Published: Friday, September 21, 2012, 12:01 a.m.
Congress
DelBene confuses laws with rights
Sign up for HeraldNet Headlines
Offensive! That is what Suzan DelBene's latest television ad was to me. Because of the Internet and editing, she was able to insert her opponent, John Koster, holding "yes" and "no" signs as if in answer to what she perceives are women's rights. Taking your opponent out of context and deliberately misstating his/her positions is the kind of politics we can no longer afford!
There is actually only one "right" specific to women, the 19th Amendment adopted by the States in 1920 stating that "rights of citizens of the U.S. to vote shall not be denied ... on account of sex."
All the other rights, both natural aka laws of nature and God and those established by the Bill of Rights and other adopted amendments to the Constitution are all available to all citizens of the U.S. equally.
DelBene has confused the passage of laws with "rights." Laws can be challenged and/or changed by one judge in one court of law while "rights" are upheld for all citizens in perpetuity. She uses the "right" of women to abortion on demand and to birth control as examples. One is a law, the other is just a consumer product. Since the Supreme Court has granted abortion, it would take another legal court case to change that law -- but even the Supreme Court cannot confer the status of a "right." Mr. Koster could not forbid a woman from seeking or getting an abortion, period!
Again, there is no law forbidding the use of birth control, and therefore, no argument. However, I believe what DelBene is really saying is that it and abortion should be free. While I cannot speak for Mr. Koster, I, personally, do not agree to pay for someone else's birth control or abortions.
Living in a "free" country means each citizen is "free" to make his/her own lifestyle, academic, social and political choices with the rights in the Constitution applying to all citizens; however, none of those mean they are also "free of charge." I suspect that Mr. Koster would never in a million years deny a woman to make her own choices as allowed by the law, and he actually would uphold her "right" to do so!
Catherine Paxton
Arlington
There is actually only one "right" specific to women, the 19th Amendment adopted by the States in 1920 stating that "rights of citizens of the U.S. to vote shall not be denied ... on account of sex."
All the other rights, both natural aka laws of nature and God and those established by the Bill of Rights and other adopted amendments to the Constitution are all available to all citizens of the U.S. equally.
DelBene has confused the passage of laws with "rights." Laws can be challenged and/or changed by one judge in one court of law while "rights" are upheld for all citizens in perpetuity. She uses the "right" of women to abortion on demand and to birth control as examples. One is a law, the other is just a consumer product. Since the Supreme Court has granted abortion, it would take another legal court case to change that law -- but even the Supreme Court cannot confer the status of a "right." Mr. Koster could not forbid a woman from seeking or getting an abortion, period!
Again, there is no law forbidding the use of birth control, and therefore, no argument. However, I believe what DelBene is really saying is that it and abortion should be free. While I cannot speak for Mr. Koster, I, personally, do not agree to pay for someone else's birth control or abortions.
Living in a "free" country means each citizen is "free" to make his/her own lifestyle, academic, social and political choices with the rights in the Constitution applying to all citizens; however, none of those mean they are also "free of charge." I suspect that Mr. Koster would never in a million years deny a woman to make her own choices as allowed by the law, and he actually would uphold her "right" to do so!
Catherine Paxton
Arlington
Comments
(