....about the Rowland case in Salt Lake City--you know, the one where the mother refused a c-section because she didn't want the scars? Anyway, here's the link: When Choice Becomes Tyranny.
It's interesting, because the author says he is a pro-CHOICE law professor.
Here's an excerpt worth reading:
The willingness of pro-choice groups to embrace Rowland reflects their extreme view of abortion as an absolute right in our constitutional system. But in our system, there are no absolute rights; our constitution is based on a balancing of interests.
Even the oldest and most fundamental rights like free speech or religion must yield in some cases to compelling state interests.
Yet, when it comes to reproductive rights, NOW and other groups reject even the most basic limitations --- leaving reproductive rights so sacrosanct that even the most depraved acts by a mother cannot limit her "right to choose."
And here's another:
The decision of NOW and other groups to defend Rowland is only the latest evidence of how far these organizations have moved to the extreme. This month, NOW, the ACLU and Planned Parenthood opposed a parental notice law in Florida as a threat to the right to abortion — even though most pro-choice voters support parental notice. Lynn Paltrow, executive director of the National Advocates for Pregnant Women, has declared the charges against Rowland an "assault on motherhood." But the case is no more an assault on motherhood than an embezzlement case is an assault against capitalism.
Even referring to "the twins" or the "babies" has drawn the ire of these groups. Indeed, Paltrow has vehemently objected to any effort "to personify the fetus."
Personify the fetus? Wait a moment, while I go throw up my lunch.