If you look at Griswold, what you can see is the first time the Court recognized the right to privacy, which ends up becoming ultimately the right to abortion.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
The emphasis must be not on the right to abortion but on the right to privacy and reproductive control.
The Supreme Court has in place a legal structure which protects abortion rights in this country, and something has got to be done to change that before we can put in place truly meaningful protection for the unborn.
Indeed, an entire generation of Americans has grown to adulthood since the Roe decision of 1973, which held that the right to choose an abortion was a privacy right protected by our Constitution.
For almost twenty years, abortion policy in America has been controlled by the courts.
Abortion's a private decision. But I just think it shouldn't be federalized.
I am open and will continue to be open to ways to limit abortion. What I am not open to is to removing the right.
The abortion license has not brought freedom and security to women. Rather, it has ushered in a new era of irresponsibility toward women and children, one that now begins before birth.
I think if you hearken back to partial-birth abortion... everybody said, you know, it's not constitutional. It can't pass; it can't go anywhere, and it took time to do that, and it even had to succeed a presidential veto. But it eventually did.
Abortion is defended today as a means of ensuring the equality and independence of women, and as a solution to the problems of single parenting, child abuse, and the feminization of poverty.
Pro-lifers have long been castigated for bringing private values into the public square. But actually it is the pro-abortion position that is based on merely personal views and values.
No opposing quotes found.