I have often wondered why judges wear black robes. After much deliberation, I have concluded that once a robe is put on, a judge is suddenly anointed with an overwhelming Solomonic wisdom, able to discern and determine things that a regular person cannot possibly do. Else how can our erudite state Supreme Court find that the Constitution requires that I should pay for someone’s abortion (Part A, Nov. 17)?
The “individual right to privacy” is what these “justices” relied on as the basis for their decision. I have worked very hard to provide for my family and I resent having to shell out my hard-earned money to a woman so she can “privately” abort her baby with no cost to her. And where does the Supreme Court get its power to override the legislative branch of our government? Can’t these myopic “tin gods” find in the Constitution the separation of powers?
I submit that it is much easier to find the separation of powers than it is to find that Joe Blow has to pay for a “poor” woman’s abortion. I don’t mind at all, and would most willingly pay for a person who is facing an illness. Abortion is not an illness. If a woman is so unwise as to get herself pregnant, then she, her lover, or her husband should pay. Leave me out of it. Or better yet, let our lawmakers do the job that they were elected to perform.
ELISEO E. GIRON