Help ratify the Liberty Amendment!

[John Dibble]

I'll go for it.

Glad my state already endorses it.

[John Dibble]

Please post; I'm interested in hearing why.

Because this idea sucks. That's why.

You always have such an objective analysis on thing, how do you do it?

[John Dibble]

For a state to ban to abortion, it would violate a woman's liberty without due process.

Don't act as if abortion is a clear cut issue - it isn't, no matter what either side says, and I despise it when they do. Clearly there is a conflict of rights, and whenever rights conflict you must determine whose rights take priority. Especially in this conflict, and some others of this type, the law goes outside the logical(which it normally should stay in) and into the realm of the philisophical.

[John Dibble]

Forget whether abortion is right or wrong. Saying it's legal because of the Constitution is a joke.

There is only one way I could say that abortion would be constitutional.

Amendmen IX: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

This is about the broadest statement in the Constitution, and the most open to interpretation - it say the Bill of Rights does not list all our rights, meaning we have other rights. Now, I think the right to control one's own body would be one of these other rights, which I think you would agree with Phillip. Using the logic that one can control their own body you could say abortion is legal.

BUT, this could be interpreted another way too! As I said, it is the most open to interpretation. So, therefore, it could also be said that the unborn have the right not to be aborted!

Since, as I said earlier, this conflicts with the right to control one's own body, a determination of which right is higher has to be made. Since the Constitution does not explicitly say this one way or another, and the only way to determine this issue via the Constitution is so complex(The Constitution was meant to be a simple document), I believe it is an issue best left to the states to determine.

[John Dibble]

The 9th amendment does not 'grant' any additional rights to the people, it only states the enumeration of some rights can not be used to discredit others.

Everything a person does is controlling his or her own body. It's a nonsense argument.

Well, in the first place the Constitution doesn't 'grant' rights. I never said it did. The Bill of Rights says 'These are our rights, and the government is not allowed to violate them'. Our rights are innaliable.

And by to control one's own body, someone has to have the ability to do what they wish with their own body. So, if people have the right to control their own bodies, they should be able to legally take any drugs they like - it's their bodies, let them do as they wish with them, even wreck them.

I disagree with the idea that the 9th amendment says that those listed in the constitution are our only rights - I think it says that we have other rights, just that they are not all listed, or possibly that some are implied by the others listed.

[John Dibble]

What if I use my body to put a knife in someone's back?

I didn't say the 9th amendment says "these are our only rights." Just the opposite; it says that the Bill of Rights can't be used to discredit other rights.

1. Your using the knife on another is violating the right of the other person to control their body. You know that. Don't be silly. It's benieth you.

2. If the 9th says that the Bill of Rights can't be used to discredit other rights(which you are right, that's part of it) that implies we have other rights, does it not?

[John Dibble]

You have not shown me anywhere in the Constitution where abortion is a right.

The right recognized is free exerise of choice. Not specifically the choice to abort or not, but it isn't prohibited either. Thus as a choice it is covered.

Liberty = freedom = choice. So again, I guess I can put a knife in someone's back because of the 14th amendment?

Liberty freedom != anarchy freedom. You know that - as I said such extreme and silly examples are beneath someone of your intelligence. Don't act like an idiot.

[John Dibble]

I know, but I don't consider abortion part of liberty freedom. The point is, it's been misconstrued and stretched by the courts to mean what they want it to.

I'm not disagreeing with that. The Constitution makes no mention, or even implication, of it. And since the issue is so mired in individual philosophy, I still say it should be left to the states.

[John Dibble]

John Dibble, not everyone knows that "!=" means "not equals."

Yeah, I forgot about that. I'm a Computer Science major so I sometimes forget that not everyone knows basic code.

[John Dibble]

What kind of choice should be honored and what shouldn't? Yes, me blowing up my neighbor's house is denying him a choice to not have it blown up. But if I don't, then his freedom of choice is blocking mine.

Well, obviously so. However, we have already said that sometimes rights will conflict with eachother, and precedence must be determined. In the case of you blowing up the guy's house, things are clear - it's his property, so his right not to have his property blown up supercede your right to choose to do things. Property rights are the 'dominant' rights in this situation. You would also be doing him harm, as his shelter would have been destroyed. This is common sense - when you allow choices that cause direct harm to other people, you have anarchy, which does not result in freedom at all, quite the opposite in fact, because it results in tyranny.

Now, as abortion goes, I do not feel it is nearly so clear cut. I think there's clearly a conflict of rights, but which rights are dominant are not clear(Though I personally lean towards those of the fetus). There is much philosophical beliefs and questions within it. For instance, what constitutes a person? Is a fetus a person, or when does it become one? Is a fetus part of the mother or seperate(clearly symbiotic, but still the question is asked, and which is closer to the truth)? And there are more. Different people will have different answers, and on both sides you will find some are thoughtful and some are assinine. I think we all agree that in a perfect world nobody would feel the need or desire to have an abortion, but it isn't a perfect world so the issue will continue to be debated, probably forever as we will not have a concrete answer to most of the questions.