Constitutional Abortion and Culture

IF 0.2 4区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY Christian Bioethics Pub Date : 2013-08-12 DOI:10.1093/CB/CBT015
H. Alvaré
{"title":"Constitutional Abortion and Culture","authors":"H. Alvaré","doi":"10.1093/CB/CBT015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The U.S. Supreme Court’s abortion decisions over the past forty years have helped to shape cultural beliefs and practices concerning heterosexual relationships, marriage, and parenting. This is true both in the practical and in the legal senses. Practically speaking, definitively separating sex from childbearing, as only abortion can do (given how often contraception fails), inevitably changes the meaning of sex, and therefore of heterosexual relationships. Legally speaking, the Court’s influence was mediated significantly by its decision to locate the right of abortion in an area of constitutional law — substantive due process — which claims to contain only those rights that are indispensable to our national understanding of freedom, both at the level of the individual and respecting our overarching democratic order. In particular, over the course of forty years of abortion opinions, the Court’s reflections on a claimed link between abortion and freedom have led it to conclusions broadly reflected in modern American beliefs and practices insofar as sex, marriage, and parenting are concerned. These include, inter alia, a suspicion of motherhood on the grounds of its risks and harms, the dispensable roles and violent characters of men, the great importance of adults’ wishes, and the importance of sexual expression for individual identity, divorced from consequences for partners or children.","PeriodicalId":42894,"journal":{"name":"Christian Bioethics","volume":"19 1","pages":"133-149"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2013-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/CB/CBT015","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Christian Bioethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/CB/CBT015","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The U.S. Supreme Court’s abortion decisions over the past forty years have helped to shape cultural beliefs and practices concerning heterosexual relationships, marriage, and parenting. This is true both in the practical and in the legal senses. Practically speaking, definitively separating sex from childbearing, as only abortion can do (given how often contraception fails), inevitably changes the meaning of sex, and therefore of heterosexual relationships. Legally speaking, the Court’s influence was mediated significantly by its decision to locate the right of abortion in an area of constitutional law — substantive due process — which claims to contain only those rights that are indispensable to our national understanding of freedom, both at the level of the individual and respecting our overarching democratic order. In particular, over the course of forty years of abortion opinions, the Court’s reflections on a claimed link between abortion and freedom have led it to conclusions broadly reflected in modern American beliefs and practices insofar as sex, marriage, and parenting are concerned. These include, inter alia, a suspicion of motherhood on the grounds of its risks and harms, the dispensable roles and violent characters of men, the great importance of adults’ wishes, and the importance of sexual expression for individual identity, divorced from consequences for partners or children.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
宪法堕胎与文化
在过去的四十年里,美国最高法院对堕胎的裁决帮助塑造了有关异性恋关系、婚姻和养育子女的文化信仰和习俗。这在实践和法律意义上都是正确的。实际上,明确地把性和生育分开,就像只有堕胎能做到的那样(考虑到避孕经常失败),不可避免地改变了性的意义,因此也改变了异性关系。从法律上讲,最高法院的影响在很大程度上是由于它决定将堕胎权置于宪法的一个领域——实质性正当程序——而宪法声称只包括那些对我国对自由的理解必不可少的权利,无论是在个人层面上还是在尊重我们的首要民主秩序方面。特别是,在40年的堕胎意见中,最高法院对堕胎与自由之间所谓联系的反思,使其得出的结论广泛反映在现代美国人的信仰和实践中,就性、婚姻和养育子女而言。除其他外,这些因素包括,由于母亲的危险和伤害而怀疑其为人母,男人的可有可无的作用和暴力的性格,成年人愿望的极其重要性,以及脱离对伴侣或子女的后果的性表达对个人身份的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
33.30%
发文量
15
期刊最新文献
Uncertainty, Risk, and the Need for Trust in Our Hope for Health Inhumation as Theophanic Encounter: The Eastern Orthodox Rejection of Cremation Ectopic Pregnancy as Previable Delivery Artificial Wombs: Could They Deliver an Answer to the Problem of Frozen Embryos? Ectogestation and Humanity’s Whence? An Exploration with Saint Augustine and Karl Barth
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1