[MD] Morality, Abortion and the MoQ

[Michael Poloukhine]

> [Michael]
> So you are willing to give up even greater personal freedom to
> protect it? This
> makes sense to you?
> 
> [Arlo]
> RvW doesn't make me give up any freedom at all. 
> 
MP: The specifics of the decision may not do so directly, but the mechanics 
sure do. To ignore the greater freedom lost for all is to myopically miss the 
forest for the tree. 

Did you have a say in re-drafting the 14th Amendment via your representative 
legislators as is your right under the Constitution? No. You may not see that as 
a loss of freedom, but I sure do. I want a say in it if we are going to modify the 
Constitution. So did the framers of the Constitution which is why they gave us, 
the people, not the judges that right. 

The 14th Amendment was written when there were already 36 states with laws 
restricting abortion. I wonder how it is that 7 Judges in the 1970s could take it 
upon themselves to determine what the 14th Amendment "actually" meant to do 
to the Constitution when they wrote it better than its framers over 100 years 
before them. 

Point is: why not dump R v.W and either: amend the Constitution as is our right 
as the people to provide a right to privacy, legislate a national law on abortion or 
some combination of both? At least we'd have the same protections but take 
back the power to grant such protections from as few as five appointed judges 
and give it back to the 300+ million people that should have that right?

Or is it that you don't trust the people to govern themselves?

And what has any of this to do with the MoQ morality on the issue? Why can't 
we stick to that topic? What are you afraid of finding there that you keep taking 
us on a personal political tangent?

MP
----
"Don't believe everything you think."