Half of the US bans abortion. Then what?

[Patine]

Well they are different. While the Supreme Court says abortion is a Constitutional right, there really isn't anything they can point to in the Constitution specifically that backs such a ruling up. However, the Constitution does specifically grant the right to gun ownership. Same with any 1st Amendment rights or any other right specifically mentioned in the Constitution.

Also, in the Roe v. Wade ruling, the Supreme Court did not rule that a woman's right to an abortion is an unlimited one. They ruled that a woman's right to an abortion must be balanced against the state's interests. Seeing as the state has an interest in both keeping birth rates up and ensuring abortions don't cause mental health issues in the women getting them, I'd say the regulations in Owen's post seem quite reasonable (except for the one that I already expressed my disagreement with) and fall well within what the Supreme Court considers reasonable restrictions on the right to an abortion.

I understand the distinction you are trying to draw, but its a distinction without a difference. Once the Supreme Court interprets a right into the Constitution, its the same as it being "specifically mentioned" in the document. Constitutional law that comes from the text isn't any more or less legitimate than Constitutional law that comes from the Supreme Court. So no, they're not different... at least not in that sense.That's true for all rights. The State has the power to regulate any right, fundamental/Constitutional or otherwise, if the State can show a compelling State interest in doing so and a law that has been narrowly tailored to serve/accomplish that compelling interest. This isn't some special rule that only applies to abortion rights, its a bedrock principle of how the Supreme Court evaluates Constitutionality. So again, they're not different in this sense either.

Well, the upholding of gun rights in the U.S. leads to a lot more deaths in the U.S. every year than the number of people in that year that wouldn't be born because of the legality of abortion.

 

[Patine]

What do you have between your ears.

Spoiler :

It is called the biggest sex organ

I don't see how that's at all relevant. That would remain the case whether or not prostitution was legal - in fact, whether or not we lived in a hard-core puritanical society whether even the slightest public immodesty or sexually provocative gesture in public or anything even viewed as close to intimate contact with something you weren't in lawful matrimony with was SEVERELY punished. That's a fact of our physiologically and psychologically as a species, not an answer to a legal question.

 

[Sommerswerd]

Well, the upholding of gun rights in the U.S. leads to a lot more deaths in the U.S. every year than the number of people in that year that wouldn't be born because of the legality of abortion.

I think that there are way more abortions per year than gun murders, or even gun related deaths.

 

[HoloDoc]

I think that there are way more abortions per year than gun murders, or even gun related deaths.

You might be right, but that is definitely not the impression we dirty foreigners have of you Murrikans. I read the other day that there hasn't been a year without a school shooting in the US since 1981. It seems like quite the lawless jungle over there.

 

[Farm Boy]

That's what you get for trusting something you learned from the internet.

 

[HoloDoc]

That's what you get for trusting something you learned from the internet.

I also learnt it was wrong in the Internet. Now I don't know what to think.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

You might be right, but that is definitely not the impression we dirty foreigners have of you Murrikans. I read the other day that there hasn't been a year without a school shooting in the US since 1981. It seems like quite the lawless jungle over there.

You aren't overestimating that, you are just underestimating abortions. We have thousands, even tens of thousands of gun deaths, but we have millions of abortions. Tens of millions.

@MaryKB has hit the nail squarely on the head. The people who "oppose abortion" do literally everything in their power to increase the need for abortions. Meanwhile, I doubt that there is anyone, anywhere, who is "for" abortions. Personally, I think that in the 21st century it is absolutely inexcusable that a 'civilized society' puts itself in a position to perform abortions at all, much less by the tens of millions.

 

[MaryKB]

Meanwhile, I doubt that there is anyone, anywhere, who is "for" abortions.

Oh but sadly you'll find quite a few, abortions are used in some places for gender control (you do see more females are aborted than males worldwide)

 

[Patine]

You aren't overestimating that, you are just underestimating abortions. We have thousands, even tens of thousands of gun deaths, but we have millions of abortions. Tens of millions.

@MaryKB has hit the nail squarely on the head. The people who "oppose abortion" do literally everything in their power to increase the need for abortions. Meanwhile, I doubt that there is anyone, anywhere, who is "for" abortions. Personally, I think that in the 21st century it is absolutely inexcusable that a 'civilized society' puts itself in a position to perform abortions at all, much less by the tens of millions.

Millions? Tens of millions? I think this kind of statistic cried out for verification. It sounds highly exaggerated. Also, what's the purported time frame all these abortions occurred within?

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Oh but sadly you'll find quite a few, abortions are used in some places for gender control (you do see more females are aborted than males worldwide)

Well pointed. My only argument is that even those people would prefer a method for controlling conception to avoid having the female fetus even conceived.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Millions? Tens of millions? I think this kind of statistic cried out for verification. It sounds highly exaggerated. Also, what's the purported time frame all these abortions occurred within?

Per year. Look it up. A search string like "abortion rate united states" should provide dozens of sources and include plenty that you will consider credible.

Tens of millions is stretching. Millions is accurate.

 

[MaryKB]

Millions? Tens of millions? I think this kind of statistic cried out for verification. It sounds highly exaggerated. Also, what's the purported time frame all these abortions occurred within?

I googled quickly, and in 2014 we had around 650,000 abortions and about 33,000 deaths from guns.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

One year older today

Happy birthday!

 

[MaryKB]

Well pointed. My only argument is that even those people would prefer a method for controlling conception to avoid having the female fetus even conceived.

I don't know .. I mean you can't control gender before conception, right? I think you've got to conceive first, then you can determine your baby's sex, then you can abort if you have a girl instead of a precious boy.

 

[Patine]

I googled quickly, and in 2014 we had around 650,000 abortions and about 33,000 deaths from guns.

Per year. Look it up. A search string like "abortion rate united states" should provide dozens of sources and include plenty that you will consider credible.
Tens of millions is stretching. Millions is accurate.

Yes, 650 000 abortions doesn't look like millions. Also, does that 33 000 include Americans killed by police or armed security, or killed by firearms serving in the U.S. military abroad, or other "activities" condoned, more or less, by the U.S. government?

 

[HoloDoc]

I don't know .. I mean you can't control gender before conception, right? I think you've got to conceive first, then you can determine your baby's sex, then you can abort if you have a girl instead of a precious boy.

I think he was thinking of something like a designer baby, Gattaca-style. Or the Bene Gesserit.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I don't know .. I mean you can't control gender before conception, right? I think you've got to conceive first, then you can determine your baby's sex, then you can abort if you have a girl instead of a precious boy.

Right, but those people would prefer such a method, were it available. So they aren't so much "for abortion" as they are making do with what's available. While certainly contemptible because of the motives, that's not really different from what most people confronting abortion would say. It is always more of a "less bad option" than something they actually favor.

 

[Patine]

I don't know .. I mean you can't control gender before conception, right? I think you've got to conceive first, then you can determine your baby's sex, then you can abort if you have a girl instead of a precious boy.

Well, there's biogenetic engineering crap, but, in a viable and practical sense, that's science fiction, even today, and most societies who get to that level of development and think nothing such ideals and mechanisms commonly in their society usually aren't backward, traditionalist, clan-oriented, retrograde societies where male children are nearly that hugely disproportionately favoured anyways.

 

[Patine]

I think he was thinking of something like a designer baby, Gattaca-style. Or the Bene Gesserit.

You were typing that right as I was typing mine.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Yes, 650 000 abortions doesn't look like millions. Also, does that 33 000 include Americans killed by police or armed security, or killed by firearms serving in the U.S. military abroad, or other "activities" condoned, more or less, by the U.S. government?

Stretching and padding might get that 33,000 up to what? Forty thousand? I could counter with illegal abortions to try to stretch 650,000 up to a million, but the point is that abortions outnumber gun deaths by an order of magnitude at the least. Gun deaths certainly seem preventable, but I don't think that anyone would refuse to admit that prevention is complicated. Abortions, on the other hand, @MaryKB pointed out a multitude of things that would reduce the rates significantly that are vehemently opposed by the people who claim to be opposing abortions.