|
Name: Steve Status: 3L / MoritzLaw Place: Columbus, OH Since: 26 June 1979 Online since: 30 August 2000 mail to: steve at
© 2003 zipsix.com rights reserved.
|
web
» » blogger » » law journal » » blue jackets law one » » how appealing » » sua sponte » » de novo » » < ? law blogs # > » » demagogue » » Law, Life, Libido » » effinchamp moritz law-blogs » » chris geidner » » law v. life » » mediocre law student » » IrishLaw » » steve podraza » » mike shecket » » better late than never law two » » unbillable hours » » bag/baggage » » sugar, mr. poon? » » jeremy blachman » » j d 2 b » » 3L Diary » » » » J M B Zine » » andrew j. sinclair » » Another 1L politics » » talking points » » andrew sullivan » » altercation » » lefty directory » » non-christian commentary zip-friends » » aLLy » » britt. » » eva » » jamie-lynn » » red wheelbarrow » » james: lost days » » NY Mets Analyst » » no ordinary day » » brittany » » bluishorange » » catherine@rainy.net » » lindsey » » lis » » a blog at random columbus » » nala » » laura » » ruby quin research » » Lexis » » Westlaw sports » » big soccer » » MLSnet » » thecrew.com » » CBS Sportsline » » ESPN.com ![]() ![]() Blogroll Me! | |
|
3.13.2004After a deep breath.Here we go again. In her continuing crusade to point out the fallibility of human kind, and by so doing, implicate civil liberties as enemy #1 to the Catholic theocracy she would no doubt rather have govern us, Irish Law delves into to the land of my-morality-is-better-than-yours and 'yes, that means I get to control your uterus,' by denying Roe and its progeny ever existed. She does this largely by making the same tired statist/time-stopped-in1789 arguments roundly (and more thoroughly) criticized elsewhere.Maybe "Irish Law" is indeed some sort of counter-Constitutional subversive plot-deviser hoping to install Ireland's pseudo-theocratic semi-reign by the Catholic church. (Get it: it's issue advocacy for the actual law of Ireland.) Or maybe she's just pro-life to the point of blindness. Before I get into the nitty and the gritty, I would like to state that I am for broad interpretation of the Constitution's rights-granting provisions and I believe that the sphere of privacy constructed by the Amendments to the Constitution grant the woman the choice of whether or not to abort her pregnancy. I believe South Dakota's law is unconstitutional and that this point has already been decided (Roe). And re-decided (Casey). I also believe that it is not un-democratic to allow the protection of liberty and rights by a court when a majority would entrench on the rights of a minority. I'm not a "majoritarian," I believe in the autonomy of an individual. And I certainly do not believe that one's religious viewpoint should ever govern another's action. I believe that people do have the right to life, provided that they are actually born. And I believe that the Constitution protects those who actually are born from Governmental Intrusion into Their Own Bodies (or reproductive choices). So don't let any one spin on you that the right to "life" trumps all. The right to life of those not yet born does not and should not trump the rights of actual citizens. And then once you've read that part of Irish Law, it's all the normal you should be ashamed of yourselfs for immoral conduct. And the whole my moral judgment is better than yours sort of thing. Basically its all catholic guilt. And if you want to spread that, I say go back to Ireland. .. | @ 3/13/2004 10:26:30 PM » » (talkback) |