TW: Anti-abortion groups constantly seek ever greater restrictions on abortion. In this piece, we see Kansans seeking to open the door for doctors to be prosecuted even when they are seeking to protect the life of the mother. To me this is "big" government, where the state is inserting itself in place of the judgment of a doctor. Presumably the anti-abortion groups would argue the state would merely be acting on behalf of the unborn. Therein lies a crux, the mother has rights, the doctor is exerting judgment and rights and the unborn has certain rights or interests as well. The state adjudicates but regardless of the outcome the state is involved.
And if the state's outcome should lead to the rights of the mother and private doctor being subsumed to a state mandated right on the behalf of the unborn, the state will have truly exerted profound power.
Conservatives argue that they are for "small" government but in this case they are advocating a very aggressive intrusion of the state or government into the lives of the mother and patient. We can define big government in many ways but those on the right who claim the mantle of "small" government are from my view wearing blinders when it comes to this and numerous other social and cultural matters.
From LA Times:
"When Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius this week vetoed another in the seemingly unending series of restrictive abortion bills her state's Legislature churns out, it guaranteed that her confirmation as secretary of Health and Human Services would become a battleground in the increasingly nasty campaign being waged against officeholders who are both Catholic and Democratic.
Politics in Kansas has long been poisoned by extremism on both sides of the abortion question. This latest bill is one of a number that Sebelius, who is not a lawyer, has been advised to veto as unconstitutional. The measure would have amended an existing statute on late-term abortions, which Kansas permits after the 21st week of pregnancy only if the mother is at risk of death or severe physical or mental injury. The amendment would have required far more detailed reporting by physicians and would have allowed prosecutors who disagreed with the doctor's judgment to file criminal charges. Husbands who objected to the abortion would have been allowed to file civil suits.
"A physician acting in good faith to save a pregnant woman's life, and using his or her best medical judgment, should not be subject to later criminal prosecution," said Sebelius, explaining why she vetoed the bill. She is a practicing Catholic who personally opposes abortion. She argues, however, that such opposition does not relieve her of a legal obligation to veto legislation she thinks is unconstitutional.
In 2006, Sebelius said: "My Catholic faith teaches me that all life is sacred, and personally I believe abortion is wrong. However, I disagree with the suggestion that criminalizing women and their doctors is an effective means of achieving the goal of reducing the number of abortions in our nation." The governor contends that other approaches, particularly adoption incentives and better public health programs, are more effective, and she frequently notes that the number of abortions in Kansas has declined 10% during her six years in office..."
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-rutten25-2009apr25,0,2222655.story
No comments:
Post a Comment