Here's the latest conervative/liberal controversy: Anonymous Lady is in jail and wants to get an abortion. Does she have the right to get one, to have transportation provided to take her to an abortion clinic, payed by (who else) taxpayers?
Well, the Supreme Court ruled that she has that right. Liberals contend that of course it's her right, how dare the Republican government try to control her reproductive choices! Conservatives contend that besides the fact that abortion is murder, prisoners aren't allowed to vote or bear arms, so why should they be allowed to get an abortion?
I don't have much to offer besides the already-established conervative viewpoint. What are the liberals gonna try to argue next? "Hey, this guy in jail wants a gun, how dare you Republicans try to control his weapons choices!" But at the same time, you can't say prisoners are deprived of all rights (food and shelter, for instance).
So when a line has to be drawn, we have to let the Supreme Court draw it, instead of the people or the people-elected Congress. Once again, I support an amendment that would send these kinds of cases to Congress or to the people to draw up a law defining prisoner's rights. Until then, the Supreme Court will continue to make "laws" without checks and balances.
I did find it ironic, though, that the Supreme Court decided that a woman, who was put in prison to restrict her from committing further crimes, is now allowed to leave prison to commit another crime.
Edmond the Hun
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
what a dumb lady. we should abort her.
-The Swedish Eskimo
Eskimo ~ wow...you crack me up.
don't even get me started on prisoners and their rights. i say give them bread and water and an iron bed. Alcatraz gave them an ocean view, a recreational field, bread and water, and a guard on every level to watch over them as they slept. what more could you want? AND, nobody ever escaped. I think they should reopen it.
-Sanguine
Post a Comment