W:276]14th Amendment - Original Intent and Roe V Wade

Thoreau72 · Oct 23, 2019

Re: Abortion & the US Constitution

Rich2018 said:
True but abortion deals with life and death issues (quite literally) and is therefore deserving of an amendment specifically to address it.

Secondly the 9th Amendment is from the 18th century, medical science and our understanding has advanced considerably since then and the Constitution should reflect that.

Utter nonsense.

A woman in a free country is just like you--she is free to do with her body as SHE sees fit. By rights, male legislators in a supposedly civilized country should construct the law so that any woman deciding she needs an abortion should have it under only the best and most civilized conditions. She should have it under the best medical conditions possible.

The British Government doing the bidding of the US Government is ongoing torturing and killing Julian Assange for years now, and you remain silent. Indeed, likely you strongly approve.

So that makes your fake piety regarding protecting unborn children all the more hypocritical.

Roe v. Wade is the proper decision for a 'civilized' country. The Ninth Amendment tells the story.

Rich2018 · Oct 23, 2019

Re: Abortion & the US Constitution

minnie616 said:
An amendment is not needed as Roe Since determined the unborn has no rights.

In the history of the Unites States an unborn has never had any rights.

From Roe Part IX :

The writers of the 14th amendment of 1868, never envisioned the abortion debate and to try to use an unfit for purpose amendment to resolve a complex as well as important issue is at best unsatisfactory and at worst unsound.

minnie616 · Oct 23, 2019

Re: Abortion & the US Constitution

Rich2018 said:
The writers of the 14th amendment of 1868, never envisioned the abortion debate and to try to use an unfit for purpose amendment to resolve a complex as well as important issue is at best unsatisfactory and at worst unsound.

I disagree.

Roe has been revisited 10 times.

When Justice Kavanaugh was interviewed by Congress before he became Confirmed he said that Casey was precedent on precedent.

Let’s review when Casey V Planned Parenthood was decided and many conservatives were hopeful that Roe would be overturned , it was not overturned. In fact the best the Conservative justices could give their conservative base was the made up undue burden clause.

Which actually came back to bite Texas conservatives who tried to pass laws requiring all abortion doctors to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital.

Look up :Whole woman’s Health v Hellerstedt

From the following:

Because the make-up of the Court had changed and become more conservative since Roe was first decided, many people believed that the Court might use this case to overturn Roe altogether.

In a 5-4 decision the Court reaffirmed its commitment to Roe and to the basic right of a woman to have an abortion under certain circumstances. [/B]

Justice O’Connor, who authored the majority opinion, argued that stare decisis required the Court to not overturn Roe. Stare decisis is the general principal that when a point has been settled by decision, it forms a precedent which is not afterwards to be departed from.

(However, the doctrine of stare decisis is not always relied upon. From time to time, the Court overrules earlier precedent that the Justices believe had been wrongly decided.) O’Connor argued that a generation of women had come to depend on the right to an abortion. Nonetheless, certain restrictions were upheld.

As a result of the case, a woman continues to have a right to an abortion before the fetus is viable (before the fetus could live independently outside of the mother’s womb). The Court held that states cannot prohibit abortion prior to viability. However, the states can regulate abortions before viability as long as the regulation does not place an “undue burden” on the access to abortion. After fetal viability, however, states have increased power to restrict the availability of abortions.

Landmark Supreme Court Cases | The Casey Case: Roe Revisited?

Rich2018 · Oct 23, 2019

Re: Abortion & the US Constitution

minnie616 said:
...in real abortions past 21 weeks are rare.
Less than 1.3 percent of all US abortions occur past 21 weeks and 90 percent are because of catastrophic fetal defects....

So what?

In real life, murder is still fairly rare (happily) and treason trials are much rarer - yet we have a law for them
Impeachment inquiries of the president has happened only 4 times - yet we have a law for it

So what if abortions over 26 weeks are rare ?
Should they happen in a healthy pregnancy ?
Are they allowed to happen ?

If you think a mother should be able to abort a healthy pregnancy over 26 weeks, how about 36 weeks, the day before birth is due
Where should a line be drawn ?
Would a specific constitutional amendment be the best way to draw that line or a 19th century (14th) amendment in a day when medical science was in its infancy ?

Rich2018 · Oct 23, 2019

Re: Abortion & the US Constitution

minnie616 said:
I disagree.

Roe has been revisited 10 times.

When Justice Kavanaugh was interviewed by Congress before he became Confirmed he said that Casey was precedent on precedent...

So the precedent is a blank check to pregnant woman to terminate for any reason, at any stage ?

soylentgreen · Oct 23, 2019

Re: Abortion & the US Constitution

Rich2018 said:
True but abortion deals with life and death issues (quite literally) and is therefore deserving of an amendment specifically to address it.

Secondly the 9th Amendment is from the 18th century, medical science and our understanding has advanced considerably since then and the Constitution should reflect that.

Now that is an amusing suggestion. Change the word 9th to 2nd and remove the word medical and we have a good argument to regulate guns.

But what i really would like to know is how does your thinking on this work? What is it about the 9th that is so antiquated that the meaning is lost in time?

Rich2018 · Oct 23, 2019

Re: Abortion & the US Constitution

soylentgreen said:
Now that is an amusing suggestion. Change the word 9th to 2nd and remove the word medical and we have a good argument to regulate guns.

But what i really would like to know is how does your thinking on this work? What is it about the 9th that is so antiquated that the meaning is lost in time?

18th century guns were muzzle loaded, muskets. A modern weapon like an assault rifle or a rocket propelled grenade was unimaginable to the writers of the Bill of Rights, much less a tea spoon of smallpox virus.

minnie616 · Oct 23, 2019

Re: Abortion & the US Constitution

Rich2018 said:
So what?

In real life, murder is still fairly rare (happily) and treason trials are much rarer - yet we have a law for them
Impeachment inquiries of the president has happened only 4 times - yet we have a law for it

So what if abortions over 26 weeks are rare ?
Should they happen in a healthy pregnancy ?
Are they allowed to happen ?

If you think a mother should be able to abort a healthy pregnancy over 26 weeks, how about 36 weeks, the day before birth is due
Where should a line be drawn ?
Would a specific constitutional amendment be the best way to draw that line or a 19th century (14th) amendment in a day when medical science was in its infancy ?

As I told you abortions do not happen in a heathy pregnancy past 24 weeks which is the limit viability.

In 2008 Kansas was one of the few #tates and had one of the few US clinic doctors that performs abortions past 22 weeks in extreme cases .

There were 323 abortions that year.

192 were because the woman would have irreparable damage to a major bodily function if the pregnancy continued.
( examples of irreparable damage are stroke, heart attack, paralysis from the neck down, kidney damage or liver damage.)

The other 131 abortions were because the unborn was non viabilbe.
( it was dead or dying and cause a life threatening infection in the woman if not removed in a timely manner.

See pages 8 and 9 of the 2008 Kansas abortion stats PDF

http://www.kdheks.gov/phi/abortion_sum/2008itopcmbnd.pdf

minnie616 · Oct 23, 2019

Re: Abortion & the US Constitution

Rich2018 said:
So the precedent is a blank check to pregnant woman to terminate for any reason, at any stage ?

Before viability but it really is up until to 20 weeks for any reason at an abortion clinic.

There are only 4 US clinic doctors and 3 clinics that perform abortions after 20 weeks.

If the fetus is viable they only perform abortions in cases where irreparable bodily damage would occur to the woman if the pregnancy continued.

Nickyjo · Oct 23, 2019

Re: 14th Amendment - Original Intent and Roe V Wade

Integrityrespec said:
So you then would be all for prostitution, and for a person selling their own organs for money? In addition you would be for no incarceration of criminals because it denies them domain over their own body in that they are not free to move about. Going back to the required service in the military, the country could not draft young men or women to serve in the military because they would have to risk their lives possibly against their will. Again losing complete domain over their own body.

Olympian leaps of logic, tho I did oppose the draft.

Rich2018 · Oct 23, 2019

Re: Abortion & the US Constitution

minnie616 said:
As I told you abortions do not happen in a heathy pregnancy past 24 weeks which is the limit viability....

So you're going to stick your head in the sand and wait until the "horse has bolted" to decide whether or not the stable needs a metaphoric door ?

How many times would it have to happen before you raised a finger ?

Rich2018 · Oct 23, 2019

Re: Abortion & the US Constitution

minnie616 said:
Before viability but it really is up until to 20 weeks for any reason at an abortion clinic.

There are only 4 US clinic doctors and 3 clinics that perform abortions after 20 weeks.

If the fetus is viable they only perform abortions in cases where irreparable bodily damage would occur to the woman if the pregnancy continued.

When, in your opinion, should abortions be prohibited, if at all ?

After how many weeks would you draw a line ?

minnie616 · Oct 23, 2019

Re: Abortion & the US Constitution

Rich2018 said:
When, in your opinion, should abortions be prohibited, if at all ?

After how many weeks would you draw a line ?

Roe already drew the line.

States may ban abortions past viability except in cases where the woman’s life is threatened or she would would suffer irreparable damage to a major bodily function if the pregnancy continued.

Several states do not have viability limits on abortions but abortions past viability are only in the cases of irreparable damage since the risk to pregnant woman has to be greater to continue the pregnancy than to have an abortion.

Rich2018 · Oct 23, 2019

Re: Abortion & the US Constitution

minnie616 said:
Roe already drew the line....

No it didn't, it established a precedent, nothing more

...states may ban abortions past viability...

But up to what point ?

The ruling doesn't actually specify.

soylentgreen · Oct 23, 2019

Re: Abortion & the US Constitution

Rich2018 said:
When, in your opinion, should abortions be prohibited, if at all ?

After how many weeks would you draw a line ?

It does not need to be prohibited by law. Abortion should not be a legal concern but instead an ethical concern for the doctor(s) involved. They are already under an ethical code that would not allow the abortion of child that could survive out of the womb.

Your argument is close to nanny state thinking in that you want the government to make decisions that should be made by those involved, ie. the doctor and the pregnant woman.

soylentgreen · Oct 23, 2019

Re: Abortion & the US Constitution

Rich2018 said:
18th century guns were muzzle loaded, muskets. A modern weapon like an assault rifle or a rocket propelled grenade was unimaginable to the writers of the Bill of Rights, much less a tea spoon of smallpox virus.

so then , basically you are arguing that guns should be registered if not restricted then. That the 2nd is out of date and no longer reflects a good amendment.

minnie616 · Oct 23, 2019

Re: Abortion & the US Constitution

Rich2018 said:
No it didn't, it established a precedent, nothing more

But up to what point ?

The ruling doesn't actually specify.

Roe defined viability as able to survive outside the womb with medical life support if needed

Viability is usually about 23 to 24 weeks.

Each pregnancy is different and it up doctors not States to determine viability.

From the following 2013 article:

A federal appellate panel struck down Arizona’s abortion law on Tuesday, saying it was unconstitutional “under a long line of invariant Supreme Court precedents” that guarantee a woman’s right to end a pregnancy any time before a fetus is deemed viable outside her womb — generally at 24 weeks.
...

In its opinion, the panel of three judges assigned to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco wrote that a fetus’s viability “varies from pregnancy to pregnancy,” which should be determined by doctors, not legislators.

Arizona’s Ban on Abortions Struck Down in Federal Court - The New York Times

By the way clinic abortions past 20 weeks are only available in 3 states.

The cost is usually between $15,000 to $20,000 not including travel expenses.

Women do wait until after 20 weeks unless there is tragic medical reason the abortion is needed.

southwest88 · Oct 23, 2019

Rockets' red glare & all

Rich2018 said:
18th century guns were muzzle loaded, muskets. A modern weapon like an assault rifle or a rocket propelled grenade was unimaginable to the writers of the Bill of Rights, much less a tea spoon of smallpox virus.

"Mysorean rockets were an Indian military weapon, the first iron-cased rockets successfully deployed for military use. The Mysorean army, under Hyder Ali and his son Tipu Sultan, used the rockets effectively against the British East India Company during the 1780s and 1790s. Their conflicts with the company exposed the British to this technology, which was then used to advance European rocketry with the development of the Congreve rocket in 1805.[1]"

The US Constitution was ratified June 21, 1788; Effective March 4, 1789[1]. (Cites are from Wikipedia, Mysorean rockets & US Constitution, respectively.)

So there was enough overlap for the Founding Fathers, who were the leading lights of the colonies & the US, & who ran enormous correspondence networks, to have heard of the Mysorean rockets. Those rockets were, in principle, predecessors to RPGs.

Rich2018 · Oct 24, 2019

Re: Rockets' red glare & all

soylentgreen said:
It does not need to be prohibited by law. Abortion should not be a legal concern but instead an ethical concern for the doctor(s) involved. They are already under an ethical code that would not allow the abortion of child that could survive out of the womb....

I don't like hat idea, simply because given enough $$$ a wealthy family will always find a doctor willing to turn a blind eye to ethics.

Abortion needs to be written into law.

What is allowed, what is not allowed

...your argument is close to nanny state thinking in that you want the government to make decisions that should be made by those involved, ie. the doctor and the pregnant woman...

Yes. You can think of it as a "nanny state" if you want...the same way that police officers are subject to what they can and cannot do when enforcing the law.

The US Congress passes hundreds of laws per year - and you think the USA would become a nanny state with just one more ?

"Between January 2017 and its final day on 1/3/19, 115th Congress enacted 442 public laws, the most since the 110th Congress (2007-09)..."

115th Congress passed more laws than before, but of similar substance | Pew Research Center

...you are arguing that guns should be registered if not restricted then. That the 2nd is out of date and no longer reflects a good amendment.

Yes

If nothing else, that is required urgently

I would like to see all but a few guns banned

No more should we respond to a mass shooting with mere empty "thought and prayers" from an uncaring president.

Rich2018 · Oct 24, 2019

Re: Abortion & the US Constitution

minnie616 said:
Roe defined viability as able to survive outside the womb with medical life support if needed

Viability is usually about 23 to 24 weeks....

Should "viability" be the deciding factor ?

What about brain development ?

It's a complex subject. We need a modern law to govern it.

We need a new Constitutional Amendment to specifically address the issue.

Rich2018 · Oct 24, 2019

Re: Rockets' red glare & all

southwest88 said:
"Mysorean rockets were an Indian military weapon, the first iron-cased rockets successfully deployed for military use....

"...and the rockets red glare..."

Somehow I think the British would have been in a lot more trouble had the India mutineers had RPG-7's much less the BM-21

...so there was enough overlap for the Founding Fathers, who were the leading lights of the colonies & the US, & who ran enormous correspondence networks, to have heard of the Mysorean rockets. Those rockets were, in principle, predecessors to RPGs.

Not exactly a personal weapon though.

The framers were also aware of muzzle loading cannons.

And definitely the writer's of the second amendment would have been astonished had they seen an MGL

Milkor MGL - Wikipedia

Now if you can take a step back into the real world, we can discuss how an 18th century law has no relevance in the 21st century and is just a fatal relic of the long distant past.

danielpalos · Oct 24, 2019

Re: Rockets' red glare & all

We have a Second Amendment and should have no security problems in our free States.

minnie616 · Oct 24, 2019

Re: Abortion & the US Constitution

Rich2018 said:
Should "viability" be the deciding factor ?

What about brain development ?

It's a complex subject. We need a modern law to govern it.

We need a new Constitutional Amendment to specifically address the issue.

If you wish to go by brain development that would Be about 26 weeks ( 2 weeks later than viability) ....before that the brainwaves are as flat and unorganized as brain dead person.

From the following:

As leading neuroscientist Michael Gazzaniga, a member of President Bush’s Council on Bioethics, describes in his book The Ethical Brain, current neurology suggests that a fetus doesn’t possess enough neural structure to harbor consciousness until about 26 weeks, when it first seems to react to pain. Before that,the fetal neural structure is about as sophisticated as that of a sea slug and its EEG as flat and unorganized as that of someone brain-dead.

The Consciousness Meter: Sure You Want That? | WIRED

Rich2018 · Oct 24, 2019

Re: Abortion & the US Constitution

minnie616 said:
If you wish to go by brain development that would Be about 26 weeks ( 2 weeks later than viability) ....before that the brainwaves are as flat and unorganized as brain dead person...

I think brain development is a better standard but I'm no doctor.

The point is I think we need a law to say what's legal and what's not.

The proposed 6 weeks is to early a timescales and hopefully you agree the day before birth is too late (for an abortion on a healthy pregnancy).

The right solution is somewhere in between...we need that absolute line drawn.

southwest88 · Oct 24, 2019

Re: Rockets' red glare & all

Rich2018 said:
"...and the rockets red glare..."

Somehow I think the British would have been in a lot more trouble had the India mutineers had RPG-7's much less the BM-21

Not exactly a personal weapon though.

The framers were also aware of muzzle loading cannons.

And definitely the writer's of the second amendment would have been astonished had they seen an MGL

Milkor MGL - Wikipedia

Now if you can take a step back into the real world, we can discuss how an 18th century law has no relevance in the 21st century and is just a fatal relic of the long distant past.

Yah. Neither Mysorean rockets, RPGs nor cannon are personal weapons. They are all crew-served weapons (pace Rambo), because the tempo of combat requires speed of prep & execution. The Second Amendment isn't specifically about the individual weapons in any event - TMK, it's about the composition (& formation) of militias.