Tag Archives: rights

Fighting Fire With Fanaticism

Stop
Congress from Amending the Constitution to Limit Free Speech

Urge your Members of Congress to Oppose the Flag Desecration Amendment!

For more than a decade, numerous members of Congress have tried to amend — with
seemingly endless resources — the U.S. Constitution to give the government the
power to prohibit the physical desecration of the American flag. Civil libertarians
have fought back hard with coalitions of veterans, religious leaders and other Americans
who believe that such a constitutional amendment would undermine the very principles
for which the American flag stands.

*Sigh* How many more times with this monstrosity rear its ugly head? The American
flag – any flag for that matter – is just a symbol. Citizens of any free country
should have the right to protest what they see as disgraceful actions taken in their
name by their government, so long as doing so doesn’t not endanger others. A legal
expression of such a protest should be the “desecration” of a symbol of
that government/country, including its flag.

This should be especially true for the US. Our constitution, and the Supreme Court
interpretations thereof, guarantees the rights of free expression and to petition
the government with grievances. To ban flag-burning would violate both.

Perhaps flag-burning is a distasteful thing. I’d have to be pretty ticked off to
do it myself, but tastefulness should not guide legislation of constitutional law.
If it were, we might as well ban foul language, sandals worn with socks, reality
TV, and Hillary Clinton.

Myth or Propaganda?

This site sheds some light on the popular idea that before Roe v. Wade made abortion
legal, 10,000 women died each year from botched illegal abortions.

Before
Roe v. Wade, did 10,000 women a year die from illegal abortions?

28-May-2004

Dear Cecil:

Boston Globe columnist Ellen Goodman recently wrote, “After all, those of us
who remember when birth control was illegal and when 10,000 American women a year
died from illegal abortions don’t have to imagine a world without choices. We were
there.” I write a blog about life after abortion, and one of my co-bloggers
says that the claim of 10,000 deaths is well known to be an urban legend. However,
Ellen Goodman is a famous journalist, and she clearly believes that it is the truth.
Is it? – Emily of After Abortion, via e-mail

Subversives

“Great spirits have often encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.”
– Albert Einstein

China
silences Tiananmen critics

Police are quickly clamping down on attempts to mark the crackdown

A leading Chinese doctor who criticised the Communist Party’s 1989 Tiananmen Square
crackdown has disappeared on the eve of its 15th anniversary.

Why do we (as a nation) keep ignoring China’s horrendous human rights record and
continue to trade so heavily with them?

If communism is so right and the Chinese government is so great, they shouldn’t
need to make people disappear to stop “dangerous” opinions. Mao forbid
people be free to think for themselves and protest openly.

My Body, My Choice?

Cases Revive Debate Over Childbirth Rights – and Wrongs

PHILADELPHIA, Pennsylvania (AP) — Amber Marlowe was a seasoned pro at delivering
big babies — her first six each weighed close to 12 pounds. So when she went into
labor with her seventh last winter, she brushed off doctors who told her the 11-pound,
9-ounce girl could be delivered only by Caesarean section.

While I respect the rights of a well-informed woman to choose how she will birth
her children, I don’t believe those rights should be unrestricted.

“My impression is that we have a political culture right now that falsely pits
fetal rights against women’s rights, and that you are seeing a kind of snowballing
effect,” said Lynn Paltrow, of the New York-based group National Advocates
for Pregnant Women. “We’re at the point now where we’re talking about arresting
pregnant women for making choices about their own bodies, and that’s not right.”

If the fetus is a person – the crucial point in the abortion “rights”
debate – then it is entitled to protection. If a doctor fears for the health and
safety of a human being, he has a right and responsibility to do whatever is in
his power to protect that life. I’m sorry, Mrs. Marlowe, but that takes precedence
over any hurt feelings or inconveniences you may suffer. Feminists who cry foul
over the actions of Wilkes-Barre General Hospital are just as selfish as any woman
who aborts for any reason other than to save her own life.

Undue Burden?

Limitation on freedoms is not a new concept. Speech is, on the whole, free, but
there are some utterances that can get you in trouble with the law. Shouting “Fire!”
in a crowded theater or joking about shooting the president are good examples. In
other words, there is legal precedent for placing limitations on constitutional
rights. Technically, abortion is not a right guaranteed by the Constitution. However,
the Supreme Court interprets the Constitution and decisions of the Court carry the
weight of the Constitution until they are overturned. For a federal judge to say
that the Partial Birth Abortion Ban places “an undue burden on a woman’s right
to choose an abortion”, thus making it unconstitutional, is a mighty strong
statement and had better be backed up with legal precedence. It will be very interesting
to see if this makes it to the Supreme Court.

On a side note, if a fetus is not a person, and thus not protected, when it is essentially
birthed to be aborted, what makes it a person if such a procedure is not performed?
I really don’t think it’s reactionary to say that the next logical step is legalized
infanticide. If this ruling goes unchallenged, we may one day wake up to headlines
telling us that a law protecting newborns places an undue burden on a woman’s right
to kill her infant.

Judge:
Bush Abortion Ban Unconstitutional

SAN FRANCISCO – In a ruling with coast-to-coast effect, a federal judge declared
the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act unconstitutional Tuesday, saying it infringes
on a woman’s right to choose.

Pro-Life Members of
Congress File Brief in Partial-Birth Abortion Case

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) — A pro-life law firm has filed an amicus brief on
behalf of 25 pro-life members of Congress in an effort to help the Bush administration
defend the partial-birth abortion ban from pro-abortion lawsuits seeking to overturn
the law.