Va. Lawmaker: Disabled Kids are God's Punishment for Abortion

Status
Not open for further replies.

netrox

New Member
Do they? Do they not? Who decides? Can a woman decide a fetus doesn't have constitutional rights? Only the courts get to decide what is constitutional.

And they did decide......are they allowed to reconsider? I am pretty sure the allows the to reconsider if a case is brought before them.

They don't. The Constitution makes it clear that those who are BORN on US soil or naturalized have Constitutional rights bestowed by our Constitution. Since a fetus is not yet born, it doesn't have the rights.

Why do we need courts to get involved with women's decisions on her reproductive choices? It's not yours to decide.

Illegal immigrants are a good example.....do they have con rights?

Constitutionally, no however we cannot assume that an immigrant is illegal or not and if we just make assumptions about immigrants, we'd be in big trouble. I mean, imagine a cop telling the immigrant, "I think you're illegal therefore I'll treat you like a criminal!" only to find out that the immigrant is naturalized and have Constitutional rights... can you imagine big lawsuits? It's better to assume that he has constitutional rights rather than to be faced with legal lawsuits or have the immigrant get away if he did commit the crime based on a technicality.
 

somedeafdudefromPNW

Active Member
Sounds very much like a pro states rights argument .....

I have often said that if you let states decide then people migrate to states that fit them......especially on issues they considered important. Make sense for abortion, capital punishment,drugs and many other areas. It would also be one great sociological experiment to watch.

Yeah, but I would rather have it at a city-state level.

Dunno... the Hutterites and Amish kinda influence the miniarchist in me. I am glad that in Canada, provinces have more rights than the federal government does-- unlike what seems to be going on in the States.
 

Banjo

Expelled
Premium Member
We're like cockroaches: impossible to eradicate!

Perhaps, but there is one way to reduce the worldwide population to roughly 400 to 600 million.

How?

By getting rid of the coal factories and oil refineries.
 

TXgolfer

Dream Weaver
Premium Member
They don't. The Constitution makes it clear that those who are BORN on US soil or naturalized have Constitutional rights bestowed by our Constitution. Since a fetus is not yet born, it doesn't have the rights.

Why do we need courts to get involved with women's decisions on her reproductive choices? It's not yours to decide.



Constitutionally, no however we cannot assume that an immigrant is illegal or not and if we just make assumptions about immigrants, we'd be in big trouble. I mean, imagine a cop telling the immigrant, "I think you're illegal therefore I'll treat you like a criminal!" only to find out that the immigrant is naturalized and have Constitutional rights... can you imagine big lawsuits? It's better to assume that he has constitutional rights rather than to be faced with legal lawsuits or have the immigrant get away if he did commit the crime based on a technicality.

I am not trying to "decide". This is not a high priority issue to me.

Apparently the courts disagree with you and have found cases relevant enough to hear.

On your illegal immigrant stance.....two ?s

A) How about IDs

B) Are you saying if an II walked into an ER and said I am an II but I need help the hospital could LEGALLY deny that person help? I mean the issue of assumption is moot in this case????
 

somedeafdudefromPNW

Active Member
That's what Americans used to ask about black slaves. :(

True, but the problem with the whole fetal right is that there's no clear distant line where the rights of the mother ends and where the rights of the fetus begins.

With slavery, it's an ownership of property problem (and scientific racism after Galton brought up his dumb theory.)
 

Reba

Retired Terp
Premium Member
They don't. The Constitution makes it clear that those who are BORN on US soil or naturalized have Constitutional rights bestowed by our Constitution. Since a fetus is not yet born, it doesn't have the rights.
Not quite right.

Certain rights, such as voting and holding federal offices, have citizenship requirements. Other rights, such as relating to speedy trials and Miranda statements, cover all who are on American soil. (Note, that's why the big argument about trying foreign terrorists in American courts.)

Also, rights are not bestowed by the Constitution. The "Bill of Rights" assume rights in existence and list them with the admonishment that these existing rights shall not be abridged or hindered in any way by the government. Read especially # IX.

The Constitution is not giving those rights but protecting them from the government and providing an orderly way to maintain them.
 

Banjo

Expelled
Premium Member
but aren't those things bad for our health?

Yes... however, the irony is that they are the very reason why we have a population of 6 billion. With oil and coals, we can sustain more life on Earth. WIthout them, we wouldn't be able to sustain more than a population of 500 million...
 

Reba

Retired Terp
Premium Member
True, but the problem with the whole fetal right is that there's no clear distant line where the rights of the mother ends and where the rights of the fetus begins.
The rights of one individual stop at the point where they interfere with the rights of another.

Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes said, "The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins."

With slavery, it's an ownership of property problem (and scientific racism after Galton brought up his dumb theory.)
Isn't that the same with abortion? Women claim ownership of whatever is in the uterus? Who owns the fetus/baby?

:hmm:
 

somedeafdudefromPNW

Active Member
The rights of one individual stop at the point where they interfere with the rights of another.

Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes said, "The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins."


Isn't that the same with abortion? Women claim ownership of whatever is in the uterus? Who owns the fetus/baby?

:hmm:

Right, but when they share the same body... it's a grey area. Nice libertarian quote there by the way.

Slaves and their owners don't share the same body.
 

Banjo

Expelled
Premium Member
Is anyone here familiar with the history of Home Children? Just asking since nobody commented on that one.
 

Banjo

Expelled
Premium Member
The ones that Stephen Harper refused to apologize for because it's a British policy, not Canadian policy?

Yep, that one. It was Canadian Immigration Minister Jason Kenney who refused to apologize, not Stephen Harper.
 

TXgolfer

Dream Weaver
Premium Member
Right, but when they share the same body... it's a grey area. Nice libertarian quote there by the way.

Slaves and their owners don't share the same body.

That gray area is the reason an independent decision is needed.
 

CJB

New Member
That gray area is the reason an independent decision is needed.

:gpost: That's why the line should be drawn by the mother, who knows the number of weeks gestation, and other circumstantial information that the government simply could never keep track of.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top