Letter: Roe opinion on par with a junior high term paper

I've now plowed through about as much of the opinion of the Supreme Court as I care to, and conclude it is an embarrassing set of twisted opinions which begins with a long account of very old reasoning by very outdated men convinced not only of the evil of abortion, but of other amazing things such as the rightness of slavery, of male superiority, of inequity based on land ownership, of the superiority of whites, of the concept of an inherent superior thought process of western logic, of male logic, of the inability of females to benefit from education, of the weakness of female judgment, of the female mind, of the certain truth that neither blacks nor women could or should be members of the Supreme Court or any other judicial or legislative body, that God rules the minds of men, that men rule the minds of women, that husbands own wives, that human beings may be chattel, that science is suspect, that God rules science, that Darwin and his methods are suspect, etc.

And those with these beliefs are now supposed to be cited as venerable and correct in their thinking and we are to abide by their logic and beliefs?

It is ludicrous.

It is embarrassing.

It suggests there is no possibility of human intellectual, moral, scientific growth.

And the writing suggests these judges never benefitted from their extensive "education," but have only used education and its extensive vocabulary to reinforce primitive prejudices.

Little minds crawling through the prior opinions of little minds and gluing quotations together into an unsightly junior high school term paper.

I used to be a teacher. I'd give it an F.

Marilyn Mayer Wiedemann

Glen Ellyn