In defense of life and parenthood... A SCOTUS litmus test in the making..

This from here:

:

CONCORD, N.H. (AP) — To some, a never-enforced New Hampshire law requiring parental notification before a minor has an abortion is a backward step for women's rights. To others, it protects parents' right to know if their child is having an abortion.

The U.S. Supreme Court will consider those arguments Wednesday as it begins to weigh whether to reinstate a law that requires parental notification 48 hours before an abortion can be performed on a woman under the age of 18.

The 2003 law was struck down, days before it was to take effect, for failing to provide an exception to protect a minor's health. Under the law, parents or guardians must be notified either in person or by certified mail.

Supporters of the law say a provision that allows a young woman to go to a judge instead of a parent provides needed protection if her health is in danger.

Opponents, however, say the law's requirements could lead to dangerous delays and result in judges making medical decisions instead of doctors. They also view the law as an ill-disguised attempt by abortion opponents to chip away at Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 decision that legalized abortion.

Sorry.. if a minor needs parental permission to down a tylenol for a headache, she also needs parental permission to have an abortion for "health issues." (if that isn't the biggest strawman of the pro-death left, then nothing is). Funny how euphamisms and circumlocutions spring eternal from the culture of death, isn't it?

At any rate this decision will certainly be telling of the future trends of SCOTUS. I sincerely hope that Judge Alito becomes Justice Alito before this case is decided.

(Filed under Defense of Life)