Freedom Of Choice Act

[nemorathwald]

Barack Obama promised Planned Parenthood that the first thing he would do as President is sign the Freedom Of Choice Act. This was one of the reasons I voted for him. Essentially, FOCA will codify Roe vs. Wade into federal law. Abortion has been legal since before our generation existed, and I am comfortable knowing my mother had a choice in whether to bring me into existence. That is the one person in whose hands I would put that decision. I would like FOCA to be a definitive and unprecedented rejection of the Pro-Life movement by America.

I know that in reality, it will not reflect any such mandate. It will merely reflect the failure of the Pro-Life movement to surmount their burden of proof. They have never made a sufficient case for foetal personhood, reflected in the indecision of the vast majority of Americans on this issue. When the population regards the effects as intangible, they default to permissiveness. "Don't like abortion, don't have one" is the new climate in our culture since Roe vs. Wade, even though we would never say "Don't like slavery, don't own slaves". It may take another generation to shake our heads in wonder that we ever believed the material for a potential person is already a person. Only then will abortion rights be safe.

I am curious about the requirement, allegedly in FOCA, that all hospitals must offer abortions, or shut down. How true is this claim? Is it true that Catholic or other religiously-based hospitals will be included in this requirement? Do you think they will shut down, as some Cardinals have promised, or do you think they will have "that room in the back" and close their eyes to it?

Is it plausible or ridiculous for Pro-Lifers to claim that FOCA will force doctors to become abortionists against their will? How many branches of medicine require the student to learn how to perform an abortion? Is it true that "abortion providers would not have to be qualified with even a nursing degree", or would the opposite occur, in which it would raise the standard of institutional accreditation to perform the procedures?

How many medical professionals do you think would resign and leave the medical industry or go overseas, rather than work for a hospital that performs abortions? Not many, I postulate.

Comments

[le-bebna-kamni.livejournal.com]

And if you think the law steps over the line for states to "run their own show", you might want to re-read the introduction that gives a very explicit explanation of why abortion regulation affects interstate commerce. Whether you personally agree with the reasoning or not, lesser justifications of interstate commerce have been taken to court (and won).

Also, when it comes to the rights of citizens, the Federal government has the ultimate authority to enforce those rights. Whether you agree with something being a right or not, once the Federal government -- whether Congress or the Supreme Court -- determines something is a right, it trumps any laws that the states may have. Roe v. Wade established that at least in the U.S, choosing your own state of pregnancy (or lack thereof) is considered a right. So this legislation would trump any state laws, just as Roe v. Wade (technically) is supposed to trump state law.

[uplinktruck.livejournal.com]

There is a an enormous difference between allowing non-whites to sit at the lunch counter in Selma, AL and forcing a Catholic OB-GYN to perform abortions or be sued. Contrary to your apparent belief structure, the federal government is not all powerful when it comes to ramming policy down the state's throats.

The courts have consistently upheld this tenant when it does not conflict with constitutional law. The way the government gets around it is by bribing the states with federal money for things like highways, schools, parks etc. But when a line is drawn that is too much to swallow, the states can and do fight and win.

It will be an interesting legal case to watch if it comes to pass.