| Author |
Topic:
States' Rights, Constitution Amendments, and Question Begging.
|
JMJacenSolo
Registered:
May '06
|
Date Posted:
10/11/07 7:10pm
Subject:
States' Rights, Constitution Amendments, and Question Begging.
|
|
A lot of times we hear politicians say they are pro-choice but are pro-States' Rights so they would oppose federal law outlawing abortion. But what then can be said if a constitutional amendment is proposed to outlaw abortion? The 10th Amendment only provides for States' Rights when not enumerated by the Federal Constitution, but if whether or not the Constitution should enumerate(or disparage) a certain right is the very issue under question, then isn't that stance only question-begging? In that case, is States' Rights really a tenable position to take? Someone please tell me I'm completely missing something, because I've been thinking myself in circles over this.
-----signature-----
"What good would it do me to switch tests with the guy who got the lowest score in the quarry?"
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Master_SweetPea
Registered:
Nov '02
|
Date Posted:
10/14/07 6:16pm
Subject:
RE: States' Rights, Constitution Amendments, and Question Begging.
|
congrats, you now see what every politician sees.
-----signature-----
I don't like the donkeys and I don't like the Elephants http://www.lp.org "Some people never have anything except ideas Go Do it! Lucky Numbers 3, 11, 21, 31, 41, 43"
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
DarthLowBudget
Registered:
Jan '04
|
Date Posted:
10/16/07 7:19pm
Subject:
RE: States' Rights, Constitution Amendments, and Question Begging.
|
If a constitutional amendment to outlaw abortion is passed, then the stance of state's rights in the matter would become irrelevant, because the states would then have to cede to the authority of the federal government in the matter of abortion.
Since abortion is not regulated in a constitutional amendment then the state's rights position is a completely valid one to take, until an amendment is passed, after that, it would become a moot argument. Constitutional amendments have to be passed by three-fourths of state legislatures, so in theory, if an amendment is passed, the majority of the states have expressed their will to in order to make the issue a federal matter.
Hopefully that helps, I may have somewhat completely missed your point, and my thinking may not be up to the standards of this forum. Until recently I've rarely poked my head inside the senate, and I think this might actually be my first post in the forum.
-----signature-----
I may be wrong but I am NEVER in doubt.
Can I say you're raping my forum experience the next time you edit a post?
www.lost.eu/199c3
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Vaderize03
Title: Manager Emeritus
Registered:
Oct '99
|
Date Posted:
10/17/07 6:12am
Subject:
RE: States' Rights, Constitution Amendments, and Question Begging.
|
Realistically, that isn't going to happen.
A majority of americans support not overturning Roe. It isn't a huge majority, but it makes the idea of such an amendment a non-issue.
Peace,
V-03
-----signature-----
"Bring your pretty face to my axe....."
B-O-H-I-C-A !! (that was funny DM!)
"I'm what Willis was talking about"
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
WormieSaber
Registered:
Oct '00
|
Date Posted:
10/19/07 1:18am
Subject:
RE: States' Rights, Constitution Amendments, and Question Begging.
- Date Edited:
10/19/07 1:19am (1 edits total)
Edited By:
WormieSaber
|
|
Considering that it took 13 years in Roe v. Wade for the abortion law to be passed, I can't imagine it ever being overturned. It's like Common Law vs. the Model Penal Code. There is no mens rea when having an abortion other than the right to pursue happiness, which I believe is under the constitution. It's interesting to note that if a man or other person kills a fetus while it is in the mother's womb (committing battery against the mother and fetus), under the law, that person is not guilty of murder. The child has to be born "alive".
-----signature-----
"Award winners don't push brooms" -- Turbo
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Vaderize03
Title: Manager Emeritus
Registered:
Oct '99
|
Date Posted:
10/19/07 3:53am
Subject:
RE: States' Rights, Constitution Amendments, and Question Begging.
|
Actually, the pursuit of happiness is in the Preamble, not the Constitution itself.
The Constitution only protects due process in that regard, and the debate over whether or not the phrase has a "substantive" component continues to rage unabated.
Under original intent, the "pursuit of happiness" meant the right to own property, including slaves. I'm not a fan of originalism, but that's a lot of what the Framers had in mind back in the late-18th century.
Peace,
V-03
-----signature-----
"Bring your pretty face to my axe....."
B-O-H-I-C-A !! (that was funny DM!)
"I'm what Willis was talking about"
|
Locked Topic |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
