The Motley Fool Discussion Boards
Politics & Current Events / Political Asylum
|Subject: Re: Poll: When should abortion be legal/banned||Date: 7/11/2013 4:56 PM|
|Author: Hawkwin||Number: 1888488 of 2010841|
Society has already chosen. The right to choose has been the law of the land for decades. No one is forced in either direction. That is the hallmark of personal liberty. Those that champion the removal of those rights wish to force everyone to follow their beliefs.
Society can and often changes it's mind - or are you one of those people that believes in original intent and would never change the laws or the Constitution - you know, on things like guns or voting rights?
I generally consider you to be intelligent but if you are suggesting we live a society without any restrictions on personal liberty, then there really is nothing else for us to talk about. Nothing could be further form the truth. Government restricts many personal liberties and always has. We even sometimes change our minds by taking away liberties previously granted - or not explicitly prohibited.
On what basis do you think that the people directly involved, the woman carrying the fetus should not be allowed to make that decision? That the decision should be made by the government?
To state once again, because I believe that at some point, typically around high viability, the unborn has rights. Many states recognize that right in one form or another - can you admit that? I don't suggest that the mother must sacrifice her rights, only that there is a timer by which she must execute them or give up such right to the unborn (assuming healthy mom and baby).
Not sure what you mean here, but I don't think the treatment of animals is relevant to the question at hand.
Oh but it is. Society recognizes that the right of the animal or pet may by higher than your right as the owner of such. Your liberty to do what you like with it is restricted.
The Supreme Court heard many challenges to abortion rights over the years, yet continues to uphold the idea that this is not a decision for government to make in a society that values personal liberty.
I don't know every single case SCOTUS has seen on this but the above statement is not correct. SCOTUS has on at least two occasions ruled that states can place restrctions on abortions. Specifically:
O'Connor's unanimous opinionIn its ruling the Court found that the following three propositions were established:
1."States have the right to require parental involvement when a minor considers terminating her pregnancy."
2."A State may not restrict access to abortions that are 'necessary, in appropriate medical judgment for preservation of the life or health of the mother.' Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey, 505 U. S. 833, 879 (plurality opinion)."
Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote for the Court that the respondents had failed to prove that Congress lacked authority to ban this abortion procedure. Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Samuel Alito, Justice Clarence Thomas, and Justice Antonin Scalia agreed with the Court's judgment, joining Kennedy's opinion.
Care to try yet one more time?
|Copyright 1996-2015 trademark and the "Fool" logo is a trademark of The Motley Fool, Inc. Contact Us|