Where the far left and far right overlap for fun and enlightenment

Anti-choice women who believe rights are what they were in 1789 should shut up, as they would have been told to do in 1789

Our rights are not limited by The Constitution. Hamilton (Fed 84) said a bill of rights is harmful because what is not listed is not a right. Amend IX says: “The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” 1/6

The Civil War gave us a more powerful central government because States violated rights that are universal & should not be subject to State lines. Amend XIII ended slavery & XV protects the right to vote, but many of our rights are tied to Amendment XIV of The Constitution. 2/6

Southern states forced Civil War to preserve slavery. SC (Dec 1860), GA & MS (Jan 1861), & TX (Feb 1861), issued statements that cited preservation of slavery as a clear & primary reason for secession. VA (Apr 1861) cited Federal Gov’t oppressing Southern slaveholding States. 3/6

The Civil War marked a significant change in The Constitution and how our Federal government functions. Amend XIII ended slavery; XIV protects due process & equal protection of law; XV protects the right to vote. More US citizens died in the Civil War than any other US war. 4/6

In 1789, white, male landowners (but no Jews, Muslims or usually Catholics) had basic rights to vote, enter contracts or speak. So anti-choice women who believe our rights are the same as they were in 1789 should shut up, as they would have been told to in 1789. 5/6

And abortion was legal in 1789. I’m Mark Small: pro-choice, pro environment, pro-science, pro-separation of church & State, anti-gun & GOP candidate for Indiana House District 86. I approve of this blog. Hell, I wrote it. 6/6

0 members like this

Comment

You need to be a member of Civil Discourse Now to add comments!

Join Civil Discourse Now

Comment by pogden297 on June 26, 2022 at 9:09am: By the way, not sure how you can claim to be "pro-science" if you are going to ignore the scientific facts of prenatal development. I know some on the "pro-choice" side want to believe a fetus is just a meaningless blob of cells, but that's not what medical science says.

Comment by pogden297 on June 26, 2022 at 9:06am: So, the only things that can be illegal today are the things that were illegal in 1789? You sure you want to go down that road? In your blog, you all but confirm there was no actual legal basis for the right to abortion on demand for six months (reduced to actual viability in Planned Parenthood v. Casey). The judges were just reaching a policy decision which they attempted to impose on the country through the guise of judicial interpretation. The result radicalized our politics on both sides. Ruth Bader Ginsburg was exactly right in saying the country wasn't ready to go that far when Roe was handed down. Roe was, and still is, a radical decision in that it said that 99% of abortions taking place were constitutionally protected.

Almost all western countries have decided the abortion issue, not via judicial fiat, but by democratic institutions. Legislatures wrested with the issue. Most have decided not to follow Roe's focus on viability (far too late) and to pick an earlier date in pregnancy to draw the line - usually 12-15 weeks. Canada is about the only country which allows abortion throughout the entire pregnancy. The country is very much an outlier.

I have no doubt that early on the crazies on both sides of the issue are going to dominate. After, all there has been nearly 50 years of pent-up political pressure that has to be let out. I'm also confident in that eventually the right and left are going to put away their slogans (like your use of "anti-choice" which completely ignores the indisputable medical fact that there is another human life involved in that choice) and reach reasonable compromises ono the issue. My guess is that will be allow abortion for 12-16 weeks,and banned (with exceptions) after that. That's where a majority of people are.