Shop top categories that ship internationally
Gebraucht kaufen
8,99 $
Lieferung Donnerstag, 9. Januar. Bestellung innerhalb 4 Stdn. 36 Min.
Oder schnellste Lieferung Montag, 6. Januar
Gebraucht: Sehr gut | Details
Verkauft von Jocuda13
Versand durch Amazon
Zustand: Gebraucht: Sehr gut
Kommentar: Minimal signs of wear. Ships direct from Amazon!

Beim Versand durch Amazon nutzen Verkaufspartner die Logistik der Amazon-Versandzentren: Amazon verpackt und verschickt die Artikel und übernimmt den Kundenservice. Deine Vorteile: (1) Lieferung ab 29 EUR Bestellwert (Bücher, Bekleidung und Schuhe generell versandkostenfrei, auch zusammen mit Media-Produkten). (2) Kombinieren und sparen - bestelle bei Amazon.de oder Verkaufspartnern, die den Versand durch Amazon nutzen, wird deine Bestellung zu einer Lieferung zusammengefasst. (3) Alle Artikel sind mit Amazon Prime für noch schnellere Lieferung bestellbar.

Wenn Sie Verkäufer sind, kann Versand durch Amazon Ihnen dabei helfen, Ihre Umsätze zu steigern. Weitere Informationen zum Programm

Zugriffscodes und Beilagen sind bei gebrauchten Artikeln nicht garantiert.
Hinzugefügt zu

Es ist ein Fehler aufgetreten.

Es gab einen Fehler beim Abrufen deines Wunschzettels. Versuche es noch einmal.

Es ist ein Fehler aufgetreten.

Liste nicht verfügbar.
Andere Verkäufer bei Amazon
Neu & Gebraucht (21) von   5,59$
Bild des Kindle App-Logos

Lade die kostenlose Kindle-App herunter und lese deine Kindle-Bücher sofort auf deinem Smartphone, Tablet oder Computer – kein Kindle-Gerät erforderlich.

Mit Kindle für Web kannst du sofort in deinem Browser lesen.

Scanne den folgenden Code mit deiner Mobiltelefonkamera und lade die Kindle-App herunter.

QR-Code zum Herunterladen der Kindle App

Den Autoren folgen

Laurence H. Tribe
Folgen
Laurence Tribe
Folgen
Ein Fehler ist aufgetreten. Wiederhole die Anfrage später noch einmal.

Abortion: The Clash of Absolutes Updated, Revised Auflage

von Laurence H. Tribe (Author)
3,8 3,8 von 5 Sternen 14 Sternebewertungen
Alle Formate und Editionen anzeigen

"An important work on a monumental subject." ―Anna Quindlen, New York Times Book Review

On profound questions of birth, death, and human choice that are raised by abortion―where opposing sides see no common ground―how can the conflict be managed? The abortion debate in the United States today involves all Americans in complex questions of sex and power, historical change, politics, advances in medicine, and competing social values. In this best-selling book, an eminent constitutional authority shows how the nation has struggled with these questions and then sets forth new approaches that reflect both sides' passionately held convictions. The paperback edition includes discussion of the latest court decisions and excerpts from the major cases, including the Supreme Court's landmark June 1992 decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey.
Vorherige Folie der Produktdetails
  1. ISBN-10
    0393309568
  2. ISBN-13
    978-0393309560
  3. Auflage
    Updated, Revised
  4. Herausgeber
    W. W. Norton & Company
  5. Erscheinungstermin
    17. September 1992
  6. Sprache
    Englisch
  7. Abmessungen
    13.97 x 2.29 x 21.34 cm
  8. Seitenzahl der Print-Ausgabe
    336 Seiten
  9. Alle Details anzeigen
Nächste Folie der Produktdetails

Ähnliche Artikel, die dir möglicherweise schnell zugestellt werden

Seite 1 von 1 Erneut startenSeite 1 von 1
Vorheriger Foliensatz
  2. Constitutional Choices
    Laurence H. Tribe
     
    Taschenbuch
    -7 %48,22$
    UVP: 52,00 $
    6,99 $ Versand
    Nur noch 1 vorrätig – bestellen Sie bald.
  3. God Save this Honorable Court: How the Choice of Justices Shapes Our History
    Lawrence H. Tribe
     
    Gebundene Ausgabe
    -33 %11,95$
    UVP: 17,95 $
    Erhalte es bis Dienstag, 7. Januar
    6,99 $ Versand
    Nur noch 1 vorrätig – bestellen Sie bald.
  4. Abortion: The Clash of Absolutes
    Laurence H. Tribe
     
    Gebundene Ausgabe
    -5 %18,97$
    UVP: 19,95 $
    Erhalte es bis Donnerstag, 9. Januar
    6,99 $ Versand
    Nur noch 1 vorrätig – bestellen Sie bald.
  5. Scarlet A: The Ethics, Law, and Politics of Ordinary Abortion
    Katie Watson
     
    Taschenbuch
    23,99$
    6,99 $ Versand
    Nur noch 11 auf Lager (mehr ist unterwegs).
Nächster Foliensatz

Kundenrezensionen

3,8 von 5 Sternen
14 weltweite Bewertungen

Dieses Produkt bewerten

Sag deine Meinung zu diesem Artikel
Kundenrezension verfassen

Spitzenrezensionen aus USA

  • Jack
    5,0 von 5 Sternen Excellent Purchase and Support
    Bewertet in den USA am13. Juli 2022
    Verifizierter Kauf
    One of the most esteemed authors on the Constitution, and excellent support from the book's distributor
    2 Personen fanden diese Informationen hilfreich
    Nützlich
     Melden
  • IHeartHeyer
    3,0 von 5 Sternen Not Quite As Balanced As I Had Hoped
    Bewertet in den USA am25. November 2014
    Verifizierter Kauf
    I was mislead a little by other reviews which suggested that this was a "balanced" and "unbiased" discussion of the abortion issue. This book is not quite that. The author is clearly pro-choice, and as result, his discussion favors pro-choice arguments. His claim of balance lies in his sympathetic mentioning of pro-life views, prior to using every effort to call them into question. He does not similarly call the pro-choice arguments into question, though they are as susceptible to his brand of slippery slope hypotheticals as the pro-life arguments he describes. I was expecting truly balanced treatment, but in many ways, the pro-life arguments were reduced to straw men. As a result, the book goes out of its way to try to gain sympathy and visibility for the women behind the pro-choice arguments--and it largely succeeds. But similar sympathy and visibility toward the unborn, though always mentioned, is also always abandoned as unworkable and incoherent. This seems to be the result of the author's selective critique, rather than any inherent qualitative difference between the two arguments. And that is unfortunate for the author is well-renown as a brilliant scholar, and is one who need not trade in straw men. I came to this book hoping for ideas of how to write in a way that genuinely treats both sides of a controversial debate with equal regard. While I appreciate all the history, the background, and have true admiration for the author, I left with a sense of how NOT to write such a book. : )
    10 Personen fanden diese Informationen hilfreich
    Nützlich
     Melden
  • Val7986
    5,0 von 5 Sternen Great service
    Bewertet in den USA am29. September 2011
    Verifizierter Kauf
    My book got here rather quickly than I anticipated and I must say I am highly pleased with its condition. It's as though it's never been used before! Thanks!!
    Nützlich
     Melden
  • Amber Henry
    4,0 von 5 Sternen A political jouney: One distant planet at a time
    Bewertet in den USA am9. Juni 2005
    Tribe's book, Abortion: The Clash of Absolutes is an excellent read for anyone who highly regards the constitutional and basic right to life. In his book,Tribe devotes equal time to shedding light on both to other cultures to see how they have dealt with this issue the Pro-life and Pro-Choice perspectives towards abortion.

    Tribe investigates other cultures views and ways of handling abortion as well the evolution of abortion throughout American history.

    I would strongly recommend this book to those who are interested in political science and the controversial issue of abortion. Whether you are Pro-Choice or Pro-Life, you will find this book highly enlightening and yourself forever changed.
    8 Personen fanden diese Informationen hilfreich
    Nützlich
     Melden
  • Orrin C. Judd
    1,0 von 5 Sternen like Bull Connor on improving race relations
    Bewertet in den USA am24. Januar 2002
    Set aside, for a moment, the question of whether you want abortion to be a right or not, and consider only how the Court got to the point where
    it made its ruling. It had, first, to assume the right, nowhere spelled out in the Constitution, to review the constitutionality of laws. It had,
    next, to extend its reach to state laws, which had several times been explicitly placed beyond its grasp. It had, then, to rely upon a "right to
    privacy" which exists nowhere in the language of the Constitution. The issue that confronts even those who support abortion is : are we a
    nation of laws, a constitutional republic, or are we mere creatures of the judiciary, prey to their every whim? For if we are to allow the Court
    to seize new powers and create entirely new "rights" when we like the results, we must also be prepared to acquiesce when they start arriving at
    results we abhor. To accept that the Court can make unprincipled decisions is to abandon the notion that they can be bound by principle.
    It is especially important to note here that it might have been possible to secure abortion rights without utilizing these subterfuges and
    imperious court rulings. People who wish to have a right of privacy protected by the Constitution need only propose and pass an amendment
    that would do so. This is the system that the Founders, in their wisdom, put in place for making changes to our system of governance and to
    what rights we choose to afford special protection from government. It also has the very great advantage of actually being democratic. In
    particular, such a radical alteration of the scheme of protected rights would seem to be best accomplished via the democratic and constitutional
    processes, rather than by judicial fiat. Presumably, proponents of privacy rights chose not to follow this course because such an amendment
    would be unlikely to pass. They instead chose the judicial route precisely because it is antidemocratic and allowed them to overcome the will
    of the people. This success has been followed by entirely predictable hostility on the part of many Americans, as should be any effort to make
    an end run on democracy.
    Meanwhile, although conservatives could spin out even more compelling arguments for a right to life, which is after all specifically mentioned
    in the text of the Constitution, many ask for far less than this. We really would just like the Court to butt out and allow the States to regulate
    abortion as their citizens see fit. This, the direction in which the country was headed before Roe was decided, would allow the more
    permissive states on the two coasts to permit fairly easy access to abortions while allowing more traditional states and populations to restrict or
    even ban them. It would return the issue to the rough and tumble of democratic debate and restore the primacy of the Constitution, rather than
    of judges. It's hard to see how one can both believe in our system of government and oppose the idea of returning abortion to the political
    sphere.
    As for the rest of Mr. Tribe's book, bad enough that his discussion of the constitutionality of Roe v. Wade is so dishonest, Mr. Tribe also
    includes a history of abortion in America that has been thoroughly discredited, much like Michael Bellesiles's fabricated history of gun
    ownership. It reaches a spectacular height of delusion when he asserts that the absence of anti-abortion laws early in our history indicates a
    general societal acceptance of the practice. We might similarly argue that terrorism was accepted in the 19th Century because there were no
    anti-terrorism laws. He proceeds from there to a discussion of abortion in other societies that is a complete non sequitir. Should we also
    legalize infanticide because the Chinese use it? Maybe we're just lagging behind other cultures in not practicing female circumcision? This
    kind of reasoning hardly deserves the name.
    When we get to Mr. Tribe's attempt to reconcile the opposing sides of the abortion debate, the partisan nature of his analysis is perhaps
    adequately demonstrated with just a few quotes :
    [T]he feeling that abortion should be blocked by government may grow, at least in part, out of a reflexive willingness to enforce
    traditional sex roles upon women and to impose upon them an unequal and harsh sexual morality.
    Note the contempt for tradition and morality? the assumption that opposition to abortion is "reflexive" and a mere "feeling", while support
    would of course be reasoned? and the incoherent thought that prohibiting abortion is unequal? Of course, Mr. Tribe fails to consider that
    allowing abortion is unequal too, since men can't have them and it takes the decision out of men's hands. The argument that abortion has to be
    made legal if women are to be treated equally with men makes about as little sense as arguing that rape should be made legal in order for men
    to be treated equally with women.
    At another point he refers to antiabortionists as believing, "that men and women are different by nature and that they have intrinsically different
    roles to play in society." Did I miss something? Are men and women now the same? Perhaps we've located the real problem in this whole
    debate. Maybe Mr. Tribe just isn't aware that it is only the female of the species that bears children. His real disagreement is not with abortion
    opponents but with Nature.
    And so, having misled us on the law, the history, and the biology of abortion, Mr. Tribe arrives at his final advice to us :
    For both sides...a greater measure of humility seems in order. If we genuinely believe in the democratic principle of one person,
    one vote, then each of us will have to treat the votes, and hear the voices, of our opponents as being no less worthy or meaningful
    than our own.
    On both sides of the abortion debate, this will require an unaccustomed and in some ways unnatural forbearance. Right-to-life
    advocates are inclined to respond to pleas for tolerance by insisting that the exclusion of the fetus from the processes of voting
    and debate distorts the discussion profoundly from the outset, for reasons that bear no proper relation to a moral or just outcome.
    That the fetus is voiceless and voteless, they may say, follows from a biological condition but is irrelevant to how society is
    morally bound to behave.
    And pro-choice advocates are inclined to react to pleas for mutual respect by insisting, no less vehemently, that it begs the question
    to attribute legitimacy to the views of those who tell women how to lead their lives and what to do with their bodies. To submit a
    woman's fate to a popular referendum, they may insist, already assumes that the matter is properly one to be resolved by voting.
    In the end, the answer to both sides is the same : In a democracy, voting and persuasion are all we have. Not even the Constitution
    is beyond amendment. And since we must therefore persuade one another even about which 'rights' the Constitution ought to place
    beyond the reach of any temporary voting majority, nothing, neither life nor liberty, can be regarded as immune from politics writ
    large. Either some of the views expressed in the political arena are to be privileged and untouchable from the start or all views are
    to count equally, those of the supposedly less sophisticated no less than those of the self-professedly more tolerant elite.
    The reader will feel justified in believing that they've accidentally wandered into a different book at this point. For in what has come before,
    Mr. Tribe has demonstrated that Roe v. Wade is not the product of "one man, one vote", and in defending it anyway has effectively shown
    himself not to believe in democratic principles. And, whatever his point about the voiceless fetus, the complaint of pro-lifers is that their own
    voices are not heard, because the Court has placed abortion beyond the reach of anything except a Constitutional Amendment or an activist
    Right-wing majority. So the point that he has italicized (presumably indicating its importance), about voting and persuasion, is quite wrong, as
    he must well know. It is possible for the Court to create a privilege for some views, as it has done with abortion, and to thwart the both the
    majority and the Constitution itself. The clash of absolutes, as it regards the opposing views of whether abortion is morally defensible, is
    probably unresolvable. But it is vitally important to our democracy that we resolve the clash between those who favor judicial usurpation of
    power, so long as it achieves ends with which they agree, and those who believe that courts must be bound by the text of the Constitution, as
    written, by the American people. Perhaps we are at the point, that Albert Jay Nock foresaw, where our society has become :
    ...tired of itself, bored by its own hideo
    29 Personen fanden diese Informationen hilfreich
    Nützlich
     Melden
  • Wayne B. Cunningham
    3,0 von 5 Sternen Comments about reviews.
    Bewertet in den USA am1. November 2005
    Please limit your review to the actual book rather than the vitriol that some readers have vented. Such "reviews" do not help a potential reader determine whether or not the book is worth reading. One thing for certain is that your reviews are not.
    18 Personen fanden diese Informationen hilfreich
    Nützlich
     Melden
  • ariel
    5,0 von 5 Sternen great and almost unbiased
    Bewertet in den USA am15. Juni 2004
    Though Lawrence H. Tribe wrote Abortion: The Clash of Absolutes in 1990, almost fifteen years ago, though the exact same issues surrounding the abortion question are all relevant today. That's how much progress is made when two sides are tugging at one subject with the same fervor - it just doesn't move. Abortion is just as a hot topic today as it was in 1973 when Roe vs. Wade made it legal in the United States. It is the perfect issue for a culture war; it has everything - sex, feminism, death and religion. Tribe does justice to the abortion question. He rotates around his subject from all angles to get the best view possible. From the title alone and then supported by the first three paragraphs, it is evident that Tribe refuses to belittle either side but is determined to show how and why these absolutes clash. These absolutes, or course, are the right to life and the right to liberty, which when they meet at abortion, directly conflict.
    7 Personen fanden diese Informationen hilfreich
    Nützlich
     Melden