I support abortion. With this in mind, Roe vs. Wade should be overturned. My position isn’t inconsistent, because there is a much deeper issue involved.

What is the function of our electoral system? One could argue about that all day, but it turns out that the deep purpose is to convince people to accept that they’ve lost. We as citizens of this republic have made a pact with each other to make certain decisions collectively through some combination of voting and representation, and we know inevitably the process will make at least some decisions that we as individuals despise.

But the pact we have with one another is that if the process was reasonably honest, and if everyone participated, the losers will conceded defeat. Of course, they may try to work within the system to bring about change. Throughout history, this has happened many times. But in our society, decisions change because a majority agree with the change, and the activist minority will work to convince the majority that change is needed, but in the mean time accept defeat.

Some activists in this country have been breaking this pact. It’s been a particular problem with the leftists over the last 30 or so odd years. Instead of trying to convince the majority that change is necessary, they’ve made a lateral pass to the activists’ judges, who in turn have run the issue around the electorate and in for change.

Setting aside the individual decisions, the inherent problem exists because it cheats the electorate by forbidding them from participating in the decisions. And the “losers” don’t concede defeat, primarily because they never got a change to participate in the decision.

Roe V. Wade was an appalling judicial decision, because 33 years later the issue is still highly contentious. If three decades ago this had been given up to the electoral system in the form of a vote, it would no longer govern modern day elections. But because it was decided by what I really do think of as judicial usurpation of the electoral process, those who oppose abortion have never let go of the issue.

Despite my personal beliefs, abortion should be legal, but relying on Roe vs. Wade is no way to ensure its survival. Many, indeed I would imagine most, of the electorate don’t actually feel very strongly about abortion as a major electoral issue. But they care deeply about this social contract and will be damned if they’re going to let elitist activists overrun the system. This is why, to this day, abortion is such a major issue.

Additionally, under the tenth amendment, abortion is a matter for the states to decide. This is really where it should be settled, with the electorate and their corresponding legislature.

Once voters are given the chance to truly engage in the issue, the social contract will kick in. Advocates for both sides will make their cases, and the voters and their representatives will, eventually, come to some sort of conclusion about it.

That’s how the system is supposed to work, and that’s a lot more important to me than legal abortion. If the price of legal abortion is destruction of that social pact, then it’s too high.

Scott Nordholm
Civil engineering senior

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.