LETTER: False and/or weak arguments hurt column
FARGO — I just read Robert Hale’s column in support of Measure 1 (“Amendment ensures N.D. respects, protects life,” Page A4, July 24).
Before Hale writes another column about abortion rights, he should re-enroll in a constitutional law class. I would suggest Assistant Professor Steven Morrison’s class at the UND School of Law.
The aspect of Hale’s letter that I’d like to address is the following: “Right now, it’s legal to terminate (kill) an unborn child at any stage of development. Currently, there are academics who suggest that until the age of 12 (considered by some as the age of reason), parents should have the right to terminate a child’s life.”
First, Hale is incorrect, as it is not legal for women to terminate a pregnancy at ANY stage of development. The standard used in this determination is viability. In Planned Parenthood of Southern Pennsylvania v. Casey, the U.S. Supreme Court in 1992 affirmed the aspects of Roe v. Wade concerning abortion rights before viability.
Even if Hale does not agree with the applicable standard, he should as an attorney know better than to make incorrect statements about the legal right to abortion.
Second, I was taught that when writing an argument, it is necessary to back it up with legitimate sources. This gives the argument more authority and shows that a person is not making things up as he or she goes along.
Hale stated in his letter that there are “academics who suggest that until the age of 12 (considered by some as the age of reason), parents should have the right to terminate a child’s life.” After this sentence, there is no reference that leads to the group or individuals who hold these beliefs. It may be easy for Hale to throw out extreme statements to see what sticks, but doing so is dangerous and misleading.
Hale’s letter is nothing more than a misleading attempt to scare the public into voting yes on Measure 1.
Green is a 2014 graduate of the UND School of Law.