Birth control laws : $b shall we keep them, change them, or abolish themDennett, Mary Ware
History
Birth control laws : $b shall we keep them, change them, or abolish them
Dennett, Mary Ware
Birth control; Birth control -- Law and legislation -- United States
It has to be admitted that the American public has often been
shockingly easy-going about responsibility for the sort of laws that
its representatives enact, likewise that the public is often woefully
pliant in accepting ready made opinions and policies without analysis.
But it is to be hoped that there are enough citizens who are genuinely
interested to help check misguided legislation and promote sound
legislation on this subject, to prevent our country from making another
great blunder in birth control legislation instead of correcting
Comstock’s original blunder with a clean firm sweep. Standing up and
being counted as a believer in birth control is not enough. Those who
are on record in birth control organizations as adherents of “the
cause” must see to it that their names are not linked to endorsements
of bills which they do not approve. Birth control leaders, like members
of Congress, will yield to public opinion, if it is clearly enough and
forcibly enough expressed.
It is time for every one who means well in this matter to do well also.
The gist of the question is very simple and lucid. It has unfortunately
been gummed up with all manner of excrescences. But they can all be
readily scraped off by dint of the application of plain common sense
and determination not to fool one’s self or to attempt to fool the
public or the legislators.
Also there is a considerable portion of the American public which
cares about having the laws on this subject in harmony with the proud
traditions of American ideals, the people to whom the guarantees of
freedom of speech and of the press mean something, and who are keen to
have the spirit of the Constitution lived up to, not so much because
it is the Constitution as because those principles of freedom are
vital to human progress and precious to human aspiration. There has
always been a sizable body of opinion that all the Comstock laws are
constitutional, as contrary to the United States Constitution and to
the constitutions of the States. Forty-five of the forty-eight States
in the Union have provisions in their constitutions or the Bill of
Rights that “every man is given the right freely to write, speak
and publish his opinions on all subjects, being responsible for the
abuse of that privilege.” Twenty-six of the States give an additional
safeguard providing that “No law shall ever be passed to restrain
freedom of speech or of the press.” Courtlandt Palmer, in 1883 wrote
a vigorous article in the “New York Observer” in criticism of the
Comstock laws, in which he said:
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account