Links
- Journal's Current Page
- To Lum Aves' Home Page
- luminus310@hotmail.com
Deaf Bloggers
- Golden Notebook
- ASL Poetry Prize
- gnarlyDORKETTE
- Spoo Blog
- Golden Notebook
- SwimPC's thing
- Daveynin's thing
- Bionic Ear Blog
- Amanita.net
- Why Try
- Semi-Cathartic
- Job Hunt Larry
- Burninglight
- My Voice
- Diana's Place
- Arcadian Expressions
Lurking in . . .
Archives
"From the darkness, sleeping light." Formerly luminus dormiens. Lux pacis, light of peace.
Quote: "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." --Bill Watterson, cartoonist, Calvin and Hobbes
20040328
To the federal supreme court
More erosion of right to choose
It is necessary for you to review your ruling and allow the decisions on abortion to be left to the states. I am pro-choice, and against any enactment of law that limits the rights of women to have an abortion, but that does not mean that I would try to enforce my beliefs on others who think that abortion is wrong. Therefore, leave the decisions to the states.
Granted, that might mean that some states will forbid murder of unborn children completely, while other states are much more for the freedom of women. That's okay. Such division of opinions is a natural part of democracy. What is not natural, however, is the attempt to pass a ruling that encompasses the entire U.S. The problem is that the people who have grown up so long believing in limiting the power of a central government are not going to give up such ideals. The problem is that the ability to pass a ruling across the U.S. also has the devastating possibility of reversing such ruling. A ban on abortion has not been written in the constitution of the U.S., and well should it not that we should have such a trivial matter on a document that has defined the entire nation.
It is necessary for you to review your ruling and allow the decisions on abortion to be left to the states. I am pro-choice, and against any enactment of law that limits the rights of women to have an abortion, but that does not mean that I would try to enforce my beliefs on others who think that abortion is wrong. Therefore, leave the decisions to the states.
Granted, that might mean that some states will forbid murder of unborn children completely, while other states are much more for the freedom of women. That's okay. Such division of opinions is a natural part of democracy. What is not natural, however, is the attempt to pass a ruling that encompasses the entire U.S. The problem is that the people who have grown up so long believing in limiting the power of a central government are not going to give up such ideals. The problem is that the ability to pass a ruling across the U.S. also has the devastating possibility of reversing such ruling. A ban on abortion has not been written in the constitution of the U.S., and well should it not that we should have such a trivial matter on a document that has defined the entire nation.
