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.
NO, Colorado, N.H., Alaska, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Vermont have NO restrictions. One doctor can decide because of mental reason or vague reason perform late term sanctioned by the state and since they have NO restrictions they can put for whatever reason, the state is not going to challenge them.
These laws were established so in case of medical issues a woman would still be able to obtain a medically needed abortion. As you well know there is an effort to restrict or ban them outright
These laws were established so in case of medical issues a woman would still be able to obtain a medically needed abortion. As you well know there is an effort to restrict or ban them outright
How is a medically needed abortion defined. Is mom being depressed a reason for a later term abortion?
Last edited by MissTerri; 05-16-2022 at 07:07 AM..
When those words were put into our federal Constitution, who were they directed at?
Now, with the fundamental right to keep and bear arms, within a various state borders, let us take a look at what the people, for example, of the State of Pennsylvania, agree upon long before our federal government was even created, and did so in their State’s fundamental law otherwise known as Pennsylvania’s Declaration of Rights, adopted in 1776.
I. That all men are born equally free and independent, and have certain natural, inherent and inalienable rights, amongst which are, the enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.
II. That all men have a natural and unalienable right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences and understanding: And that no man ought or of right can be compelled to attend any religious worship, or erect or support any place of worship, or maintain any ministry, contrary to, or against, his own free will and consent: Nor can any man, who acknowledges the being of a God, be justly deprived or abridged of any civil right as a citizen, on account of his religious sentiments or peculiar mode of religious worship: And that no authority can or ought to be vested in, or assumed by any power whatever, that shall in any case interfere with, or in any manner controul, the right of conscience in the free exercise of religious worship.
III. That the people of this State have the sole, exclusive and inherent right of governing and regulating the internal police of the same.
IV. That all power being originally inherent in, and consequently derived from, the people; therefore all officers of government, whether legislative or executive, are their trustees and servants, and at all times accountable to them.
V. That government is, or ought to be, instituted for the common benefit, protection and security of the people, nation or community; and not for the particular emolument or advantage of any single man, family, or soft of men, who are a part only of that community, And that the community hath an indubitable, unalienable and indefeasible right to reform, alter, or abolish government in such manner as shall be by that community judged most conducive to the public weal.
VI. That those who are employed in the legislative and executive business of the State, may be restrained from oppression, the people have a right, at such periods as they may think proper, to reduce their public officers to a private station, and supply the vacancies by certain and regular elections.
VII. That all elections ought to be free; and that all free men having a sufficient evident common interest with, and attachment to the community, have a right to elect officers, or to be elected into office.
VIII. That every member of society hath a right to be protected in the enjoyment of life, liberty and property, and therefore is bound to contribute his proportion towards the expence of that protection, and yield his personal service when necessary, or an equivalent thereto: But no part of a man's property can be justly taken from him, or applied to public uses, without his own consent, or that of his legal representatives: Nor can any man who is conscientiously scrupulous of bearing arms, be justly compelled thereto, if he will pay such equivalent, nor are the people bound by any laws, but such as they have in like manner assented to, for their common good.
IX. That in all prosecutions for criminal offences, a man hath a right to be heard by himself and his council, to demand the cause and nature of his accusation, to be confronted with the witnesses, to call for evidence in his favour, and a speedy public trial, by an impartial jury of the country, without the unanimous consent of which jury he cannot be found guilty; nor can he be compelled to give evidence against himself; nor can any man be justly deprived of his liberty except by the laws of the land, or the judgment of his peers.
X. That the people have a right to hold themselves, their houses, papers, and possessions free from search and seizure, and therefore warrants without oaths or affirmations first made, affording a sufficient foundation for them, and whereby any officer or messenger may be commanded or required to search suspected places, or to seize any person or persons, his or their property, not particularly described, are contrary to that right, and ought not to be granted.
XI. That in controversies respecting property, and in suits between man and man, the parties have a right to trial by jury, which ought to be held sacred.
XII. That the people have a right to freedom of speech, and of writing, and publishing their sentiments; therefore the freedom of the press ought not to be restrained.
XIII. That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the state; and as standing armies in the time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; And that the military should be kept under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.
XIV. That a frequent recurrence to fundamental principles, and a firm adherence to justice, moderation, temperance, industry, and frugality are absolutely necessary to preserve the blessings of liberty, and keep a government free: The people ought therefore to pay particular attention to these points in the choice of officers and representatives, and have a right to exact a due and constant regard to them, from their legislatures and magistrates, in the making and executing such laws as are necessary for the good government of the state.
XV. That all men have a natural inherent right to emigrate from one state to another that will receive them, or to form a new state in vacant countries, or in such countries as they can purchase, whenever they think that thereby they may promote their own happiness.
XVI. That the people have a right to assemble together, to consult for their common good, to instruct their representatives, and to apply to the legislature for redress of grievances, by address, petition, or remonstrance.
So, as it turns out with respect to Pennsylvania, documented history tells us the people therein decided, long before our existing Constitution was adopted, to guarantee a right to bear arms for "defense of themselves", in addition to the defense of the State, and, by the adoption of the 2nd Amendment to our federal Constitution they went on to specifically forbid the federal government to enter their state and “infringe” upon the people’s already existing right to keep and bear arms established by their state Declaration of Rights.
The error in that decision was allowing states to restrict Constitutional Rights at all. Can states/local governments ban freedom of religion or freedom of speech? No. Can states ban 2nd Amendment Rights? Yes. WHY???
Because it hasn't been litigated enough yet. Regardless, the 4473 and NICS checks are going to continue to exist as a method to prevent felons and others that are disqualified from owning firearms from buying them on the legitimate market.
My point is that women are NOT aborting due to financial inadequacy. They're aborting solely for the sake of convenience. Women in the highest income group have the highest rate of abortion.
Don't women get to control their own bodies, or are they chattel property once they become pregnant?
And where in our Constitution is our Supreme Court authorized to amend our Constitution? Seems to me the only lawful way to amend our Constitution is laid out in Article V of our Constitution.
Did you really mean that on June 26, 2008 our S. C., in District of Columbia v. Heller, engaged in judicial tyranny? If so, please explain.
JWK
SCOTUS didn't change the 2nd Amendment, they made a ruling that partially incorporates the 2nd as applying to the states. Prior to Heller, there was nothing that definitively made the 2nd apply to states, and states were free to do as they pleased. There are additional cases now that will help clarify things.
How is a medically needed abortion defined. Is mom being depressed a reason for a later term abortion?
If a woman is suffering from severe clinical depression related to a pregnancy, and it cannot be treated, then yes, that would be a reason for a late term abortion. Especially if the woman is suicidal. Or if the drugs necessary to treat the condition would cause issues with the pregnancy. There is no black and white line here, it's a very gray area with nuance and a need to evaluate every case on its merits.
If a woman is suffering from severe clinical depression related to a pregnancy, and it cannot be treated, then yes, that would be a reason for a late term abortion. Especially if the woman is suicidal. Or if the drugs necessary to treat the condition would cause issues with the pregnancy. There is no black and white line here, it's a very gray area with nuance and a need to evaluate every case on its merits.
I don’t agree with this at all. Killing a healthy viable fetus via late term abortion for depression doesn’t sit well with me. Most drugs used to treat depression are safe during pregnancy. There are options other than killing the fetus. I do not support this at all.
Late term abortions require dialation and extraction. The baby is extracted in pieces. It’s inhumane.
Another violation of federalism, our Constitution's plan
Quote:
Originally Posted by WRM20
SCOTUS didn't change the 2nd Amendment, they made a ruling that partially incorporates the 2nd as applying to the states..
And where in our federal Constitution is our Supreme Court authorized to make the Second Amendment enforceable upon the States by the federal government, which is essentially amending our federal Constitution?
Seems to me your notion is an obvious violation of the Tenth Amendment and federalism, our Constitution's plan.
JWK
.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
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.
the right to keep and bear arms
