Questions about "abortion and the law" are usually seen as matters of constitutional law. Constitutional law, however, seems ill-suited. This is not only because the U.S. Supreme Court discovered a "constitutional right" for something that had been banned by most states for most of the nation's history. It is also because the "privacy" right encompassing abortion frames the issue as a struggle between the state and the woman over her right to define her life, her future, or even her "concept …of the universe," in the famous words of the Casey Court. But it is becoming increasingly apparent that abortion is about family relationships, not simply a contest between the state and a woman who happens to be pregnant.
A Planned Parenthood in Lawrence, Kansas has closed because of lack of interest in their services. According to Kansas prolife groups, the Lawrence location offered RU-486 chemical abortions.
Planned Parenthood did not return calls Friday. But a sign posted in the window of the Lawrence office at 2108J W. 27th St. said that location closed Aug. 31.
"It appears the need for our services is not as great as it once was and it is no longer financially feasible to continue offering those services," the notice said. "We are sorry for the inconvenience this may cause you."
Joseph Knippenberg responds to a Poltico article which asked if abortion was the reason some Republican candidates for the U.S. Senate lost.
If I were to draw a lesson from the evidence before us, it isn't that abortion is a winner or wave-stopper for Democrats, or that Republicans need to modulate their pro-life positions in order to win office. It's that Republicans have to find a way (which has nothing to do with abortion) to win over more African-American and Hispanic voters. That's been done before and can surely be done again.
In the meantime, if Democrats want to strengthen their connection with roughly one-third of the electorate by emphasizing their strongly pro-choice position, well, who am I to stand in their way?
University of Georgia student Samantha Shelton is extremely confused. She somehow thinks that a Center for Bio-Ethical Reform/Genocide Awareness Project display showing the remains of aborted children violated her university's code of conduct by "infring[ing] upon the rights, privacy, or privileges" of women who have exercised their right to terminate their pregnancy." She never explains how these rights were infringed upon. The only "right" she seems to argue was violated was her "right" not to be disturbed.