I really like your reasoning, although you get a bit murky at the end when you are talking about higher scrutiny. Whose scrutiny? the public's or the Court's? Really though, don't worry about it because you can easily mean both.
The reasoning you outline is why, I believe, the anti-abortion types are fighting so hard against the "morning-after" pill. It is as if they know that the closer to conception the state intervention into the life of the fetus begins, the greater the deprivation of the liberty interest for the woman. It is almost like they recognize the inherent lack of human-ness of a fertilized egg, and so they want to prevent the left from trying to win, and what an easy victory it would be, on this point. An ideal world, at least in my mind, would be a world without abortions but with plentiful "morning-after" pills. Although, just given the irresponsibility of people, and the lack of good sex education for Christiany high school girls, it is likely there would still be SOME abortions.
That reads convoluted to me, but I just got up.
No comments:
Post a Comment