If 'Roe' Were Overturned

Sunday, November 4, 2007

Understandably cynical about "ukases from the federal judiciary," George F. Will seems unduly fixated on California in concluding that reversing Roe v. Wade would hardly cause a ripple in abortion's status quo ["Abortion's 'So-What' Factor," op-ed, Oct. 28].

Granting Mr. Will's point that the doctrine of stare decisis poses a potential roadblock to a jurisprudential revolution, one can still hope that a case with all the logic of the Dred Scott slavery decision cannot long endure.

Eventually the people will prevail. As with slavery, Americans regret the injustice of abortion on demand. A Gallup poll released in June showed that an overwhelming (2-to-1) majority of Americans consider it "morally wrong."

If a revival of federalism sent the abortion issue back to the states, states such as Virginia would not be likely to follow the Left Coast's lead in denying the rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness to the unborn. Overturning the injustice of Roe would result in a network of safe-haven states where inalienable rights and equal protection are accorded to all members of the human race.

JONATHAN IMBODY

Vice President for Government Relations

Christian Medical Association

Bristol, Tenn.


© 2007 The Washington Post Company