Gonzales v. Carhart and Moral Implications

I’m glad this legislation was upheld. It’s a terrible procedure where a doctor partially delivers a child’s body until only the head remains inside the womb, then punctures the back of the child’s skull with a sharp instrument, and sucks the child’s brains out before completing delivery of the now-dead infant. On that note I have seen the question asked by liberal bloggers:

What is society to do with all those additional unwanted babies?

This question is part of the reason why I support limited abortion rights, even though I am morally conflicted about it. (I think Roe is a constitutional abomination, but that's a totally different question.) However....

Yes, a total ban on abortion would result in a number of unwanted babies and lead to other social problems. But I don't think that this potential consequence is controlling when there is a moral question involved. I can imagine a lot of "efficient" laws or solutions that would be horribly, morally wrong. Consider a number of variations on Swift's "A modest Proposal".

When it comes down to it, there are some things that are sufficiently wrong that you oppose them and deal with the consequences as best as you can.

One must remember no constitutional right is absolute. The right to free expression is limited by libel, slander, obscenity, and the "fighting words" doctrine. A right to be secure in one's home can be invaded with a search warrant (and sometimes without). I list these things to show that any fundamental right does have limits and, more importantly, it SHOULD have limits. There are many conflicting values in our constitutional system and this is just one of them.