The Armed Liberal notes that there is going to be a proposal to limit abortion in California for minors. Minor girls will have to get permission from a parent or guardian or, failing that, a juvenile court. AM seems to agree with the premise of the idea…
One of the reasonable regulations on gun ownership says that minors may not buy guns, or in many states, possess them without an adult's presence.
I don't think that's a bad thing. And yes, I know about the idyllic days when kids would bring their 30-30 to school on the opening day of deer season.
Similarly, I'm a strong supporter of some core right to abortion - probably not including late-term abortions. But I'm troubled at the idea that a girl who cannot get her ears pierced (or here in L.A., her bellybutton pierced) without Mon or Dad signing off can go to a clinic and have an abortion with no adult supervision or involvement except by the abortion provider.
He actually is leaning against it, saying that he would support that kind of thing if the legislature passed it, but it doesn’t seem like the kind of thing to raise to the level of referendum.
But, considering the make up of the current Californian legislature, do you think that’s ever going to happen? If the vast majority of Californians agree with you and considers it an important issue, but the legislature would NEVER pick it up, why wouldn’t that make a good reason to raise it by initiative law?
This kind of thing could get interesting, as the makeup of the SCOTUS changes with Bush nominations, and one of these laws is bound to be brought to that level. The current nominee, Alito, made a judgment in a case regarding a law that required a wife to alert her husband when she was getting an abortion. He argued in favor of the law. I think this kind of thing is similar. Considering the social and legal bounds of immediate family, I don’t know how you can say that this sort of restriction isn’t just.