Ruth Bader Ginsburg - wrong and right comparing abortion to slavery

Striving to some how justify abortion Constitutionally, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said in a June speech to the Veteran Feminists of America that the basis for legalized abortion needs to shift away from the so-called "right to privacy" to the anti-slavery provisions found in the Constitution. With no mention of a "right to privacy" anywhere in the Constitution this is an interesting admission that THAT foundation is very weak in terms of supporting abortion.

South Dakota is being belted with propaganda right now (from those who profit into the hundreds of millions of dollars a year from doing abortion) that families should decide if killing their unborn child is the best decision for them. The Campaign for UNHealthy Families is basing their campaign this fall in South Dakota on this "right to privacy" issue. Interesting that Ginsburg is conceding that argument has no Constitutional basis.

Ginsburg suggests the debate be recast along the lines of the thirteenth amendment against slavery. She is right that there are key parallels. She is dead wrong about what they are.

Ginsburg said "the notion of a women's autonomy to determine her life's course" is the issue in abortion as it was the issue with regard to a slave being free control his/her own life. However, the thirteenth amendment didn't free slaves to go kill other human beings.

Ginsburg is correct that the slavery amendment is directly related to abortion. Now that science has determined that conception produces a separate and unique living human being, a constitutional amendment is needed to ensure unborn human beings are free and unhindered in any way from reaching their full potential in life. We need a LIFE amendment to the United States Constitution.

There is NO right to abortion in the Constitution. There IS a right to life in the Constitution. In the preamble, these rights are extended to "our posterity." Posterity means ALL OUR FUTURE OFFSPRING.