March 4, 2006

Constitutional Amendment for Abortion Rights

 

The Democrats need an issue - a big one - that not only impacts the congressional elections, but impacts the state elections as well...for years. And here it is:

A constitutional amendment for abortion rights (from a political standpoint it would put the Republicans on the defensive for a change).

Abortions are becoming more restrictive and less accessible. In fact, it's gotten to the point that some states have just one facility that provides them. Imagine the outrage from NRA fanatics if they had to drive five hours to get to the only gun store in the state because severe restrictions put most of them out of business.

With South Dakota passing legislation* that would ban abortions in the state, and the Supreme Court becoming more conservative, Roe vs. Wade is in jeopardy and could be overturned. So the country desperately needs a constitutional amendment guaranteeing abortion rights. In fact, it should have been done a long time ago.

The amendment could read:

Females who have attained the age of no less then 18 years, shall have reasonable availability and unrestrained access to any and all procedures that terminate pregnancy without restriction in at least their first trimester.

Granted, the peripheral issues such as parental notification for minors will remain. But we have to be practical.

There would be a war over the two words "at least." But since states are free to set their minimum wage above the federal level, there's no reason why states can't allow second and third term abortions if they want to (let's see how much Republicans care about "local control" and "states rights" now).

Abortion has become a politically divisive issue and it gets worse every time a judge is nominated for the Supreme Court. Pass the amendment and the issue is taken out of the hands of the nine justices and the politicans for good. And that's how the country wants it.

Of course it would take the issue away from Democrats, but it's not as if they've gained anything from it. If either party "loses," it would be the Republicans since their "pro-life" base is much more dedicated (but the GOP will just come up with something else to rile up their brainwashed base with - gay marriage? Right to die?).

If there ever was an issue and a time that needed a constitutional amendment, it's abortion and right now.

What are the Democrats waiting for?


* The South Dakota law is a total cop out. Five years in jail to the doctor but nothing to the woman (I guess the politicians didn't have the guts to accuse women of being "murderers"). This would be like making it legal to buy a gun, but five years in jail if you sell one. Imagine what the NRA would say about that!


December 2006 Insert: Now that the Democrats have gained control of congress, the so called "liberal" media has declared that public doesn't want them to institute a "radical liberal agenda" and in fact warns that they better "govern from the center," as if there's something wrong with governing from the left.

Naturally, afraid of their own shadow Democrats will take this advice and walk on egg shells. No wonder they'll never bring up such a Constitutional Amendment, let alone impeaching Bush and Cheney.

But how come when the Republicans took control of Congress in the 1994 mid terms, and when Bush won the White House in 2000, they couldn't run to the far right fast enough?

So how come it's only Democrats that are forced to run to the center and not Republicans?


+/- show/hide this post


<< Home