Quote:
Originally Posted by Arus
No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
It's called equal protection as defined in the 14th Amendment. As long as I'm free to do as I wish, within the LAWS of the land.
The laws of this land, as stated by the Supreme Court, says that ABORTION is legal in this country as protected under the 14th Amendment.
YOU do know that the 14th Amendment is a part of our US Constitution right?
|
No, the 14th amendment has very little to actually do with it. The 14th amendment holds no protections in it, it only translates to apply the Bill of Rights to the citizens of the states(before the 14th amendment, the Bill of Rights was only a limit on the Federal government). The part of the constitution that actually decided Roe v. Wade was the 4th amendment, right to privacy.
Quote:
|
Abortion only affects one person. Illegal drugs affect many, not just the person who is using it. A person high on illegal drugs can potentially harm another person, or even kill another person while under the effects (example: driving a car while high). They also can affect others financially (stealing), and drive up costs to others (intervention)
|
Abortion affects at least three people. It affects the mother, the father, and the unborn child. And in reality, it affects far more than that indirectly. In fact, many argue that abortion is actually murder that is simply ignored by the justice system. Which hypocritically will file charges of murder on someone if the result of an attack on a pregnant woman is the loss of her unborn child.
Quote:
|
Illegal drugs are controlled by the FDA, which has sole authority on enforcement as granted by CONGRESS. The Constitution allows for CONGRESS to form agencies/law enforcement entities to enforce laws.
|
If all it took was for a federal agency to be created to prohibit alcohol, why didn't they just make that agency instead of passing an amendment to the constitution? Do you have any idea how difficult it is to pass an amendment to the constitution? The truth is, most agencies of the federal government today, would have been deemed unconstitutional 100 years ago.
Quote:
Wrong. It about privacy rights and what a woman is allowed to do with her own body.
Anyone who says otherwise, is just hiding the fact that they consider women 2nd class citizens.
|
Are you just being facetious now? Because I think most people understand that abortion is a little more than a simple decision about control of your body. It isn't exactly like putting on a t-shirt or raising your arm, or deciding what you want to eat for dinner. Most people understand what life is, most people understand that the governments job is to protect one life from being taken by another. What you are trying to do is define arbitrarily what life is and what a person is. But most people understand that life begins at conception. But what point in gestation the government wants to define that "development" as a person, is the only real issue at stake.
This whole talk about women being second-class citizens is ridiculous. It is an attempt to demonize anyone who opposes abortion as overbearing sexists. And its ridiculous.
Quote:
|
Then that would make women who have miscarriages murderers as well. Well, damn, MOTHER NATURE (or GOD for those that believe) murderers.
|
I think you are taking this a little overboard. In reality, a miscarriage would be similar to "sudden infant death syndrome" or SIDS. In the sense that a baby is alive, sleeping in their bed, then they just stop breathing or stop functioning and die. In that sense, it is the fault of no one. On the other hand, abortion would be like a mother walking into her babies room, grabbing a pillow and covering the babies face and suffocating it to death. That is murder.
People die all the time from accidents and for other random reasons. A death doesn't require a murderer. But any intentional or planned destruction of a human life, is carried out by a murderer.
Quote:
|
This is why this kind of legislation is dangerous.
|
It is not dangerous, in fact that kind of legislation had existed in this country all the way up to 1973, and we managed just fine. Roe v Wade completely upset the balance of this country, was decided by a few men on the supreme court, and wasn't even a unanimous decision.
Quote:
|
Cause that is all these laws are for. To make women feel as if they are nothing more than whores; nothing more than breeding vessels and 2nd class citizens. That the "rights" over 2 cells have more rights over her LIFE.
|
I think you are being ridiculous. Lets flip the script for a second. Lets pretend that men were the ones who carried the baby instead of women. Do you think laws prohibiting abortions would be trying to make men feel like whores or "breeding vessels"?
Do you think that if you wanted a child with your boyfriend/husband, and you knocked him up, then he went out and aborted your baby, that you wouldn't have any issue with it? Did you know there are some men who actually want to have children, and would be perfectly fine with carrying their baby for nine months, but they have to rely on man-hating women like you.
You do realize that women can only become pregnant if they have sex. Right? Why would an abortion make a woman feel like a *****? Unless of course, she was already being a *****, having sex out of wedlock, with a guy not ready to be a father. Which is obviously why she needs to have an abortion, so that people don't realize what a ***** she has been and call her on it.
Quote:
Federal LAW people. Learn it. States cannot create or pass laws that go against FEDERAL Law.
Our country was founded on the principles of freedom from OPRESSIVE governments that seek to CONTROL every aspect of our lives.
Such laws as the one proposed GOES AGAINST the very reason why the USA was formed. By controlling women by taking AWAY their rights, you're essentially going back to what our fore fathers ESCAPED from.
|
You are so delusional it isn't even funny. Do you know what the constitution is? If the federal government has unlimited power, what is the need for a constitution anyway? More importantly, why were the powers of the federal government listed explicitly in the constitution(article 1 section 8)? Why doesn't it just say that the federal government has power to do anything it wants, anytime it wants?
What is the 10th amendment to the constitution? What does it mean? What is a right anyway? Where does a right come from?
If murder in the form of abortion is a "right". Then is suicide not also a "right"? There are plenty of drugs out there that require a prescription. Should buying or using drugs without a prescription be illegal? The only person they would be hurting is themselves. The government wants to start limiting what kinds of foods a person eats, or start implementing "fat taxes" to steer people away from "unhealthy" foods. The government already has controls over how you may dress in public. Should prostitution be illegal? Should there be age of consent laws? What should the age of consent be? Why does it vary from state to state?
Let me tell you a little about the United States. It was not formed to protect peoples rights from state governments. The only role of governing the federal government had over the state governments was to make sure a "Republican" form of government was created for the states. A Republic is basically a government dictated by a constitution(or fixed body of law), so the federal government made sure the states had a constitution and adhered to it(no despots). In that time, you had state-sponsored religion. You had states creating their own rules regarding freedom of speech. Death penalty, alcohol, abortions, public safety, guns, welfare, transportation, etc etc.
It is only in more recent years that you have had the federal government eclipsing the state governments. Our founding fathers tried to escape from a tyrannical central government, which had almost no limits to its scope of power. Our founding fathers wanted a system of checks and balances to prevent any part of government from becoming too powerful. Our founding fathers put faith in the states to be a balance to each other.
If your vision of America were true, there would be no reason to have states at all. There would be no reason to call us the United States of America. We would have just been a unified country, controlled by Washington D.C.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
