May 3, 20223 yr Liberty in the 14th Amendment was found the right of married couples to obtain contraception. The government was found to be interfering in the privacy rights of married couples in preventing them from obtaining contraception. The Court found that the right privacy in making familial decisions is found in the right to Liberty in the 14th Amendment. Privacy helps us establish boundaries to limit who has access to our bodies, places and things, as well as our thoughts, decisions, feelings, and communications. The rules that protect privacy give us the ability to assert our rights in the face of significant power imbalances. Aristotle's take on Privacy. According to a widely accepted interpretation, one promoted unreservedly by Hannah Arendt, Aristotle depicts the private in the following ways: (1 ) as distinct and separate from the public; (2) as corresponding to the household; (3) as serving only individual and species survival; and, most notably, (4) as justifying "force and violence . . . because they are the only means to master necessity-for instance, by ruling over slaves . "On this interpretation, Aristotle reveals "tremendous contempt” for the private by depicting it as a dark, despotic, and subhuman sphere in which freedom does not exist.
May 3, 20223 yr 12 minutes ago, jsdarkstar said: Devils advocate, where does it say unborn children have any legal rights at all? cool, you have no answer so you create a new question.
May 3, 20223 yr 8 minutes ago, vikas83 said: You can read the SCOTUS decision for yourself. I have - and know you're full of it. But again, prove me wrong - go show me where Roe v Wade invokes equal protection. All ears on this one.
May 3, 20223 yr 2 hours ago, Phillyterp85 said: I disagree that they didn't have the votes to do so. This wouldn't need to be done by amendment. It could have been done through legislation. The same way EMTALA was done through legislation, the same way the national drinking age was done through legislation, etc... But then it wouldn’t be a "right.”
May 3, 20223 yr The Radical Right loves to provide the unborn with constitutional rights, but as soon as they are born, the Radical right will cut their education funding, take away their food stamps, eliminate their parents health insurance, get them fired from their jobs because they took leave, and tell them to pull themselves up by their boot straps and make their own way without any government help at all. The radical right could care less about the legal rights of the unborn, child as soon as it is born into the world.
May 3, 20223 yr 25 minutes ago, paco said: Careful. You are wandering into The government shouldn't be involved with health care territory. If you like you can get fitted for a red cap and vote to overturn obamacare Whatever happened with that anyway? The redcaps did win in 2016 afterall.
May 3, 20223 yr 4 minutes ago, Alpha_TATEr said: cool, you have no answer so you create a new question. No, the answer is the pregnant mother has legal rights and it's not the role of the Government to take them away.
May 3, 20223 yr Author 2 minutes ago, Procus said: I have - and know you're full of it. But again, prove me wrong - go show me where Roe v Wade invokes equal protection. All ears on this one. We've been over this. It's not an Equal Protection case, it's Due Process and Right to Privacy. Guess they didn't teach that at NYU.
May 3, 20223 yr 41 minutes ago, vikas83 said: Or...he can actually read the link you posted. A "Marriage Penalty" applies to a small group -- married couples with 2 high earners. Either way, the fact that taxes are different for married people is what causes the equal protection violaiton. it's also not a "penalty" because you can always file separately to avoid it. dumb argument.
May 3, 20223 yr Just now, jsdarkstar said: No, the answer is the pregnant mother has legal rights and it's not the role of the Government to take them away. Ok. At what point does the fetus gain individual rights?
May 3, 20223 yr 6 minutes ago, jsdarkstar said: The Radical Right loves to provide the unborn with constitutional rights, but as soon as they are born, the Radical right will cut their education funding, take away their food stamps, eliminate their parents health insurance, get them fired from their jobs because they took leave, and tell them to pull themselves up by their boot straps and make their own way without any government help at all. The radical right could care less about the legal rights of the unborn, child as soon as it is born into the world. im not the radical right and many many more like me as well as a good number of dems disagree with you, the radical left.
May 3, 20223 yr 2 minutes ago, EaglesRocker97 said: We've been over this. It's not an Equal Protection case, it's Due Process and Right to Privacy. Guess they didn't teach that at NYU. Wow. You figured that out all by yourself? You don't need to go to law school to read the opinion or an abstract - but apparently Vikas didn't get that memo.
May 3, 20223 yr 1 minute ago, DrPhilly said: Ok. At what point does the fetus gain individual rights? When it's born. At what point does the unborn fetus legal rights become different than the mother who is carrying it?
May 3, 20223 yr Elective abortion is not healthcare. That’s just more rhetoric from the left to brainwash people into believing that dismembering babies is a noble thing to do and that taxpayers should fund it.
May 3, 20223 yr Author 2 minutes ago, DrPhilly said: Ok. At what point does the fetus gain individual rights? The Court has never directly addressed this to my knowledge, but the ruling in Casey implies that it would be viability.
May 3, 20223 yr Just now, jsdarkstar said: When it's born. And your legal basis for that statement is? (It came from your a s s and nowhere else)
May 3, 20223 yr 18 minutes ago, jsdarkstar said: Devils advocate, where does it say unborn children have any legal rights at all? The distinction of born vs unborn isn’t made, as it was with race, gender, etc. Thus they are by default extended those rights provided by the constitution.
May 3, 20223 yr Just now, binkybink77 said: Elective abortion is not healthcare. That’s just more rhetoric from the left to brainwash people into believing that dismembering babies is a noble thing to do and that taxpayers should fund it. ding ding.
May 3, 20223 yr 9 minutes ago, Procus said: I have - and know you're full of it. But again, prove me wrong - go show me where Roe v Wade invokes equal protection. All ears on this one. I never said it did. We were talking about gay marriage, genius.
May 3, 20223 yr 1 hour ago, Procus said: I'll bite - why don't you elaborate. Again, why don't you elaborate There are numerous legal protections/benefits afforded to to married couples. Just to name a few: The ability to file taxes as a married couple The right to inherit your spouse's property upon their death The right to receive your spouse's pension, social security benefits, disability, etc... Spousal testimony privilege immigration benefits And I'm sure there's many more. Banning gay marriage denies a person equal protection under the law as it denies those legal protections/benefits to someone based on their gender/who they are married to.
May 3, 20223 yr 2 minutes ago, jsdarkstar said: When it's born. At what point does the unborn fetus legal rights become different than the mother who is carrying it? The guy who wished death on over 100 million americans has a ghoulish position on abortion. Who would have guessed?
May 3, 20223 yr 3 minutes ago, Procus said: Wow. You figured that out all by yourself? You don't need to go to law school to read the opinion or an abstract - but apparently Vikas didn't get that memo. Holy ish you're stupid. Must be nice as a lawyer to invent claims made by the other side and then argue against them. Not too effective though...
May 3, 20223 yr "banning" abortion has the same impact "gun-free" and "drug-free" zone do .. none. the logic just isn't sound .. "if we ban abortions we won't have abortions happen right!?!?" it doesn't demonstrably change the number of "babies slaughtered" . especially in the modern era where plan B is readily accessible. the status quo is probably the best any free society can do. abortion is available, but it's not easy. which is where most Americans are at. most people find the practice of abortion abhorrent. but also recognize it's a necessary evil, and stop short of forcing others to subscribe to one's own moral viewpoint. some small but loud minority of people go beyond this and have packed the supreme court with jokers out of the mainstream on this topic. and the right is likely to pay a political price for a generation if they do overturn it.
Create an account or sign in to comment