Women's Rights and Abortion

Proposal 4

by Michael Bindner

Posted June 17, 2007

Issues:

There are three dominant positions on this issue. The pro-life side seeks the repeal of Roe v. Wade and eventual state by state abortion bans, although does not go into detail on what these bans will look like. The pro-choice side seeks the reproductive rights of the women involved but does not consider the rights of the child. The third position, called the mushy-middle, is held by a majority of the public, is that abortion is wrong and that outlawing it using the criminal law is also wrong. The pro-life side tends to be dominant in the Republican Party, while the pro-choicers dominate the Democrats, at least at the activist level. Holders of the third position have no real political home, especially if they seek political office. The holders of the first two positions and the parties which sponsor them also use this issue for fundraising, which does not bode well for compromise.

Individuals have the right to life, liberty, and property. However, under the law, fetuses are considered property until birth. This fact deserves to be stated bluntly to unmask those who would minimize the rights of the fetus. Restrictions on abortion which lead women to self-induced or unsafe abortion providers are as surely violative of their right to life as abortion is to the unborn. The Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution defines citizenship rights as occurring upon birth or naturalization and gives Congress the ability to enforce the provisions of the amendment. To advocate a solution that is not national in scope is violative of the plain language of this amendment and ignores the strife caused when the issue of slavery was treated on a state by state basis. Any state by state abortion situation will not prevent most abortions as they currently occur, since most abortions now occur in what would be pro-choice states and women from any state may travel to these states to procure an abortion. Solutions which do not actually have a result should not be enacted. Any abortion restriction must not be considered merely a reproductive issue or minor felony. Citizenship rights must mean full citizenship. Prior to the granting of such rights, the fate of the fetus must be legally considered a private matter between a woman and her doctor.

The Libertarian Party seeks an end to the stalemate on this issue, which serves to enrich the fundraising capabilities of the two major parties while dividing this nation on this highly emotional issue. We believe such a solution is possible. The appropriate forum for granting citizenship rights must be the United States Congress, not state legislatures and not the courts. The granting of citizenship rights implies a right to legal action against the doctor should the pregnancy not come to a successful conclusion. Due to the frequency of natural miscarriage in the first trimester, we cannot advocate the granting of legal standing to fetuses at this stage of developments as this would require that all such children must be saved. While many of us find second trimester abortion to be abhorrent, we realize that an abortion ban at this stage may well lead to an epidemic of unsafe abortion in which the mother’s life would be placed at great risk. We also do not believe that obstetricians should be held legally responsible for the outcome of the pregnancy at this point. We do believe, however, that once the lungs of the child are developed, that doctors should be accountable for a successful outcome barring some tragic circumstance beyond their control. This stage also guides us in demanding that Congress grant full legal status to children at this stage of development. The individual states may then define the punishment for the deliberate taking of these lives, which should be at least manslaughter barring some grave medical necessity.

The Libertarian Party believes that, as part of systematic reform of the tax code, tax credits for family size must be enacted to remove the economic incentive for abortion. Such a credit must be large enough to assure a decent standard of living, should be refundable, available regardless of salary level, and should be a replacement for all other family entitlements. This credit should be tied to the performance of work or the pursuit of literacy to the 1oth Grade level, or occupational training for those incapable of such education by reason of mental defect.

Proposing a resolution of this issue will distinguish the party from both the Republicans and the Democrats, who thrive on its divisiveness and its fundraising allure. It also shows the members of the so-called mushy middle that there is a home for them in the Libertarian Party. This solution would also do more than any other proposal to reverse the demographic decline that imperils a secure retirement, whether financed by public or private funds. The only real solution to the aging crisis is more birth.

Author's Comments

This proposal brings clarity to the issue of legal status for the unborn and exposes the bias against action present in the pro-life movement. Frankly, whatever one's opinion is on Roe, it is never going to be overturned. Roe was not based on the right of privacy, but rather on the lack of legal status for the unborn in the plain language of the Constitution. Roe can only be modified by congressional action granting citizenship to some percentage of the unborn. Advocating the overturn on Roe because of some idealized distaste of judicial activism ignores the history and usefulness of the 14th Amendment in providing freedom from state sponsored tyranny, which is what segregation was in an extreme form. To truly believe in liberty, one must believe in the power of the courts to overturn the tyranny of the majority.

This proposal is useful in attracting the "mushy middle" on abortion, including those Catholics who believe it is wrong but who do not believe in using the criminal law to enforce restrictions upon it in all but the most obvious of circumstances, such as partial birth abortion. Many of these socially conservative voters are also economically progressive. As such, they would favor using a tax subsidy to discourage abortion. Indeed, this solution will attract Democrats, as well as Republicans who now see their party as the party of corporate welfare and war. Making this proposal will cement this perception in their minds and may lead to the final destruction of the Republican Party.

0 Comments

Printer Friendly Version
Top of Page