation is in jeopardy of being forever changed from its traditional founding. The other side is fearful that the rights of a minority are being challenged and if not stopped here where will it end. Whether it’s restricting abortion, a mosque in Manhattan, same-sex marriage or any other described right, when you advocate taking perceived rights away from people, its viewed as oppressive and those feeling oppressed only dig their feelings in deeper to ensure their position remains firm. The “oppressed” look unfavorably at the opposition and animosity builds up against not just the single principle being debated but for the fundamental views being expressed by the opposition.

Click here to Read Entire Article