Evidence for God from Science

I was watching 700 Club and they were talking about Robertson...and from what they said, it seemed like Roe vs Wade was solely based on a woman's (not really of course) right to privacy. FIRST, is that true? That that decision is based on one piddly thing like that, and second, where do they get the idea that the Constitution protects one's right to privacy?

I'm not familiar with the Roe v. Wade case(except for the outcome, of course). On the issue of Constitutional privacy, though, you're correct. While the Constitution does provide for certain freedoms, it doesn't at any point offer protection of privacy.

The modern notion of privacy has come about in reaction to many people being unwilling to visit a physician without knowing that what is said and done in the office is confidential. I wouldn't be surprised if this was one of the deciding factors in the RvW case, though -- as irrelevent as it is, some people will go to great lengths to avoid the responsibility for their actions.

AttentionKMartShoppers wrote:I was watching 700 Club and they were talking about Robertson...and from what they said, it seemed like Roe vs Wade was solely based on a woman's (not really of course) right to privacy. FIRST, is that true? That that decision is based on one piddly thing like that, and second, where do they get the idea that the Constitution protects one's right to privacy?

How is murder a privacy issue?

That's something that's always perplexed me conerning Roe and abortion. How does privacy give you the right to murder an unborn child...but not a full grown adult, or a child, or a baby?

AttentionKMartShoppers wrote:That's something that's always perplexed me conerning Roe and abortion. How does privacy give you the right to murder an unborn child...but not a full grown adult, or a child, or a baby?

It doesn't, all life is sacred and deserves to be protected, especially the unborn! What we have here is a shocking example of just where going down the moral relativism path leads us to.