Life, liberty and abortion

In this age of political correctness where truths are obscured by words that mask their meaning, certain clarifying distinctions must be made. The most disturbing case in point is the abuse of the word "right" as it applies to civil liberties and privileges in today's society -- most notably to abortion.\nWhile I do not intend to make a case for the repeal of Roe v. Wade or in any way judge the merits of the abortion procedure or its participants, I feel the rhetoric used by its proponents must change.\nThe National Organization for Women's Web site has numerous references to a woman's "right to abortion" and "reproductive rights." Even The New York Times in a recent article documenting the recent release of the private papers of the late Supreme Court Justice Harry A. Blackmun, referred to "abortion rights." \nAbortion, albeit legal, is not a right. \nThe Roe decision is based on the right to privacy, which, although not specifically enumerated in the Constitution, is well-established in American jurisprudence. I make no argument with the right to privacy. However, making the conceptual leap from a right to privacy to a right to abortion itself is dangerous and foolish.\nTo approach this issue, one must understand the basic facts about abortion. It is an elective and invasive medical procedure most often used to eliminate the consequences of an irresponsible sexual act to preserve or maintain the quality of life of the woman and/or couple. Regardless of whether you believe in abortion rights or are anti-abortion, the basic elements of abortion are irrefutable.\nAs it stands currently, women have the legal option to have an abortion in order to escape the responsibilities of a mistake she and her partner made. But let us not begin to think ducking these or any responsibilities that result from one's own actions has ever been or ever will be a Constitutional, natural or divine right.\nIf abortion were a right, by citing the 14th Amendment, men could argue they too would have a right to an abortion or its effects because all citizens are guaranteed "equal protection under the law." This would mean either a man could enforce the "right" to abortion upon his pregnant partner or he could be absolved from any parental or financial responsibility for the would-be child. Rights cannot simply be applied to some and not to all (I, of course, do not believe it is a right and therefore believe men should be held accountable for their role in the resulting pregnancy).\nTrying to pass off abortion as a right is an insult to the people in this nation and around the world who have fought, bled and died to attain the fundamental rights that many of us now take for granted. Equating abortion to the freedom from chattel slavery, the right to universal suffrage and the right of free speech is an affront to the very essence of our freedoms. \nFurthermore, the American liberal rhetoric to defend abortion under the guise of "reproductive freedom" must seem a cruel misnomer to women in China forced to have abortions because they exceed the state's one-child limit. (If abortion is a "right," then this perceived instance of China's human rights abuses is actually a reaffirmation of the civil rights of its people). \nGallant phrases such as "reproductive freedom" may serve as emotional catalysts to NOW's supporters, but such abuse of language is actually a disservice to its cause.\nAgain, I make no case for the repeal of Roe or the criminalization of abortion. But please let us not confuse the fundamental rights we all enjoy with the unessential privileges available for the irresponsible few. To do so degrades the integrity of our freedoms and undermines the inalienable rights we should all hold very dear.