🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Apr10.185433.14853@midway.uchicago.edu>
eeb1@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>In article <1992Apr06.172500.3090@deeptht.santa-cruz.ca.us>
>rstevew@deeptht.santa-cruz.ca.us (Richard Steven Walz) writes:
>
>>I am puzzled by your sig. having pro-choice anti-Roe. These would seem
>>to be opposites in common usage. Please explain.
>
>I'm in favor of a woman having the ability to choose abortion, against
>the idea that this is mandated by the Constitution.

Mandated, no, but guaranteed, yes.

According to the bill of rights, its enumeration of guaranteed rights
does not and cannot be seen as precluding or limiting in any way any other
non-enumerated rights.  These are reserved to the states and to the people.

Of course, my online copy of that document has been overzealously cleaned
up and is no longer around.  :-(

Anyway, the Supremes, in their very finite and highly fallible way, seem
to have conveniently overlooked that provision in recent times, by declaring
that since no "right to privacy" or "right to control of ones' own body" are
explicitly written, that no such rights can be guaranteed.

A plague on all their houses.

Hutch