Skip to main content

Further Proof that Judges are Not Good Scientists

I recently cited a US Supreme Court decision to indicate that judges often do not make good scientists. Two cases do not a certainty make, but the 8th US Circuit Court of Appeals went a great way toward substantiating my theory today.


The State of South Dakota appeared in the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals today to defend its requirement that a doctor remind a woman prior to her receiving an abortion of the following:

  1. That abortion takes a human life
  2. That women have a right to continue the pregnancy
  3. That abortion may cause psychological harm to the mother
It might have been billed as an excellent waste of time brought on by the bullying of Planned Parenthood--who sees its main livelihood reduced as more and more women become more contemplative--simply because it can. Remind me again how Planned Parenthood has any standing in this case?

But then the following conversation ensued (a recording of which I heard on the CBS radio news at 6:00 PM mountain time this evening):

Chief Justice Loken: This compels the preaching of ideology.

Assistant Attorney General: Sir, we don't feel that this is ideology.

Chief Justice (with great fervor): It's not science!

Me (with greater fervor): AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGH!!!

Item 2 is a generally understood and agreed-upon tenet of political science, but I don't think that's the sentence the judge was referring to anyway.

Item 3 has been statistically and anecdotally proven to occur at least sometimes, but I don't think that was the issue he was looking at either.

Which leaves us with Item 1--which deals the non-science of ultrasound technology. Which deals with the non-science of reproductive biology.

The judge needs to go back to high school. And if he sticks to his guns that abortion cannot be scientifically proven to be the taking of a human life, then he shouldn't be a judge.

Labels

Labels:

Comments

  1. rmwarnick4/12/2007 11:08:00 AM

    The legal issues here are not as simple as you think.
    http://writ.lp.findlaw.com/dorf/20030528.html

    ReplyDelete
  2. Frank Staheli4/12/2007 11:26:00 AM

    You're right. I think he has a good point that feticide with an exception for the mother would be a good thing. The story of the mentally disabled woman who is pregnant because of rape is particularly troubling, but if she clearly cannot support the child and would be endangered to take the baby to full term and deliver it (which I imagine she would) this is a probably a case where the baby's life should be taken.

    However, my original point is that the science of whether a human life is being taken during an abortion is indisputable. I suspect (hope) the judge wishes he hadn't blurted out what he blurted.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Thank you for commenting. If you have a Google/Blogger account, to be apprised of ongoing comment activity on this article, please click the "Subscribe" link below.

Popular posts from this blog

Red Clothing and Resurrection: Jesus Christ's Second Coming

The scriptures teach that when Christ comes again to the earth, that he will be wearing red apparel. Why red ? They also teach that at Christ's coming, many of the dead will become resurrected. Will this only include members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints? Not by a long shot, no matter what some Mormon might tell you.
2 comments
Read more

School Vouchers: "The Bramble Memo"

$429 million? What? Where? The legislative fiscal analyst for the State of Utah calculated the costs to the public schools over the next 13 years if school vouchers are implemented. It said the costs would be $5.5M in the first year, and $71M in the 13th year. Suddenly, the number I have started seeing thrown around was $429 million, the total costs for vouchers over 13 years. Where did that number come from? Enter the mysterious "Bramble Memo". In the past few days several of us (Jeremy, Utah Taxpayer, Craig, Sara, Urban Koda, Jesse, and me) have (sometimes?) enjoyed a lively discussion about school vouchers in Utah . Jeremy clarified to me the costs of the venture by linking to a copy of the Utah Legislative Fiscal Analyst's Impartial Analysis (LFA) of the costs of Vouchers , found on "The Senate Site". In my previous voucher article, I quoted some of Lavar Webb's article from last Sunday's Deseret News, wherein he stated that those total costs ...
66 comments
Read more

American Energy Independence: I Support "All of the Above"

Of course it will take several years to develop new domestic petroleum production. But it will take a lot longer to develop a lot of other alternative energy sources. I would LOVE to not have to rely on oil for anything, but that's a ways off. That's why I support the latest legislation in Congress that supports "All of the Above"--developing all energy sources, including oil, so that we can be energy independent. It really drives me nuts when people say we shouldn't develop domestic oil production because it won't be productive for 7-10 years. That would be a workable argument if we could have enough alternative energy by that time that we wouldn't need oil. I don't think, though, that anybody believes that. In congress recently, legislation was introduced to do encourage the development of all forms of energy. HR 6656, also known as " All of the Above ", will solve that problem, but apparently Nancy Pelosi thinks that at least two ...
54 comments
Read more