Fetal rights and slave rights.

Author: Greyparrot

Posts

Total: 74
Topic's author
#1
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,051
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
The 13th amendment makes it illegal to own another person. Alabama and Georgia have recently made test law for the express purpose of overturning Roe V Wade.

Do you think it is possible that the SCOTUS could use the 13th amendment to overturn Roe V Wade by declaring a fetus a legal person?

#2
TheDredPriateRoberts
TheDredPriateRoberts's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,383
3
3
6
TheDredPriateRoberts's avatar
TheDredPriateRoberts
3
3
6
-->
@Greyparrot
Do you think it is possible that the SCOTUS could use the 13th amendment to overturn Roe V Wade by declaring a fetus a legal person?
IF the is a ruling has to when a human poofs into existence then the 13th would apply as well as anti murder laws.

I'm glad these states are doing this.  This issue needs to be settled once and for all.

So imagine for a moment if you will that at some very specific time you transformed from not a human life to a human life, though no one seems to know when that is, it's quite a metamorphosis.

what other animals or things have and grown human dna and human chromosomes other than humans?

the whole premise on this issue is when is a baby a living human because I believe the law prohibits murder, which depending on the ruling could make a lot of people murders.

#3
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
-->
@Greyparrot
The fetus doesn't own the mother's body. 
Topic's author
#4
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,051
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
Neither do I, but I am imposing on your body nonetheless simply by breathing the same air as you do. That doesn't mean I lose my constitutional rights as a person, just because I caused changes to your body by breathing shared air.

Rapists are still considered a legal person even though they force a woman's body to change against her wishes.
Topic's author
#5
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,051
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
Yes because slavery also dealt with the issue of the legal personhood  of a slave. (3/5 law declared them "other persons")


I can understand also why people want to use abortion as a means of euthanasia for a sick baby, but that should be a separate issue from abortion. For example, why is it compassionate to euthanize a 24 week fetus over a 9 month old fetus just born with the exact same congenital defects? If euthanasia has merits on its own, then make euthanasia legal. Don't restrict euthanasia by allowing it only for "non-persons"
#6
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
-->
@Greyparrot
You are a living person who may or may not pass on germs to me and cause me to get sick. You have rights. The unborn do not. 
Topic's author
#7
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,051
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
I also have responsibilities as well. If the state can use force to quarantine me or vaccinate me to prevent me from getting you sick, then they can use the same force to make sure all women are vaccinated against pregnancy with birth control so that they cannot use violence against an unborn person.
#8
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
-->
@Greyparrot
Effecting a whole community and effecting one's own body are not he same thing. You keep talking about born people. The unborn are not people. 
#9
TheDredPriateRoberts
TheDredPriateRoberts's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,383
3
3
6
TheDredPriateRoberts's avatar
TheDredPriateRoberts
3
3
6
-->
@Greyparrot
I can understand also why people want to use abortion as a means of euthanasia for a sick baby, but that should be a separate issue from abortion. 
in certain respects that can fall under the already D.N.R. laws

as you said it's about person hood, we do not have the right to murder another human, even one who is in prison and has lost their rights

Fmpov that is the linchpin of the whole issue.

Human life > all your rights generally

when rights conflict life wins 99% of the time, if not more.

#10
disgusted
disgusted's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,959
2
3
3
disgusted's avatar
disgusted
2
3
3
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
Unless you violate a woman's right to bodily autonomy how do you determine the existence of a fertilized egg?
#11
TheDredPriateRoberts
TheDredPriateRoberts's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,383
3
3
6
TheDredPriateRoberts's avatar
TheDredPriateRoberts
3
3
6
-->
@disgusted
Unless you violate a woman's right to bodily autonomy how do you determine the existence of a fertilized egg?
why did the chicken cross the road?

#12
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
--> @Polytheist-Witch

So far as I know you are the only person who has responded to this thread that actually has a working uterus. As such I feel that you are the only one entitled to an opinion here.
Topic's author
#13
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,051
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@secularmerlin
So far as I know you are the only person who has responded to this thread that actually is an abortion survivor. As such I feel that you are the only one entitled to an opinion here.
#14
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Greyparrot
abortion survivor.
Either we all are or none of us are. Please decide which and get back to me.

#15
Swagnarok
Swagnarok's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 1,251
3
2
6
Swagnarok's avatar
Swagnarok
3
2
6
-->
@Greyparrot
If I'm not mistaken, the Court decided in the Slaughterhouse Cases that the 13th Amendment can only be interpreted literally, and in Griswold v. Connecticut it was found that there was a "penumbra" of rights encapsulated in certain amendments that established a right to privacy, which along with the 9th Amendment is the legal basis for abortion.
The ruling in Roe v. Wade was strengthened by the ruling in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which declared Roe to be unbreakable precedent.
So to overturn Roe would require a chain of rulings that slowly enumerated a right superseding that of privacy, and then ultimately interpreted as a right to life for fetuses.
#16
mustardness
mustardness's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,979
2
2
3
mustardness's avatar
mustardness
2
2
3
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
@Greyparrot
You are a living person who may or may not pass on germs to me and cause me to get sick. You have rights. The unborn do not.

Thank you P-Witch for rational, logical common sense. I didnt know you were capable.

Effecting a whole community and effecting one's own body are not he same thing. You keep talking about born people.
Thank you again for being a sane rational, logical common sense person.

The unborn are not people.
They are human fetus, ergo and organism of the mother untill they take their first breath of air and not an independent human person untill the umbilical chord is cut.

G-Parrot and people like insist on immoral behaviour when it come to pregnant women.  This is a sexist thing with them and  all right-lifers.

Topic's author
#17
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,051
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@secularmerlin
I am sure people were more than willing to say that only slave owners should have an opinion on whether a slave should be considered a person with rights as well, since they were the only ones with a working plantation/uterus.

#18
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Greyparrot
Well I disagree with those person's who say that. I object to slavery for largely the same reason I would object to you telling me what to do with my uteris.
Topic's author
#19
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,051
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@secularmerlin
So you won't allow women to claim a fetus as property of their body?

I'm sure there were plenty of slave owners that would have said "my plantation..my choice"

#20
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Greyparrot
The slaves do not require a plantation to survive nor are they physically attached to a slave owner. Also they can clearly state their will and could be reasonably provided autonomy. A fetus is generally unable too survive without some means of life support and are physically attached to the mother and cannot be considered autonomous humans for more than a decad after birth.
Also and possibly most important if you have never had one growing inside you have no frame of reference for what it is like.
#21
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
-->
@Greyparrot
Having an abortion is not equal to slavery. Murder if you want to argue it but not slavery. Forcing a person to carry a pregnancy is. 
#22
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
--> @Polytheist-Witch
Having an abortion is not equal to slavery. Murder if you want to argue it but not slavery. Forcing a person to carry a pregnancy is. 
Well stated.

Topic's author
#23
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,051
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
That's fine. Maybe the Congress can make it a law that women can claim a fetus as property.
#24
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
-->
@Greyparrot
Why would they want to if they are getting rid of it. 
Topic's author
#25
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,051
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
SCOTUS can't prevent Congress from making a constitutional amendment.
#26
TheDredPriateRoberts
TheDredPriateRoberts's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,383
3
3
6
TheDredPriateRoberts's avatar
TheDredPriateRoberts
3
3
6
-->
@Swagnarok
I believe what you said is correct, most don't understand it that way.  However certain rights can be, have been and are trumped by other rights, like the right to life.  If a right is in conflict with the right to life I would say the right to life is more important than any other.  So IF a baby of whatever determined gestational age is a human being then it has the basic rights of all human beings, one of which, the most important imo, is the right to life.  Without life there are no other rights.
#27
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
What right to life? 
#28
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Greyparrot
Why exactly are you so concerned with poly's uterus? It is quite simply none of our buisness what she does with it or keeps in there.
#29
TheDredPriateRoberts
TheDredPriateRoberts's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,383
3
3
6
TheDredPriateRoberts's avatar
TheDredPriateRoberts
3
3
6
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
What right to life? 

the one in the U.S. constitution
14th ammendment



#30
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
I’m reading this, and I’m thinking, “What about the fourteenth amendment?” The fourteenth amendment says that the State may not “deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws” (emphasis mine). That is a constitutionally protected right to life, not to be forfeited without due process of law. It’s right there plain as day.

The woman carrying the child is not the state.