Since the Supreme Court’s ruling handed down on Friday of last week, social media and news outlets across America have been ablaze. The most commonly listed headline has been a caption about the fact that Roe v. Wade has been overturned by the mostly conservative justices currently seated on the high court after fifty years of Constitutional protections.
Opponents of the law view the ruling as an avenue that makes the way for an influx of regulations from the respective states that will be designed to further restrict a woman’s freedom of choice concerning her body as granted by the United States Constitution. Of course, those opposing abortion see the court’s position as an act of vindication to correct a half-century old error stemming from the infamous decision granting abortions in the 1973 case of Roe vs Wade. The ruling was then reaffirmed twenty years later by a case argued before the Supreme Court on April 22, 1992 in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania vs. Robert P. Casey, and decided two months later on June 29.
One of the most troublesome elements of the past week’s occurrences stems from the realization that many of those echoing the Supreme Court’s Ruling don’t really have a firm understanding of the judgment. In actuality, a lot of the debate has centered on the probability of change as opposed to the actual change itself.
Moral and spiritual parameters do not allow this columnist to take a position either in support of or against the argument. However, contrary to what those opposing the ruling have argued for the past fifty years, taking a look at the controversial decision handed down by the Court in 1973 and actually reviewing the Constitutional Amendments known as the Bill of Rights, one will discover there is actually no place in the document where it states a woman is granted “the right to an abortion.” This conclusion can only be drawn by combining interpretations from multiple line items within the Bill of Rights and inferring that determination.
Concerns over the fate of abortion laws have been the hot ticket item with each in-coming presidential administration and the current situation has proven no different. The weight of Constitutional protections aside, there are laws on the books of many states that serve to create additional hardships for women who choose to exercise that right.
As stated, the issue of women’s rights to have the final say concerning choices made related to their physical and reproductive health has been at the forefront of the political debate for decades. The recent Supreme Court ruling will only serve to intensify both the fight and the quest to seek out methods of securing means to realize their respective choices.
Changing the law simply removes the Constitutional stamp and shifts the issue of prima fascia concerns back to the state level. There will always be those in favor and in opposition, regardless of which way the pendulum swings. What this Supreme Court decision should do is compel more people to change their view of the significance casting a ballot has on the management of the country.
The United States of America is listed as a formidable democracy amongst the civilized nations of the world. One reason is due to the nature of how the founding fathers established the operational system of government. The controversies currently being faced by the country can be directly linked to the fact that many citizens have dismissed the importance of casting ballots in local, state, and national elections. It is necessary to have a voice if one has the privilege of living in a democratic society. If the choice is to remain silent during elections, it’s a good idea to stick to that decision all the time.
To pose a question or share your opinion about this opinion, you can reach B. G. Howard via email at authorbghoward.com or P. O. Box 8103, Jacksonville, FL 32239.
Commented
Sorry, there are no recent results for popular commented articles.