Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (10268)	1/29/2006 3:33:14 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 541741

It's not really even a right to choose- because that would seem to mandate that women actually had a choice, which in many states they do not have. All they really have, according to the Supreme Court, is a right to have their choice to an abortion protected (by a lack of criminalization) IF, and only if, they are lucky enough to live in a state where they have access to health care for an abortion, AND they are lucky enough to afford one.

To: Lane3 who wrote (10268)	1/29/2006 3:51:12 PM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541741

I am delighted that the SC found the right to privacy in the Constitution and that abortions are legal. My only objection to your claiming that they found a right to an abortion rather than a right to choose. That's a little like saying the right to vote is not the right to vote, only the right to choose to vote. We continue to disagree. As for your distinction between rights and freedom, if you wish to argue it, fine. I simply don't see the point. Roe v Wade didn't establish a "freedom" for an abortion; just as various constitutional provisions don't establish a "freedom" to vote. They lay out a right. Now if you wish to take E's position, that there are different kinds of rights, affirmative and, hmmmm, let's call them passive, though there is a better term, I just can't pull it out of the relevant brain cell at the moment. If you wish to do that, and argue that Roe is not a decision that enshrines an affirmative right in the sense that the government is actually obligated to provide the hospitals, doctors, etc. Then we agree. Which still leaves me with the original point of this conversation?? that it's a hollow right when provisions aren't made for poor women to have abortions if they so wish.