Richard Avansino: On Roe v. Wade |

Richard Avansino: On Roe v. Wade

Mr. Jensen’s letter of July 21, contradicting my belief against Roe v. Wade, (woman’s right to an abortion) states, “what protects a woman in whose body is an embryo for which for, any reason at all, she does not wish to completely change her life for the next 18 years plus a handful of months by incubating it into a constitutionally protected person?”

He further states that “a philosophy, held by many people, that an embryo is such a person should not force her to have no choice in the matter,” and that this is where “Roe v. Wade got it right.”

Roe v. Wade did not get it right. The activity of sex, everybody’s right, also carries the right of responsibility. Yes, we all have the right to choose when and with whom to engage in this activity which can lead to procreation. An individuals rights stops at the point of getting undressed and changes to the adult responsibility for one’s sexual activity.

The “my rights” way of thinking is a spoiled child’s lifestyle that says, “I can do what I want, where I want and with whomever, and the responsibility for those actions are whatever I choose them to be. The government, therefore, is supposed to respect and protect my rights and not tell me what my responsibilities are.”

The legal principle of stare decisis, the legal principle of determining points in litigation according to precedent is also noting. This principle, however, has always been tempered with a conviction that prior decisions must comport with notions of good reason or they can be overturned.

This brings us back to the rights of the embryo, the fetus or the unborn baby. Does the Constitution apply to and protect his/her rights to “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?” If Judge Kavanaugh is confirmed by the Senate, we may have a chance to see.

Richard Avansino

Nevada City

Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.