YOU ARE HERE: LAT HomeCollections

'Fanatics' on Supreme Court

June 25, 1986

Columnist George F. Will entirely misses the point of the Supreme Court's latest decision on abortion (Editorial Pages, June 16), "Supreme Court's Fanatics Exalt One Right Above All."

It was the states ' intrusion into this very private matter that the court so rightly rejected--the states providing graphic fetal information, the states emphasizing the risks of abortion (while neatly ignoring the much greater risks and burdens of childbirth and unwanted, unaffordable children, I might add!), the states assuming the position of some sort of "governmental physician" and stepping between a woman and her own physician. All these actions were designed to promote one single aim: prevent the abortion.

If I can recall the 1973 abortion decision correctly, the Supreme Court then said, "Abortion is a matter between a woman, her conscience, her physician and her God," which means that the real issue we are dealing with is the right to privacy--and that is indeed a right worth exalting!

To abort or not to abort is a private matter--it is not a matter for state or federal governmental intrusion. Do they intrude upon a man's private decision to undergo a vasectomy?

As for Will's worrying about women not being provided all the important medical information on the subject of abortion, is he really that myopic? What does he think doctors are for, or hospitals are for, or clinics are for, or even priests and ministers are for? They all provide any and all abortion risk information, both physical and moral--all you have to do is ask. Ever hear of "informed consent," Mr. Will?

As a woman and a human being who is not for abortion but for choice, I heartily thank the Supreme Court for once more affirming for women the basic right enjoyed by every other segment of society--the right to privacy!


Palos Verdes

Los Angeles Times Articles