Abortion is in the constitution.

Great thread here!

I would add that the Ninth Amendment is relevant here. A woman's right to do as she wishes with her body is easily found in the Ninth, just as in the Griswold case her right to practice birth control was found there.

It is the religious emotions that make it an unpleasant topic. Religious emotions have declared one either pro life or pro abortion. Their position is essentially an appeal to emotions while ignoring the law.

 

So you're saying that our founding Fathers risked their lives and fortunes and fought a war to give birth to a nation in which women could abort their conceptions? Seems counter intuitive to me, and a supremely self serving mentality. Reason dictates that a conception is as much a human being as a newborn is an American. Both must develop into their potential. So if a newborn in America is an American at birth, then a conception in a human being is a human being at conception, even though neither is fully one or the other. Justice is more than what we choose to see.

 

Why then do we make such a big deal about birth dates? Why not celebrate a person's date of conception?

 

I agree, however, efforts to change that are moving forward as we speak. You either support government control over our bodies or you dont. If you support it for what you agree with, like this inferior pharma product, you support all. In other words, once they are in control, it doesn't matter if you agree or not.

What you have is an inconsistent position.

 

In this context, that is a distinction without relevance. Fine, call it personhood. The same principles stand. This is a debate about when does personhood begin. The Constitution is not empowered nor intended to make that determination. Any attempt to do so is the very definition of judicial overreach.

 

""""""Unless, of course, congress creates a law giving a fetus equal rights as a born human."""""


...and with those rights comes restrictions that we all have.

IF a fetus the same rights as born humans it would have the same restrictions. Correct?

NO one can use the body of another to sustain their life.

Having the same rights as born humans does NOT give one the right to do anything they please...

 

I read posts on face value. I don't keep a log of posters comments as I response to so may and make many OPs.

Either back up your claim, or it's vacuous.

if your claim is backed up on the immediate prior post, that i will check, but not if it's 'various posts', no one keeps logs like that, that's nuts. If you specifically backed it up with a specific post, it's courtesy to provide the URL.

 

It's the only argument that matters. the rest is just feelings, sentiments, philosophy.

If you want my opinion if Roe is moral, the answer is yes.

The morals of the centuries prior is irrelevant.

 

I don't keep logs of your posts. It's courtesy to provide a link.

What I do is requote myself, should a claim I made be argued and backed up another post, and provide a link to it, as I would any article. I normally do this out of courtesy, or strive to do it.

 

Specious argument, as Sotomayor pointed out, because of the concept of penumbra.

That Congress has the right to investigate, issue subpoenas, is not in the Constitution, either, but, Marbury v Madison explained established the precedent of penumbra

Similarly, abortion is penumbra to women's liberty, bodily autonomy, and privacy.

No one is suggesting that rights are absolute, so I fail to see what point you are making.

Abortion is limited by Roe & Casey. So?

I didn't call her opinion as 'fact', merely stated that was her argument to refute opposing council's argument, and yours, that 'abortion is nowhere in the constitution'

.

 

At least half the men who signed those documents about liberty owned slaves, so it's not a stretch to suggest their conception of the word was more limited than yours.

 

Penumbra or not the excuse that something is "nowhere in the Constitution" is utter nonsense. The 9th Amendment is all encompassing with respect to protecting ALL rights and the 10th Amendment is all encompassing in terms of limiting the powers of the federal government to those powers explicitly granted to it by the Constitution and granting ALL other powers to the states and The People.

 

You'd have to read her autobiography or Pivot of Civilization, where she said ,,,
On blacks, immigrants and indigents:
"...human weeds,' 'reckless breeders,' 'spawning... human beings who never should have been born." Margaret Sanger, Pivot of Civilization, referring to immigrants and poor people

or read what Ellis Washington had to say about The Negro Project

The Negro Project and Margaret Sanger's proto-Nazism

By Ellis Washington
December 2, 2015

"We prefer the policy of immediate sterilization, of making sure that parenthood is immediately prohibited to the feeble-minded."

~ Margaret Sanger, The Pivot of Civilization (1922)

"The demand that defective people be prevented from propagating equally defective offspring is the most human act of mankind."

~ Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf (1925)

,, or consider Sanger's connection to the KuKluxKlan:


which she explained away as follows:

Always to me any aroused group was a good group, and therefore I accepted an invitation to talk to the women’s branch of the Ku Klux Klan….My address that night had to be in the most elementary terms, as though I were trying to make children understand. In the end, through simple illustrations I believed I had accomplished my purpose. A dozen invitations to speak to similar groups were proffered.

https://www.hli.org/resources/margaret-sanger-kkk/

 

In the case of privileges, perhaps, but not inherent natural rights.

Even on a practical level you're wrong. People have asserted and upheld their rights without the assistance of government, and in many cases they have done so in opposition to government. A famous example of that would be in the communes of Medieval Europe where people asserted their rights against the ruling aristocracy and forced them to acknowledge those rights. That's also how Magna Carta came into being - people asserting their rights against a government that believed, as many Leftists in our country believe, that the only rights people have are the privileges that government is willing to grant them.

 

She's not being forced; she made a decision to engage in sex. There are myriad products available to reduce her chances of getting pregnant - assuming she's an competent adult she knew the chances.

Emphasis on 'competent" and "adult".

 

Here's some info from Gallup polls on abortion

 

Very interesting.Thanks. The KKK bit was not damning, in itself, but I see there is more reading for me to do, here.

 

if you're morally bankrupt sure.

 

She wishes to have an abortion but is prevented from doing so by the state=forced.

 

The right always argues that every life is precious, but when that baby is born, why do they try to do everything to make the child suffer? Red states rank in the bottom of child welfare. It's a paradox really. Children are miserable in states that supposedly cherish the miracle of innocent life.

 

It is a cross-cutting contradiction in American life. In general, a majority of those who are pro-life are also pro-death penalty. And a majority those who are pro-choice oppose the death penalty. One side will save you early and kill you later. The other will kill you in the womb but save you in prison.

 

I want to drive 150mph on the I 405 through Los Angele, CHP would prevent me from doing so. As I showed above 80% of voters favor some form of legalized abortion.

 

Actual red states just support families working to make a living better so there's less need for welfare.

 

Is that why red states have the highest percent of uninsured children?

 

If your wrongly convicted you can be released from prison, not so much if your killed.