Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Your rights end when they conflict with the rights of others.It doesn't matter.
the Constitution doesn't grant rights it never has it never will. Our entire system is based on the premise that rights are inherent in the person and not granted by the government.
The gov't has responsibilities and duties and is prohibited from certain acts, Rights belong only to The People.,You're both overlooking the idea (and viability) of implied rights.
Every government has inherent rights (intrinsic to being a government, the right to make laws and so on), express rights (clearly spelled out), and implied rights, which are not expressly stated but are understood as basic concepts upon which the more specific laws are based.
One of these implied rights is body autonomy, the idea that no one can take ownership and make demands on your personal self but you. It isn't spelled out in the Constitution, but it the basis for the protection against illegal seizure, the right not to self-incriminate, habeas corpus, and lots of others.
It's also the basis for, among other things, a case in Pittsburgh a few years back where a terminally ill man sued his cousin because he wouldn't donate half his liver for a transplant that would save his life. The case failed because the government could not violate the cousin's body autonomy, and the sick man died. This concept has been supported in jurisprudence at all levels for centuries, and just because it's implied rather than expressed doesn't make it any less binding.
The argument for legal abortion is based on the mother's body autonomy. Whether you agree with the conclusion or not, the basis for the argument is actually a real Constitutional thing.
Absolutely. The whole beauty of our Constitution is that our rights under it are granted to us by Our Creator, not by any person or government who could later take them away.The gov't has responsibilities and duties and is prohibited from certain acts, Rights belong only to The People.,
This goes beyond abortionYour rights end when they conflict with the rights of others.
Every successful abortion kills at least one human being. The "RIght to Abortion" was completely fabricated by an activist court.
The hypocritical right is of course inconsistent with the application of limited government dogma – seeking more government, bigger government at the expense of individual rights concerning that which they oppose.And yet, you agree the TX abortion law is constitutional.
Wrong.There is no Constitutional right to have an abortion. There is a SCOTUS decision “finding” the right. And sure. It’s right there in invisible ink penumbra clauses.
The Fourth Amendment:It isn't spelled out in the Constitution, but it the basis for the protection against illegal seizure, the right not to self-incriminate, habeas corpus, and lots of others.
It’s true. The SCOTUS made it up.There is no Constitutional right to have an abortion. There is a SCOTUS decision “finding” the right. And sure. It’s right there in invisible ink penumbra clauses.
Wrong. There is an implied right to privacy as determined by — yep — SCOTUS. I’m okay with that bit if fiction up to a point. But to then extract the right to an abortion as an adjunct of the right to choose as a corollary of a right to privacy means the SCOTUS has been legislating. It’s not in the Constitution.Wrong.
There is a Constitutional right to privacy – prohibiting government excess and overreach concerning personal, private matters; again, such as deciding whether to have a child or not.
Such decisions are not within the scope of government regulatory authority.
Determined by a significant majority, by Justices nominated by both Ds and Rs, for three different justifications, more than fifty years ago, with a ton of rulings supporting it since. Good luck getting that overturned.Wrong. There is an implied right to privacy as determined by — yep — SCOTUS. I’m okay with that bit if fiction up to a point. But to then extract the right to an abortion as an adjunct of the right to choose as a corollary of a right to privacy means the SCOTUS has been legislating. It’s not in the Constitution.
9th amendmentIt’s true. The SCOTUS made it up.
I am not making predictions. But bad rulings aren’t immune from reconsideration. And Roe v. Wade was a shabbily decided decision.Determined by a significant majority, by Justices nominated by both Ds and Rs, for three different justifications, more than fifty years ago, with a ton of rulings supporting it since. Good luck getting that overturned.
Also, one of those justifications was the Ninth Amendment, which says that just because a right isn't specifically enumerated in the Constitution, that doesn't mean it isn't a right "retained by the people." The Founding Fathers deliberately included a clear reference to implied, also called unenumerated, rights.
It wasn't just made up. Implied rights have always been a real thing.
Has nothing to do with it.9th amendment
If you read the roe decision you would know differentlyHas nothing to do with it.
I did. That’s why I know you’re wrong. The bases for the Roe v. Wade decision were the right to choose and the right to privacy. They were found in the penumbras. You really should do more than read the decision. You should try to understand it.If you read the roe decision you would know differently
I want you to claim the majority opinion did not name the 9th amendmentI did. That’s why I know you’re wrong. The bases for the Roe v. Wade decision were the right to choose and the right to privacy. They were found in the penumbras. You really should do more than read the decision. You should try to understand it.
While there were some references made to the Ninth Amendment, the fundamental bases of the decision were as I noted above. Privacy and choice.
I already acknowledge they did. Ty to keep up.I want you to claim the majority opinion did not name the 9th amendment
HAHAHAHA
Bidens illegal invaders give an all new definition to row vs wade.I did. That’s why I know you’re wrong. The bases for the Roe v. Wade decision were the right to choose and the right to privacy. They were found in the penumbras. You really should do more than read the decision. You should try to understand it.
While there were some references made to the Ninth Amendment, the fundamental bases of the decision were as I noted above. Privacy and choice.
