published Wednesday, May 25th, 2011

Rejecting so-called abortion ‘rights’

Though abortion is not mentioned in the Tennessee Constitution, a divided state Supreme Court strangely ruled in 2000 that the Tennessee Constitution guarantees an even stronger “right” to abortion than the abortion “rights” created out of thin air by the U.S. Supreme Court’s disastrous 1973 Roe v. Wade decision.

So it is encouraging that overwhelming majorities in the state Senate and House of Representatives have approved a 2014 ballot referendum that would undo the state Supreme Court ruling in favor of abortion “rights.”

The referendum will state: “Nothing in this Constitution secures or protects a right to abortion or requires the funding of an abortion. The people retain the right through their elected state representatives and state senators to enact, amend, or repeal statutes regarding abortion, including, but not limited to, circumstances of pregnancy resulting from rape or incest or when necessary to save the life of the mother.”

Tragically, because of the Roe v. Wade decision, many abortions will remain legal in Tennessee even if the referendum passes in 2014.

Nevertheless, it is appropriate for lawmakers and voters to make it abundantly clear that Tennessee’s Constitution itself does not in fact declare abortion a “right.”

It will be three years before the referendum appears on the ballot. But it should enjoy overwhelming support from the residents of Tennessee.

Comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, nor does it review every comment. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. For more information you can view our Terms & Conditions and/or Ethics policy.
hambone said...

Is ammending the state constitution in order to allow the legislature change a supreme court decision the proper thing to do?

May 25, 2011 at 9:20 a.m.
librul said...

No sexist religionism, no document, no referendum and no law can take precedence over the autonomy and authority of the mind of an individual in making decisions about their own body. Such a concept is the product of tyrants, who more often than not, are the product of that same sexist religionism.

May 25, 2011 at 9:30 a.m.
nucanuck said...

The Tennessee Legislature wants to deregulate businesses an regulate women's reproduction.

...and some people are surprised the US is sliding.

May 25, 2011 at 9:48 a.m.
Livn4life said...

Boy how much better our nation became when we threw morality out the window. There should have to be no law on either side regarding abortion but here we are almost 50 years after the US Supreme Court decided and still fighting. What you say, "you can't legislate morality!" If not, then what in heaven's name do you legislate? There must be some moral code or else there is no basis for what Dems and Libs refer to as "rule of law." They only follow rule of law when it fits in with their particular purpose. Otherwise they ignore it or get a judge to rule in their favor. Many who would not judge a woman for choosing abortion simply do not wish to fund them with tax-payer dollars. Why does the society at large not understand this?

May 25, 2011 at 10:44 a.m.
hambone said...

L4L, there are multi laws on the books that prohibit taxpayer money for abortion. How many do we need?

May 25, 2011 at 11:08 a.m.
nucanuck said...


Why should we give boardroom morality a broad pass while focusing on whether an individual woman has made a correct decision? Abortion has to be a most difficult decision for anyone to reach. What makes you think that the government can interpret morality in such wrenching and varied circumstances?

The huge divide in public opinion on abortion should make it clear enough that this issue is not clarified by government intrusion.

May 25, 2011 at 11:23 a.m.
Livn4life said...

hambone, we only need one that is enforced and keeps tax money out of the hands of people who see abortion not as a choice, though that term is used but rather as a right. It is not a right!

May 25, 2011 at 9:09 p.m.
Livn4life said...

Nuc, did you read what I wrote? No boardroom morality but there are laws based on someone's morality. I want to be shown where any amoral society has ever survived. Many which began with high morals sank into relativism and then collapsed. Is that where we are headed? No laws should be needed as I wrote earlier. obviously you didn't get that. A moral code should be written in the hearts of people leading them toward decent behavior. But then, you have another idea. Good luck with all that.

May 25, 2011 at 9:12 p.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »


Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.