A Conservative Case for Abortion Access
Buckle up buttercup … This is going to be a long one…
Preamble
First, let me start by saying I abhor abortion. A piece of me inside cried when I heard that someone I knew had terminated a pregnancy and I said a short prayer for the baby and the mom. Yet, I am sitting here writing an advocacy piece in favor of access to abortion services.
When I hear that a fetus is not yet “life” at six months gestation I think of the preemie pictures of me that my mom keeps in a private album showing me at 987 grams (2lbs 2oz) and of my brother even smaller. Extracted from my mother’s womb in an emergency surgery at six months gestation, and not yet breathing, were we not life?
I’ve posted on abortion here previously (prior to the over-turning of Roe). In those posts, I’ve expressed my reservations about the procedure. And yet I sit here now, after forcing myself to spend many hours thinking about justice and rights and healthcare and society, and I’m about to advocate for preserving access to the procedure.
What is a “Right”?
Notice I said I am going to advocate for access to abortion services and not for abortion rights. Abortion is not a right. Neither is healthcare. Or food. Or housing. People who claim these are “rights” do not understand what a right is (and before you go off on me, I do support universal access to healthcare and food security, but these are not “rights”).
Abortion, and healthcare in general, is a service provided by one person or group of people to another. As a service, comprised of the labors of people, it cannot be another person’s “right”. John Locke discussed the Rights of the Natural Man in his many writings. If you’ve not read him, I strongly recommend you do.
So what are the rights of the natural man (person) and how does this relate to the abortion discussion? In the US Declaration of Independence, our founders stated to the world that…
Now I’ll be the first to admit that America is and our Founders were far from perfect and not everyone was treated equally, but the point made in that Declaration was that our “rights” did not come from the government or from the English Crown or from any congress or any judge. Our rights were pre-existing. Our “rights” were something that was naturally possessed by virtue of having been born. This is an important point. One that our founders came back to when they sought to create a “more perfect union.”
A More Perfect Union
Eleven years after declaring our independence from the English Crown, our founders recognized the need to form a “more perfect union” and set out to codify in a document what the new American government should look like. That document, the US Constitution, has survived and adapted for over 230 years. And while it has survived by adapting to changing times through the amendment process, one thing has remained constant. That is the understanding that “Rights” do not come from the Constitution or from the American government. Rights are part of the pre-existing state of the Natural Man (again, see John Locke).
So, what is all this discussion of “Constitutional Rights”?? Here’s a really important point: There is no such thing as a Constitutional Right. None. Rather, among the MANY rights of the Natural Man, there is a subset listed in the Constitution that government cannot infringe upon. This is the famous five words favored by so many of my conservative friends and repeated over and over in the Constitution: “Congress shall make no law...” infringing on this right or that right.
That’s correct. Your right to free speech is not granted by the Constitution. Rather, the US government (and by extension the states) is prohibited from infringing on your pre-existing natural right to free thought and free expression.
Similarly, your right to freely practice the religion of your choosing or none at all is not granted by the Constitution. Rather, the US government (and by extension the states) is prohibited from infringing on your pre-existing natural right to freely believe whatever you’d like.
And, your right to own and carry (keep and bear) arms is not granted by the Constitution. Rather, the US government (and by extension the states) is prohibited from infringing on your pre-existing natural right to self-defense.
What’s my point here, you ask? Simple. Our Declaration announced our belief that we are each endowed with rights that pre-exist and supersede any government action. Our Constitution went on to enumerate a short list of some of those pre-existing rights.
Whoa Sara! What do you mean a short list of some of those rights?? I mean exactly that. In Constitutional theory, we talk about the enumerated rights contained in the Constitution and its Bill of Rights and we talk about the greater list of unenumerated rights of the natural man (person).
That’s right! The Bill of Rights, enumerated in the Constitution, which prevents the government from stepping on certain of your rights was never intended to be a complete list of your rights. You have many other rights!
But Sara, you said abortion wasn’t a right? Why are we talking so much about rights?
Two reasons. First because the 9th amendment above has been repeatedly interpreted to mean that the “rights” of the people enumerated in the Constitution should be broadly construed whenever possible.
And secondly, because we do have a very important right that is discussed in the Constitution, but that doesn’t get anywhere near enough attention. Privacy. The pre-existing natural right to privacy that we all cherish. Please, my conservative friends, tell me how you feel when someone from the government wants to know something about your personal life? Right? I feel the same way. It’s none of their business.
So let’s look at this right to privacy? Where is it in the Constitution (if at all)? The answer is that it is everywhere! It underpins your right to privacy in your beliefs, thoughts, and expression (1st amendment), your right to privacy in your home (3rd amendment), your right to privacy in your person and possessions (4th amendment), your right to privacy in your personal information and against self-incrimination (5th amendment). And, of course, the 9th amendment, quoted above, clarifies that our rights are far broader than just those listed in writing.
Let’s look at that right to privacy in our persons and possessions:
Secure in my person??
Against unreasonable searches?
Hmmm. What could that mean? Perhaps that as a Natural (Person), I have a pre-existing natural right to be free from intrusive inquiries and/or restrictions about what I do with and to my body.
As I said at the opening of this essay, I abhor abortion. A little piece of me inside dies with each baby aborted. In a perfect world, I would let Jewish Law govern the abortion issue. The child has a Right to Life unless the mother’s life or health is threatened; in which case, the rights of the mother supersede the rights of the child. I like that. It has balance. But here’s the thing: As a slightly right-of-center person, I do not want, nor do I trust the government to enforce such a policy. That mother has a natural right to privacy and a right to be secure in her person, secure from government intrusion.
I wish for abortion to be rare. I wish for every baby conceived to be given every chance at life and for every baby born to have every advantage and opportunity for success. But this is not a perfect world and I’ve yet to be convinced that there is some compelling government interest justifying intrusion into the decisions made by an expectant mother.
If you live in a state where your right to privacy is respected in law, great. If you live in a state where it is not, then I ask you to consider what freedoms, what liberties, what privacy you are willing to hand over to the people in your state government. For me, that is a very short list. 😔
My hope is for civil discussion in the comments below. In over ten years of active participation in discourse on EP & SW, I have never deleted a comment on any of my stories. For this story, my policy will change: I will allow only civil discourse. Any comment containing derogatory or accusatory statements toward another SWeep or any group of people will be deleted.
You can say anything you want to or about me but be kind to each other or I will delete comments. And yes, for this story, I am the sole judge and jury regarding kindness and all decisions are final. 😉
Preamble
First, let me start by saying I abhor abortion. A piece of me inside cried when I heard that someone I knew had terminated a pregnancy and I said a short prayer for the baby and the mom. Yet, I am sitting here writing an advocacy piece in favor of access to abortion services.
When I hear that a fetus is not yet “life” at six months gestation I think of the preemie pictures of me that my mom keeps in a private album showing me at 987 grams (2lbs 2oz) and of my brother even smaller. Extracted from my mother’s womb in an emergency surgery at six months gestation, and not yet breathing, were we not life?
I’ve posted on abortion here previously (prior to the over-turning of Roe). In those posts, I’ve expressed my reservations about the procedure. And yet I sit here now, after forcing myself to spend many hours thinking about justice and rights and healthcare and society, and I’m about to advocate for preserving access to the procedure.
What is a “Right”?
Notice I said I am going to advocate for access to abortion services and not for abortion rights. Abortion is not a right. Neither is healthcare. Or food. Or housing. People who claim these are “rights” do not understand what a right is (and before you go off on me, I do support universal access to healthcare and food security, but these are not “rights”).
Abortion, and healthcare in general, is a service provided by one person or group of people to another. As a service, comprised of the labors of people, it cannot be another person’s “right”. John Locke discussed the Rights of the Natural Man in his many writings. If you’ve not read him, I strongly recommend you do.
So what are the rights of the natural man (person) and how does this relate to the abortion discussion? In the US Declaration of Independence, our founders stated to the world that…
“We hold these truths to be self-evident,
- that all men are created equal,
- that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,
- that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
- that to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed”
~US Declaration of Independence, 4 July 1776
- that all men are created equal,
- that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,
- that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
- that to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed”
~US Declaration of Independence, 4 July 1776
Now I’ll be the first to admit that America is and our Founders were far from perfect and not everyone was treated equally, but the point made in that Declaration was that our “rights” did not come from the government or from the English Crown or from any congress or any judge. Our rights were pre-existing. Our “rights” were something that was naturally possessed by virtue of having been born. This is an important point. One that our founders came back to when they sought to create a “more perfect union.”
A More Perfect Union
Eleven years after declaring our independence from the English Crown, our founders recognized the need to form a “more perfect union” and set out to codify in a document what the new American government should look like. That document, the US Constitution, has survived and adapted for over 230 years. And while it has survived by adapting to changing times through the amendment process, one thing has remained constant. That is the understanding that “Rights” do not come from the Constitution or from the American government. Rights are part of the pre-existing state of the Natural Man (again, see John Locke).
So, what is all this discussion of “Constitutional Rights”?? Here’s a really important point: There is no such thing as a Constitutional Right. None. Rather, among the MANY rights of the Natural Man, there is a subset listed in the Constitution that government cannot infringe upon. This is the famous five words favored by so many of my conservative friends and repeated over and over in the Constitution: “Congress shall make no law...” infringing on this right or that right.
That’s correct. Your right to free speech is not granted by the Constitution. Rather, the US government (and by extension the states) is prohibited from infringing on your pre-existing natural right to free thought and free expression.
Similarly, your right to freely practice the religion of your choosing or none at all is not granted by the Constitution. Rather, the US government (and by extension the states) is prohibited from infringing on your pre-existing natural right to freely believe whatever you’d like.
And, your right to own and carry (keep and bear) arms is not granted by the Constitution. Rather, the US government (and by extension the states) is prohibited from infringing on your pre-existing natural right to self-defense.
What’s my point here, you ask? Simple. Our Declaration announced our belief that we are each endowed with rights that pre-exist and supersede any government action. Our Constitution went on to enumerate a short list of some of those pre-existing rights.
Whoa Sara! What do you mean a short list of some of those rights?? I mean exactly that. In Constitutional theory, we talk about the enumerated rights contained in the Constitution and its Bill of Rights and we talk about the greater list of unenumerated rights of the natural man (person).
"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage other {right}s retained by the people."
~US Constitution, 9th Amendment
~US Constitution, 9th Amendment
That’s right! The Bill of Rights, enumerated in the Constitution, which prevents the government from stepping on certain of your rights was never intended to be a complete list of your rights. You have many other rights!
But Sara, you said abortion wasn’t a right? Why are we talking so much about rights?
Two reasons. First because the 9th amendment above has been repeatedly interpreted to mean that the “rights” of the people enumerated in the Constitution should be broadly construed whenever possible.
And secondly, because we do have a very important right that is discussed in the Constitution, but that doesn’t get anywhere near enough attention. Privacy. The pre-existing natural right to privacy that we all cherish. Please, my conservative friends, tell me how you feel when someone from the government wants to know something about your personal life? Right? I feel the same way. It’s none of their business.
So let’s look at this right to privacy? Where is it in the Constitution (if at all)? The answer is that it is everywhere! It underpins your right to privacy in your beliefs, thoughts, and expression (1st amendment), your right to privacy in your home (3rd amendment), your right to privacy in your person and possessions (4th amendment), your right to privacy in your personal information and against self-incrimination (5th amendment). And, of course, the 9th amendment, quoted above, clarifies that our rights are far broader than just those listed in writing.
Let’s look at that right to privacy in our persons and possessions:
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated...”
~US Constitution, 4th amendment
~US Constitution, 4th amendment
Secure in my person??
Against unreasonable searches?
Hmmm. What could that mean? Perhaps that as a Natural (Person), I have a pre-existing natural right to be free from intrusive inquiries and/or restrictions about what I do with and to my body.
As I said at the opening of this essay, I abhor abortion. A little piece of me inside dies with each baby aborted. In a perfect world, I would let Jewish Law govern the abortion issue. The child has a Right to Life unless the mother’s life or health is threatened; in which case, the rights of the mother supersede the rights of the child. I like that. It has balance. But here’s the thing: As a slightly right-of-center person, I do not want, nor do I trust the government to enforce such a policy. That mother has a natural right to privacy and a right to be secure in her person, secure from government intrusion.
I wish for abortion to be rare. I wish for every baby conceived to be given every chance at life and for every baby born to have every advantage and opportunity for success. But this is not a perfect world and I’ve yet to be convinced that there is some compelling government interest justifying intrusion into the decisions made by an expectant mother.
If you live in a state where your right to privacy is respected in law, great. If you live in a state where it is not, then I ask you to consider what freedoms, what liberties, what privacy you are willing to hand over to the people in your state government. For me, that is a very short list. 😔
My hope is for civil discussion in the comments below. In over ten years of active participation in discourse on EP & SW, I have never deleted a comment on any of my stories. For this story, my policy will change: I will allow only civil discourse. Any comment containing derogatory or accusatory statements toward another SWeep or any group of people will be deleted.
You can say anything you want to or about me but be kind to each other or I will delete comments. And yes, for this story, I am the sole judge and jury regarding kindness and all decisions are final. 😉
26-30, F
