The Hastings Center has a new blog which contains a piece by Hilde Lindemann which rightly calls last week's South Dakota legislation banning most abortions a "direct attack on Roe v. Wade." The author says that this law ignores the undue gender inequality of burden on the mother and enforces "specific performance" on the pregnant woman.
I'm not a lawyer, just a family doctor. However, doesn't the use of this doctrine of law involve penalties or the positive forcing of an intentional act that has been promised but is not being done? The prohibition *against the initiation* of an intentional act by a third party by abortion doesn't seem to quite fit.
Sunday, March 12, 2006
A clear (but erroneous) argument against abortion bans
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
This Lindemann is a horrific person. And there are many who think like her.
But that is part of democracy: the stupid and hateful cry louder and usually have access to mass media to spread their poison.
I agree with j2 (btw very good comment!) except I do not tolerate her like.
Post a Comment