|
DomKen -> RE: Abortion has been safe and legal for 45 years now! FUCK YOU "PRO-LIFERS"!!! (6/10/2011 9:46:56 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Kirata
quote:
ORIGINAL: DomKen
Griswold was where the Right to Privacy that forms the basis of Roe was first articulated. Roe would have no intellectual underpinning without Griswold.
The basis for the decision in Roe was that the law violated the 14th Amendment right to due process, not a right to privacy.
The situation therefore is inherently different from marital intimacy, or bedroom possession of obscene material, or marriage, or procreation, or education, with which Eisenstadt and Griswold, Stanley, Loving, Skinner, and Pierce and Meyer were respectively concerned....
To summarize and to repeat:
1. A state criminal abortion statute of the current Texas type, that excepts from criminality only a life-saving procedure on behalf of the mother, without regard to pregnancy stage and without recognition of the other interests involved, is violative of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
K.
Did you stop reading there? Maybe the rest of the sentence will be illuminating?
quote:
, which protects against state action the right to privacy, including a woman's qualified right to terminate her pregnancy.
Roe specifically sued under the right to privacy established in Griswold
quote:
Roe alleged that she was unmarried and pregnant; that she wished to terminate her pregnancy by an abortion "performed by a competent, licensed physician, under safe, clinical conditions"; that she was unable to get a "legal" abortion in Texas because her life did not appear to be threatened by the continuation of her pregnancy; and that she could not afford to travel to another jurisdiction in order to secure a legal abortion under safe conditions. She claimed that the Texas statutes were unconstitutionally vague and that they abridged her right of personal privacy, protected by the First, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments. By an amendment to her complaint Roe purported to sue "on behalf of herself and all other women" similarly situated.
The doctor who joined the law suit also sited the Griswold right to privacy
quote:
James Hubert Hallford, a licensed physician, sought and was granted leave to intervene in Roe's action. In his complaint he alleged that he had been arrested previously for violations of the Texas abortion statutes and [410 U.S. 113, 121] that two such prosecutions were pending against him. He described conditions of patients who came to him seeking abortions, and he claimed that for many cases he, as a physician, was unable to determine whether they fell within or outside the exception recognized by Article 1196. He alleged that, as a consequence, the statutes were vague and uncertain, in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment, and that they violated his own and his patients' rights to privacy in the doctor-patient relationship and his own right to practice medicine, rights he claimed were guaranteed by the First, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments.
The court's majority ruled
quote:
This right of privacy, whether it be founded in the Fourteenth Amendment's concept of personal liberty and restrictions upon state action, as we feel it is, or, as the District Court determined, in the Ninth Amendment's reservation of rights to the people, is broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy. *
As a matter of fact the court's entire ruling is based on the right to privacy.
*All quotes are from the Roe v Wade majority opinion.
|
|
|
|
