What is it that possesses someone to believe so blindly in something, to follow so faithfully like a dog to its master, that would cause them to be of the impression that they know more at the tender young age of 20 than a licensed gynecologist who had performed over one thousand abortions in around a decade. It was mind-boggling to see the lack of respect some people have for people who happen to disagree with their worldview. However, with all fairness, there were several medical students who represented an intellectual contrast to the arguments of the rude and hateful crowd. All intellect aside, not a single pro-choice voice in the crowd tonight had the slightest bit of experience in the field that Dr. Levatino had spent over twenty years learning and performing in, and the last twenty trying to shut down. They assumed as most liberals do that just the belief in their cause is sufficient to enable them to argue even with the most accomplished and distinguished of opponents. It would be tantamount to a debate between Karl Rove and the chair of the UW College Democrats.
With as little as I know about abortion, be it the medical practice or the psychology of the patients and providers, I can say one thing for sure. I know that there is nothing that can sidestep the truth of the matter. Roe v Wade is a gross abuse of judicial power and has no place in the laws of the United States of America. The job of the judiciary as defined in Article III, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution is as follows:
The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;--to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;--to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;--to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;--to Controversies between two or more States;--between a State and Citizens of another State;--between Citizens of different States, --between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.Now where in the Constitution do the words "abortion" and "woman's choice" show up? The answer is nowhere. There is no Constitutional right, however any person may interpret it, that declares that a woman has the choice to abort her child. However, there is a way to democratically find out if abortion should be legal. It is guaranteed by the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution that "[T]he powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Therefore, abortion not being a protected Constitutional right, it is the job of state legislatures or the people to decide whether or not it is in fact a God-given right. If the measure fails to pass through the designated processes of each state, or pass through a vote by the people, then I'm sorry my friends but no such right exists. However, if you have such minimal faith in the system that you must resort to seeking activist judges that can create a right out of thin air, then deal with it when your opponents seek the same avenue to right the wrongs of Roe v Wade. Unless this case is overturned, there is no way for a democratic process to decide whether or not your so-called right truly exists.