Open Forum: Unborn children deserve due process of law - The Winchester Star

Today’s news is predictably dominated by speculation about the Supreme Court’s pending decision concerning Roe v. Wade and the Mississippi abortion law. Progressive columnists, no fewer than five, in Thursday’s Washington Post predict that the United States will be irreparably harmed if the 1973 Supreme Court decision, that abortion is a right under the Constitution, is overturned.

I disagree. To my mind there is only one correct decision, and it does not depend on religious views, only nature.

At least one letter to the editor published in Thursday’s Post, along with at least one full-length opinion column, cite danger to a woman’s career as justification for an abortion. In many jurisdictions that is indeed enough. Abortion as a form of birth control, as an expedient, as a convenience, as a means of avoiding embarrassment, justifies ending the life of a human organism.

This is the ultimate denial of human dignity for both the prospective mother and the unborn child.

So what should the Supreme Court decide? First, admit that there is no right to abortion stated or implied in the U.S. Constitution. It was an extreme stretch in 1973, and is even more so now.

Second, recognize that nature dictates species. For human beings, at conception the resulting organism contains the entire genetic makeup of a new human being, including it’s sex. Some refer to the unborn at the various stages of growth as “just” a blastocyst, “just” an embryo, “just” a fetus. Left out is the truth that the organism is a human blastocyst, embryo, fetus. As such, he or she should be accorded the same respect under law as a human being that has been born.

Thus, abortion should only be an option once the unborn child has been accorded the same due process of law that any live human being is entitled to.

Granted, this would be a serious blow to the generations that have grown up since Roe was decided. Suddenly, we would be responsible for the new life that often happens as a result of unprotected sex. “Casual sex” would have the possibility of changing lives in ways many would find inconvenient. They might well find themselves responsible for the consequences of their behavior. Progressives have for decades been systematically excusing, even removing consequences from behavior, from Roe almost five decades ago, to shoplifting most recently. It’s time to reverse that trend.

Unwanted pregnancies need not be bleak; expanded pre-natal and post-natal care should be made available to those unable to afford it; adoption agencies should be publicly supported; expectant mothers should be treated with the utmost respect in the workplace. And if abortion is seen as the only alternative, the courts should have scheduling flexibility to provide the unborn the full protection of the law. Should an abortion be found necessary, it should be performed in accordance with the same standards as any other medical procedure.

With this decision, the Supreme Court can change this country for the better. I fervently hope for that outcome.

James Sherry is a resident of Frederick County.

source: https://www.winchesterstar.com/winchester_star/open-forum-unborn-children-deserve-due-process-of-law/article_6b028c35-3dd9-59f9-b21c-cef402e8065f.html

Your content is great. However, if any of the content contained herein violates any rights of yours, including those of copyright, please contact us immediately by e-mail at media[@]kissrpr.com.