Some registered account users are experiencing password recognition issues. The issue appears to have been triggered by a PHP update last night. If this is occurring, please try logging in and using the "forgot password?" utility. Bear in mind auto-generated password reset emails may appear in your spam folder. If this does not work, please click the "Contact Us" option near the lower right hand corner of the index page to contact me via email.

Thank you for your patience!
- M.W.

Why I disagree with returning the abortion question to the states

Debate and discussion of current events and political issues across the U.S. and throughout the World. Be forewarned -- this forum is NOT for the intellectually weak or those of you with thin skins. Don't come crying to me if you become the subject of ridicule. **Board Administrator reserves the right to revoke posting privileges based on my sole discretion**
bmw
Posts: 7749
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 1:02 am

Why I disagree with returning the abortion question to the states

Unread post by bmw »

I've finally had time to read through some of the text of the ruling, and while I agree with the finding that there is no Constitutional right to abortion, I disagree with the Court, as well as most Conservatives, on the following finding:
It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives. “The per-missibility of abortion, and the limitations, upon it, are tobe resolved like most important questions in our democ-racy: by citizens trying to persuade one another and thenvoting.” Casey, 505 U. S., at 979...That is what the Constitution and the rule of law demand.
Now, the only justification for banning abortions or regulating them in any way is whether the unborn child is entitled to any rights. Because if it isn't, I can't think of any legal justification for banning abortions. If it is entitled to rights, the question becomes what rights exactly, and at precisely what point during pregnancy - ie, the fundamental question here is "when does life begin?"

This raises the question of "Constitutional Personhood," and that is a question where the SCOTUS had indeed opined in a variety of circumstances, including:

-Corporations (see Hobby Lobby and Citizens United cases in 2014 and 2010, both decided in 5-4 decisions by the Conservative Justices and conferring certain Constitutional rights upon corporations),

-Illegal Immigrants (see Reno v. Flores, 1993, where the Court found "it is well established that the Fifth Amendment entitles aliens to due process of law in deportation proceedings.")

-Felons (see Richardson v. Ramirez, 1974, where the Court found that felons could be denied the right to vote)

-Minors (cases too numerous to mention here, but there are many instances where a parent's rights override the rights of minors).

=====================

So, if questions of personhood as they apply to corporations, illegal immigrants, felons, and minors can be ruled on by the Supreme Court (and thus apply at the federal level), so can the question of what specific Constitutional rights an unborn child is entitled to. The more time I've had to think about this ruling, the more I think that returning the question to the states was a bit of chickening out on the part of the Conservatives on the Court and is going to create more problems than it solves for many years to come.

What the Court should have done, IMO, is tackle the question of gestational age. It could have found that Alabama's law was Constitutional on the ground that at a gestational age of 15 weeks, an unborn child is entitled to certain Constitutional rights, and could have upheld Alabama's law on that ground, effectively overturning Roe and establishing personhood at the 15-week mark.
User avatar
Bryce
Posts: 7178
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 12:04 pm

Re: Why I disagree with returning the abortion question to the states

Unread post by Bryce »

bmw wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 10:17 am
What the Court should have done, IMO, is tackle the question of gestational age. It could have found that Alabama's law was Constitutional on the ground that at a gestational age of 15 weeks, an unborn child is entitled to certain Constitutional rights, and could have upheld Alabama's law on that ground, effectively overturning Roe and establishing personhood at the 15-week mark.
I don't think the COTUS can tackle the question until they are presented a case involving that particular question.

For example, if a state or even the U.S. Congress passed a law conferring full constitutional rights after 15 weeks in the womb, and someone challenged that law, they could then dip their toe in that particular pond.
New York and Chicago were all in with respect to their sanctuary status — until they were hit with the challenge of actually providing sanctuary. In other words, typical liberal hypocrisy.
bmw
Posts: 7749
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 1:02 am

Re: Why I disagree with returning the abortion question to the states

Unread post by bmw »

The question the Court was presented with:
Mississippi’s Gestational Age Act provides that “[e]xcept in a medical emergency or in the case of a severe fetal abnormality, a person shall not intentionally or knowingly perform . . . or induce an abortion of an unborn human being if the probable gestational age of the unborn human being has been determined to be greater than fifteen (15) weeks.” Miss. Code Ann. §41–41–191. Respondents—Jackson Women’s Health Organization, an abortion clinic, and one of its doctors—challenged the Act in Federal District Court, alleging that it violated this Court’s precedents establishing a constitutional right to abortion...
To me that is enough to tackle the personhood question. The Court could have found Alabama's law to be Constitutional on the grounds that aborting an unborn child after 15 weeks violated the rights of that unborn child. Because how else would the personhood question ever end up in front of the Court? An unborn child certainly can't bring a case to the Supreme Court, and no parent who is going to have an abortion is ever going to bring such a case....so I see no pathway otherwise for the question to ever be brought to the Court by an aggrieved person.

Also to clarify something I said earlier - while I don't believe there is a Constitutional right to have an abortion, my belief only applies to aborting an unborn child with actual rights. If said unborn child has no rights, I can think of no justification for government to ban such an abortion - and as such the argument could be made that property rights would instead apply.
km1125
Posts: 3789
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2019 3:09 pm

Re: Why I disagree with returning the abortion question to the states

Unread post by km1125 »

But yet many states have recognized some rights of an unborn child, as they've enacted some type of "feticide" laws. Seems to be quite a conflict there, especially when they make exclusions for "legal abortion". You're either recognizing that there's a body/person that needs protection, but then allowing that body/person to be killed without extenuating circumstances (life of mother, etc).
User avatar
Bryce
Posts: 7178
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 12:04 pm

Re: Why I disagree with returning the abortion question to the states

Unread post by Bryce »

km1125 wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 10:50 am But yet many states have recognized some rights of an unborn child, as they've enacted some type of "feticide" laws. Seems to be quite a conflict there, especially when they make exclusions for "legal abortion". You're either recognizing that there's a body/person that needs protection, but then allowing that body/person to be killed without extenuating circumstances (life of mother, etc).
Even in one of the most wide open abortion at almost any time states, California, if you kill a pregnant woman you get charged with two counts of murder. How in the world they square that is beyond me.
New York and Chicago were all in with respect to their sanctuary status — until they were hit with the challenge of actually providing sanctuary. In other words, typical liberal hypocrisy.
georgetownt
Posts: 80
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2020 11:18 am

Re: Why I disagree with returning the abortion question to the states

Unread post by georgetownt »

Doesn't the miracle of birth, 2 cells coming together to create an intelligent life even matter? The right to be able to live outside its mother's womb should be enough of a right.
km1125
Posts: 3789
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2019 3:09 pm

Re: Why I disagree with returning the abortion question to the states

Unread post by km1125 »

georgetownt wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 2:21 pm Doesn't the miracle of birth, 2 cells coming together to create an intelligent life even matter? The right to be able to live outside its mother's womb should be enough of a right.
Not to some folks. There are a contingent of folks out there who are signed up to a religion that believes there is no life until birth. Those religious zealots believe - contrary to all known SCIENCE - that those two cells coming together aren't really doing anything except creating a burden on the host (mother), and have no rights until (and sometimes after) they are popped out of the womb.
bmw
Posts: 7749
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 1:02 am

Re: Why I disagree with returning the abortion question to the states

Unread post by bmw »

I never started this thread as a place to continue to debate WHEN life starts, but rather as a debate over who should make that decision. Is that call to be made by each state separately, the federal government, or the Supreme Court? The concept of personhood, or more specifically Constitutional personhood, is one that has been dealt with many times by the Court itself. I fail to see why unborn children are any different. By the Court's reasoning in this recent ruling, any question about who should and should not receive rights under the Constituion should be deferred to the states.

Also, do Conservatives here agree that the ONLY justification for banning abortion would be the rights of the unborn? If there are other justifications, I'd love to hear them.
km1125
Posts: 3789
Joined: Thu Mar 14, 2019 3:09 pm

Re: Why I disagree with returning the abortion question to the states

Unread post by km1125 »

I think you have to answer the question first "is it a possible life before birth" before you can even start talking about granting rights and what/when the correct timing of implementing those rights should be.

We've recognized dogs and cats and other animals as living beings and have instituted penalties for improper termination of those lives, and they're not granted 'personhood' either.
Deleted User 15783

Re: Why I disagree with returning the abortion question to the states

Unread post by Deleted User 15783 »

bmw wrote: Tue Jun 28, 2022 5:45 pm I never started this thread as a place to continue to debate WHEN life starts, but rather as a debate over who should make that decision. Is that call to be made by each state separately, the federal government, or the Supreme Court? The concept of personhood, or more specifically Constitutional personhood, is one that has been dealt with many times by the Court itself. I fail to see why unborn children are any different. By the Court's reasoning in this recent ruling, any question about who should and should not receive rights under the Constituion should be deferred to the states ...
I myself like that it goes back to the states.

First, I don't feel The Supremes should of ruled on it 50 years ago.

Secondly, it will be decided by representatives that have to submit to the will of the people. People that it's not too hard to vote out of office.

As opposed to our elected officials in Washington who know no matter what they say, and what they do, the "machine" assures they get reelected.
User avatar
TC Talks
Posts: 12065
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 2:41 am

Re: Why I disagree with returning the abortion question to the states

Unread post by TC Talks »

I don't particularly agree that your faith should dictate how the rest of America has to live.

If you believe that human life begins earlier why do welfare laws, tax credits and all the other benefits parents receive only occur when children are actually born and become people.
For Kristian Trumpers are not serving our Lord Christ, but their own appetites. By smooth talk and flattery they deceive the minds of naive people.
-Romans 16:18

Posting Content © 2024 TC Talks Holdings LP.
bmw
Posts: 7749
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 1:02 am

Re: Why I disagree with returning the abortion question to the states

Unread post by bmw »

TC Talks wrote: Wed Jun 29, 2022 8:52 am I don't particularly agree that your faith should dictate how the rest of America has to live.

If you believe that human life begins earlier why do welfare laws, tax credits and all the other benefits parents receive only occur when children are actually born and become people.
The counter-example to that is why when you kill a pregnant woman are you charged with 2 murders? (in most states, anyways)

And btw - the question of when life begins is more of a scientific one than a religious one. Yes, I'm aware that many Christians believe that life begins at conception, but I personally am perfectly ok with banning abortion at whatever week of pregnancy science says a life begins and allowing it to be legal before that week.
User avatar
TC Talks
Posts: 12065
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 2:41 am

Re: Why I disagree with returning the abortion question to the states

Unread post by TC Talks »

Name one scientist who has argued that abortions are murder.
For Kristian Trumpers are not serving our Lord Christ, but their own appetites. By smooth talk and flattery they deceive the minds of naive people.
-Romans 16:18

Posting Content © 2024 TC Talks Holdings LP.
bmw
Posts: 7749
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 1:02 am

Re: Why I disagree with returning the abortion question to the states

Unread post by bmw »

What kind of a question is that? Since when does declaring something "murder" fall within the official job capacity of a scientist? That said, this is a simple one. If it is a human life, and you kill it intentionally, it is murder.

And btw - I always thought that Democrats believed that we as a society should protect the most vulnerable of our members. I can't think of a life more vulnerable than one trapped inside of another person's body.
Deleted User 15783

Re: Why I disagree with returning the abortion question to the states

Unread post by Deleted User 15783 »

TC Talks wrote: Wed Jun 29, 2022 8:52 am I don't particularly agree that your faith should dictate how the rest of America has to live.

If you believe that human life begins earlier why do welfare laws, tax credits and all the other benefits parents receive only occur when children are actually born and become people.
In the thread concerning the Supreme Court ruling, I have talked about both sides settling on 15 weeks.
Abortion legal up to 15 weeks. That covers rape and incest. Like I said in the other thread, at 15 weeks preemies are making it. At 15 weeks, doctors know if there is something going on.

Personally, I'm opposed to abortion period. Many folks are passionate about life begins at conception.
Others feel it's perfectly legal to end the baby's life when the head starts coming out.
But both sides have to come in the middle. People are talking about killing each other over this. Geez.

So TCT. How do you feel about my 15 weeks?
Post Reply