Charter Member of the Sub-Media

July 04, 2005

Pro-Choice, Anti- Roe v. Wade Advocates Are Correct « Social Issues »

Mickey Kaus puts together a strong Pro-Choice argument for the reversal of Roe v. Wade. He's said it before, I've said it before, other people have said it before. It still strikes me as good sense:

... Would it really be so terrible if Roe goes? Abortion would become a legislative decision again. Pro-choice forces would mainly win, with Democrats who wanted to preserve the option of abortion clobbering Republicans (and maybe retaking legislatures) all across the country. But Americans who oppose abortion would win a few points, and become part of the democratic dialogue--instead of being left to nurture resentment at the judges who exclude them and tell them there's nothing they can do about it. Good for democracy, good for Democrats, good for the rule of law--and OK for "choice." Would someone "engaged with real-world facts" have such a big problem with that outcome? Even if it meant they'd be accused of having a coherent judicial philosophy.

The people who get it will continue to get it. The people who don't get it will continue to not get it. Sometimes I wonder why anyone bothers.

Posted by Nathan at 12:03 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Post a comment

Remember personal info?