Sunstein: Government must fund abortion
Declares 'no problem' forcing
taxpayers with religious, moral conflict
The government should be required to fund abortion in cases such as
rape or incest, argues President Obama's newly confirmed regulatory
czar, Cass Sunstein.
"I have argued that the Constitution ... forbids government from
refusing to pay the expenses of abortion in cases of rape or incest, at
least if government pays for childbirth in such cases," Sunstein wrote
in his 1993 book "The Partial Constitution."
In the book, obtained and reviewed by WND, Sunstein sets forth a
radical new interpretation of the Constitution. The book contains a
chapter entitled "It's the government's money" in which Sunstein
strongly argues the government should be compelled to fund abortions
for women victimized by rape or incest.
The Obama czar posits that funding only childbirth but not abortion
"has the precise consequence of turning women into involuntary
Sunstein argues that refusing to fund abortion "would require poor
women to be breeders," while co-opting women's bodies "in the service
of third parties" – referring to fetuses.
Sunstein wrote he has no problem with forcing taxpayers to fund
abortions even if they morally object to their money being used for
such a purpose.
He wrote: "There would be no tension with the establishment clause if
people with religious or other objections were forced to pay for that
procedure (abortion). Indeed, taxpayers are often forced to pay for
things – national defense, welfare, certain forms of art, and others –
to which they have powerful moral and even religious objections."
Sunstein is not shy about expressing his radical beliefs in papers and
books, although many of his controversial arguments have received
little to no news media attention or public scrutiny.
WND previously reported Sunstein drew up in an academic book a "First
Amendment New Deal" – a new "Fairness Doctrine" that would include the
establishment of a panel of "nonpartisan experts" to ensure "diversity
of view" on the airwaves.
WND also reported Sunstein proposed a radical new "bill of rights" in a
2004 book, "The Second Bill of Rights: FDR'S Unfinished Revolution and
Why We Need It More than Ever," in which he advanced the radical notion
that welfare rights, including some controversial inceptions, be
granted by the state.
WND has learned that in April 2005, Sunstein opened up a conference at
Yale Law School entitled "The Constitution in 2020," which sought to
change the nature and interpretation of the Constitution by that year.
Sunstein has been a main participant in the movement which openly seeks
to create a "progressive" consensus as to what the U.S. Constitution
should provide for by the year 2020. It also suggests strategy for how
liberal lawyers and judges might bring such a constitutional regime
Just before his appearance at the conference, Sunstein wrote a blog
entry in which he explained he "will be urging that it is important to
resist, on democratic grounds, the idea that the document should be
interpreted to reflect the view of the extreme right-wing of the
In his "Second Bill of Rights" book, Sunstein laid out what he wants to
become the new bill of rights, which he calls the Second Bill of Rights:
Among his mandates are:
* The right to a useful and remunerative job in the
industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;
* The right to earn enough to provide adequate food
and clothing and recreation;
* The right of every farmer to raise and sell his
products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
* The right of every businessman, large and small,
to trade in an
atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by
monopolies at home or abroad;
* The right of every family to a decent home;
* The right to adequate medical care and the
opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
* The right to adequate protection from the economic
fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
* The right to a good education.
On one page in his "Second Bill of Rights" book, Sunstein claims he is
"not seriously arguing" his bill of rights be "encompassed by anything
in the Constitution," but on the next page he states that "if the
nation becomes committed to certain rights, they may migrate into the
Later in the book, Sunstein argues that "at a minimum, the second bill
should be seen as part and parcel of America's constitutive
Contact: Aaron Klein
Date: September 29, 2009
to this article.
this article to a friend.
The IFRL is the largest grassroots pro-life organization in
Illinois. A non-profit organization, that serves as the state
coordinating body for local pro-life chapters representing thousands of
Illinois citizens working to restore respect for all human life in our
society. The IFRL is composed of people of different political
persuasions, various faiths and diverse economic, social and ethnic
backgrounds. Since 1973 the Illinois Federation for Right to Life has
been working to end abortion and restore legal protection to those members of the
human family who are threatened by abortion, infanticide and euthanasia. Diverse though we are, we hold one common belief - that
every human being has an inalienable right to life that is precious and must be protected. IFRL is
dedicated to restoring the right to life to the unborn, and protection
for the disabled and the elderly. Click here to learn more about the IFRL.