Ask any business executive or Wall Street player if there aren't trade and finance laws that you can beat just by arranging your books the right way, and you can make a killing.
The authority of law rises from the moral intent to prevent harm, to avoid a pitfall, as in 'don't do that or you'll hurt somebody'. We know it's not perfect; loopholes in the law let you hurt others legally, so for now, the law says that's acceptable. Some folks are fighting to keep it that way, but to be fair, perhaps they don't understand what they've agreed to.
Norma McCorvey was Roe in Roe v. Wade. She later testified to Congress:
Instead of a last resort to avoid unendurable troubles, abortion has become a convenience available without restriction.
From the 2012 Democratic Party platform on abortion:
"... unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade ... We oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right. Abortion is an intensely personal decision between a woman, her family, her doctor, and her clergy; there is no place for politicians or government to get in the way. ..."
Although unintended by the court, the ruling has loopholes big enough for an eight-month pregnant minor to walk through for an abortion without "her family, her doctor," or "her clergy" ever being part of the decision.
The party has removed the sentence “Abortion should be safe, legal, and rare” from its platform.
The party has removed the sentence “Abortion should be safe, legal, and rare” from its platform.
The question? After millions of written pages and hundreds of millions of dollars spent on the legal battles in state and federal courts and in government houses, the original question is lost.
Is there harm to anyone?
Abortion -- does it hurt anyone? |
Where is the transition from embryo to child? At what point have we crossed that line?