Scarlito's way
Here's what I don't get...conservatives supposedly want LESS government and LESS government intrusion into our lives and yet, when it comes to sex and abortion, many conservatives want to create rules about what a wife has to tell her husband and what consenting adults can do in the privacy of their homes.
Bush's latest appointee came to the legal conclusion that spousal notification is not an onerous burden on the wife if she chooses to have an abortion. Don't forget that abortion is still legal here!
I firmly believe that a decision to abort a child should be discussed by both parents. I wish with all my heart that the parents would change their mind and NOT choose abortion. But, as long as abortion is legal, is it really government's business to intrude into that discussion and decision?
I understand that the underpinning for Alito's decision may have been his desire to not intrude on the will of the legislature that chose to require spousal notification, but to me, this line of thinking on this issue portends the non-belief in the right to privacy as established in Griswald v. Connecticut.
On the other hand, Alito (in Elizabeth Blackwell Health Center for Women v. Knoll (61 F.3d 170)) cast the tie-breaking vote, when the 3rd Circuit panel enjoined (forbid) the enforcement of a provision in Pa’s Abortion Control Act that had required victims of rape and incest to report the crime to appropriate authorities as a precondition for obtaining an abortion at taxpayer expense under Medicaid.
Although the latter ruling is somewhat encouraging (if commonsensical), I'm thinking that if you firmly believe in the constitutional right to privacy, Alito may not be your man.
Bush's latest appointee came to the legal conclusion that spousal notification is not an onerous burden on the wife if she chooses to have an abortion. Don't forget that abortion is still legal here!
I firmly believe that a decision to abort a child should be discussed by both parents. I wish with all my heart that the parents would change their mind and NOT choose abortion. But, as long as abortion is legal, is it really government's business to intrude into that discussion and decision?
I understand that the underpinning for Alito's decision may have been his desire to not intrude on the will of the legislature that chose to require spousal notification, but to me, this line of thinking on this issue portends the non-belief in the right to privacy as established in Griswald v. Connecticut.
On the other hand, Alito (in Elizabeth Blackwell Health Center for Women v. Knoll (61 F.3d 170)) cast the tie-breaking vote, when the 3rd Circuit panel enjoined (forbid) the enforcement of a provision in Pa’s Abortion Control Act that had required victims of rape and incest to report the crime to appropriate authorities as a precondition for obtaining an abortion at taxpayer expense under Medicaid.
Although the latter ruling is somewhat encouraging (if commonsensical), I'm thinking that if you firmly believe in the constitutional right to privacy, Alito may not be your man.
