- Does the Federal government have the power (as defined by the ruling document, the Constitution) to involve itself in abortion?
- How do you define life and when does it begin?
- How should the State define life?
- Does the majority have the philosophical and legal right to impose its morality on the minority?
There are specific, enumerated powers granted to the Federal government by the Constitution. Powers not mentioned specifically are reserved to the States and the People. These powers can be added to or removed by the Constitutional Amendment process, and in no other way. While the Declaration of Independence recognizes an individual's God-given right to life, the Constitution does not. That power is reserved to the States. While the Congress may have made laws concerning murder outside of the District of Columbia and the Army and Navy, they are currently un-Constitutional.
Each State has its own laws about murder. This then, not the Federal, is the arena in which laws concerning abortion should be considered.
How do you define "life" and when does it begin for humans? This is the question most people get hung up on, that generates the most heat, and is least important. This is a question of science, philosophy, religion, and morality. It should not be a question of politics or law.
The legal question should be properly phrased: "How should the State define 'person'?" Does a "person's life" begin at the moment of conception? Do you really want the State involved from that moment onward? Do you want the State to monitor your pre-natal diet and nutrition? Your exercise? Your stress? Your financial condition? Your visits to the doctor? Once you let that camel's nose under the flap of your tent, you'd better plan on the entire camel sharing your bed! Will it become a felony to have one beer? A nutritionally unbalanced meal? Too many snacks? To go swimming? To ride a bike? To go skydiving? You might be endangering the life of a "person" for whom the State has legal responsibility.
I suggest that the point of the State's commencement of responsibility is the real question here. It might be defined as "at birth" or "after the second trimester of pregnancy." Whatever point is decided upon, it will have little to do with the definition of life, and more to do with the degree of intrusion by the State that we will accept.
Sharia Law, for instance, demands death for more than just first degree murder. Indeed, it demands death for some offenses American law does not even recognize. This is an obvious indication of the variations in the value of human life and morality that exist in our society today. There is a philosophical question to be answered. Does the majority have a right to impose its will on the minority? In all cases? Or is there a line? Should we, the majority, decide that a woman must wear a veil in public, so that no man not her husband can see her face? Should we rule that a raped twelve year old girl must carry the loathsome evidence of her victimization to term and give birth? Do we have the right to impose our morality upon everyone else, regardless of the fundamental beliefs of their religion? Would you have the same answer if you were in the minority?
I am not the Oracle of Delphi. But, I do have answers to all the above questions. Were I the Emperor of the World, I could solve this problem now and forevermore in a New York minute. Turns out, to my considerable disappointment, I am NOT Emperor of the World. So, make up your own darn answers. Just don't treat this issue as a simple question, because it is not. There is not ONE answer. And the answers you have may not be the same as mine. And until someone dies and leaves you as Emperor of the World . . .
