A Question Of Those On The Left...

Here ya go.

Phood Phreak's

 

Put on my red liberal hat for a moment:

From Roe v. Wade's decision:

The 14th Amendment:

No protection for the unborn under the 14th

The 9th Amendment:

The fact abortion is not enumerated as a right in the Constitution does not mean it is not a right of the people.

Abortion laws were quite lax during the colonial era. It was really in the latter half of the 19th century where harsh anti-abortion laws were passed by many state legislatures. The founding fathers were basically liberals in the classical sense of the word. They generally opposed government limits on individual actions; they generally opposed governments interfering with an individuals "pursuit of happiness." Yes, when the Constitution was formed it basically only applied to white men. The 14th Amendment corrected that error. Women are now entitled to engage in their own pursuit of happiness...which may not include birthing a child.

 

Another excellent post brimming with common sense.

 

That's one of the reasons I like Hugo, he doesn't fall into an "US .vs THEM" type category on his opinions.
.
.

 

Define, "born" as it Constitutionally applies here, please.

 

Well, it doesn't say conceived..

I would say born = out of the womb, into the world.

 

Oh your sadly mistaken. He' s one of us.

 

Excellent question, we know if a child is "born" of two American parents in a foreign country we still have our citizenship and enjoy the protections of the 14th so the intent is clear to mean an American, not only someone birthed or where they were birthed.


Another point to remember on roe-v-wade is here:

Court's decisions recognizing a right of privacy also acknowledge that some state regulation in areas protected by that right is appropriate. As noted above, a State may properly assert important interests in safeguarding health, in maintaining medical standards, and in protecting potential life.

Here the Court clearly supports protecting "potential life". This is recognizing the unborn child as life, and a living human in America from an American parent is what????????

An American.

 

I'm actually pretty sure that if they're born in another country, they aren't American citizens. I could be wrong, but it would require a "naturalization" process, since they weren't "born", as the requirement so clearly stated.

And since we're supposed to be looking at the constitutionality of this...

And the constitution says that unborn children have no rights...

It's pretty safe to say that abortion is legal, and should be, as from conception up until moments before birth, it's not yet born, and retains no rights as an American citizen.

However...*pulls out the Declaration* Hm..."The right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness"...well, it's a good thing the Declaration doesn't govern us, eh?

 

Appearantly Federal judges don't agree with you.

Judge says McCain is a 'natural born citizen' - MSNBC Wire Services - MSNBC.com

Show me where it says in the US Constitution that unborn children have no rights

This is all moot anyway. I never once questioned the legality of abortion. The question is what is the definition of "born" as it applies to the 14th Amendment.

 

Kinda makes me wonder what would happen if science perfected growing human life forms in a petri dish/ incubator... then what would the definition of "BORN" be.. hmm... something to think about.
.
.

 

read 'A Brave New World'
Sir Huxley

 

Define "define", please.

 

That depends on what the definition of the word, "is", is.

 

"Please"?


Please explain..