Two ideas on abortion

Idea one: an abortion license giving individuals the right to have an abortion. Granted by a medical bored this might help eliminate communities concerns in some parts of the country ( USA ) over young people choosing to have abortions and being denied access.

Idea two: Have it be a strictly medical determination.

 

You like bigger government?

Don't need a license to have an abortion, it's a legal medical procedure, it's women's right....and it's a private medical issue , no need for a license anymore than you need a license to have a hernia operation..

Your second idea? What is it? Have abortions approved for medical reasons? Why?

 

Since neither of your 2 ideas is in the US Constitution anywhere, it shall be up to the state legislatures to decide what ideas they want to enact, if any.

I do not see that your 2 ideas accomplish anything at all.

 

1) this is to give women autonomy in places that are extremely restrictive regarding abortion
2)my second idea was to have the medical community be the ultimate authority regarding this matter.
the reason for this is to assign a somewhat impartial, non political third party to arbitrate.

 

Like I said there is no basis for your arbitrary notions.

People are generally granted freedom unless some Federal or State or local statute states otherwise.

In other words if I shoot you I will go to prison unless it can be shown that it is in self defense.

This is because you have certain civil rights under English Common Law which are built into the US Federal and State law codes.

A fetus has no such rights. Ergo to accord such rights is up to the states, absent the erroneous ruling of Roe V. Wade.

Roe V. Wade strips all feti (plural of fetus) of all human rights and accords all such rights to the pregnant female.

 

like LGBQ rights, this would fall under the federal governments purview, not to enforce but to remove obstruction, which is what the federal government is mostly supposed to do.

 

Do women have the same rights as other citizens?

 

LGBTQ rights have been upheld by the SCOTUS.

Feti (plural of fetus) have no such court rulings in their favor.

 

Is this a loaded question ??

 

your augment was that a fetus has no rights, correct?

 

No, the Supreme Court overrules the medical community, they said women have the right to their own bodies, The End...Doctors have no authority to decide what women do with their bodies..

 

No problem. As long as we include a "Right to Free Speech" license. Can anything you need a license for be considered a "right"?

If you will excuse me, I have to renew my "Pursuit of Happiness" license.

 

rights are given by those with power to those with less or none, a right is only what we want or what is given. If we believe that we have a right to life liberty and the pursuit of happyness as many Americans do then it follows that these things are both expected and substantive, what rights do women have if individual states have the right to legislate the choice of abortion on their own?

 

You could not be more wrong. Rights are only taken by those with power.

 

in many parts of the world you would be correct

 

I am globally correct on this one. Getting back on topic, your proposal is a failure from the start. If someone wants an abortion, they will get one with or without your license. This is known as a Nothing Burger.

 

Not necessarily. I could see this falling under civil rights legislation, through the Fourteenth Amendment (the unborn having the right to equal protection under the law).

 

""""do then it follows that these things are both expected and substantive, what rights do women have if individual states have the right to legislate the choice of abortion on their own?""""


...........they would have NO rights...... states can't take away rights Americans have, a pregnant woman shouldn't lose her rights because she moves to a different state.

ALL American citizens should have the same basic rights in ALL the UNITED States.

 

You have to be born to have equal rights under the law...

 

Not according to the Fourteenth Amendment.
The only mention to "being born" in that amendment is that it automatically gives you citizenship.

 

Welll, ok, then explain to me why it's legal to abort a fetus but not legal to kill a newborn???

 

That's a logical fallacy; "the law should be because the law is"

And no, it doesn't seem to make much sense to me.
Maybe you should explain it.

(But I should probably ask you to do so in a different thread)

 

Roe V. Wade states that the mother has all the rights.

Have you read it lately ??

 

I did NOT post "the law should be because the law is"..... I asked a question (denoted by the little squiggly thing at the end of the sentence)

"".....then explain to me why it's legal to abort a fetus but not legal to kill a newborn???""


How about YOU explain why the fetus is or should be a person with all the rights of others.....but be careful, they should also have the same RESTRICTIONS as any other person, too.....(haven't I already explained this to you ???)

 

Oooooor just privatise the whole business. If you can afford it, then you can have it and if not, well better be careful with whom you go to bed with.