[Abortion][REVISED POLL] If you had the power...

[Communal concils]

They'd likely go to nearly zero if we had comprehensive sex education and free healthcare (including birth control). Too bad so many pro-lifers don't advocate for such policies; maybe then their position would be tolerable.[/quote]
I agree with you on such issues, Pro-lifers don't tend to think about prevention.

[Neutraligon]

I understand the Amendment the way it was understood by its authors

And which authors would those happen to be?

And why do they matter?

[Godular]

And which authors would those happen to be?

And why do they matter?

That too... the constitution is called a living document for a reason, after all.

[Wallenburg]

You don't have a right to your body though, so clearly it isn't mayhem to surgically remove your nonessential organs for the greater good.

"Greater good" is not a legal defense, pinko.

Lol. Pinko.

[Kernen]

You don't have a right to your body though, so clearly it isn't mayhem to surgically remove your nonessential organs for the greater good.

"Greater good" is not a legal defense, pinko.

Several crimes have the potential defense of preventing a greater, widespread harm. It can be a legal defense. Know the law!

[Vassenor]

"Greater good" is not a legal defense, pinko.

Several crimes have the potential defense of preventing a greater, widespread harm. It can be a legal defense. Know the law!

For instance, in English law Section 3(1) of the Criminal Law Act 1967 allows the use of reasonable force in the prevention of a crime.

[Kernen]

Several crimes have the potential defense of preventing a greater, widespread harm. It can be a legal defense. Know the law!

For instance, in English law Section 3(1) of the Criminal Law Act 1967 allows the use of reasonable force in the prevention of a crime.

US civil law is rife with common law defenses in that vein. I'll freely admit that US criminal law is a topic I am unfamiliar with, but I can hardly imagine those exceptions not crossing over for the same reason they did under civil law. Except its all statutory these days.

[The Greater Ohio Valley]

I give zero fucks about a youtube link as a source. If you’re gonna use a vlog post as your defense your position is sufficiently shaky as to be condemned for unsafe conditions.

To claim that such a right is make believe is to do the same to all other rights, in which case suuuuure no such rights exist objectively... but according to the US constitution it is very much extant and integral to how our society works.

That's not a source, it's just a goofy video.

Bodily sovereignty is not enumerated as a right anywhere in the U.S. Constitution.

Rights don’t necessarily need to be enumerated to exist, 9th amendment and all that jazz.

[The Parkus Empire]

That's not a source, it's just a goofy video.

Bodily sovereignty is not enumerated as a right anywhere in the U.S. Constitution.

Rights don’t necessarily need to be enumerated to exist, 9th amendment and all that jazz.

The 9th protects prior rights which were always taken for granted, such as the right to breathe. It's not about coining new ones.

[Galloism]

Rights don’t necessarily need to be enumerated to exist, 9th amendment and all that jazz.

The 9th protects prior rights which were always taken for granted, such as the right to breathe. It's not about coining new ones.

Here's the thing - you are right that right to bodily autonomy is neither an enumerated right nor one of the unenumerated rights.

The logical outcome of that is that the government can, in its capacity of governing, decide someone else's right to life is more important than your (nonexistent) right to bodily autonomy. That means the government can, in fact, strap you down and take a kidney to give to someone else who will die without it. This is also not mayhem, because official government legal acts are not mayhem, any more than a police officer slamming someone to the ground and arresting them for smoking weed is mayhem.

Your argument is actually sound. It just has really bad consequences.

[The Greater Ohio Valley]

Rights don’t necessarily need to be enumerated to exist, 9th amendment and all that jazz.

The 9th protects prior rights which were always taken for granted, such as the right to breathe. It's not about coining new ones.

Nah, it’s written in such a way where it doesn’t distinguish between prior or future rights, just rights. Bodily sovereignty isn’t even a new concept, it’s practically as old as the constitution itself, it not older. The “right to breathe” example you gave is even under the umbrella of bodily sovereignty.

[Kernen]

Rights don’t necessarily need to be enumerated to exist, 9th amendment and all that jazz.

The 9th protects prior rights which were always taken for granted, such as the right to breathe. It's not about coining new ones.

Except that isn't how even the conservative judicial theorists interpret the Constitution. The accepted wisdom is that the Founders knew that society would change over time, and that it would be necessary to re-interpret the text in light of a new perspective. You can argue that the 9th Amendment isn't designed to protect new rights, but that is exactly how it is used.

In fact, Roe v. Wade wasn't even a question of abortion rights. It was a question of privacy rights and how they apply to seeking certain procedures. The Founders considered the issue of privacy, albeit indirectly, so it isn't unreasonable to include it under 9th Amendment protections.

[Chestaan]

Those of you who are pro-choice on the basis of the right to bodily autonomy, what are your opinions on prostitution, legalisation of drugs and selling organs? Also if you believe there should be a time limit on when abortion can be carried out why do you believe this?

[Godular]

Those of you who are pro-choice on the basis of the right to bodily autonomy, what are your opinions on prostitution, legalisation of drugs and selling organs? Also if you believe there should be a time limit on when abortion can be carried out why do you believe this?

Sure (so long as they are licensed, medically safe, and follow necessary precautions), Sure (as long as those drugs do not constitute an overt danger to others), Sure (but shouldn’t be plan A), and post viability abortions are as much of a danger to the mother as allowing the pregnancy to proceed to term.

[Vassenor]

Those of you who are pro-choice on the basis of the right to bodily autonomy, what are your opinions on prostitution, legalisation of drugs and selling organs? Also if you believe there should be a time limit on when abortion can be carried out why do you believe this?

Given that effective regulation of legalised prostitution has proved to be positive for the individuals engaging in sex work...

[Chestaan]

Those of you who are pro-choice on the basis of the right to bodily autonomy, what are your opinions on prostitution, legalisation of drugs and selling organs? Also if you believe there should be a time limit on when abortion can be carried out why do you believe this?

Sure (so long as they are licensed, medically safe, and follow necessary precautions), Sure (as long as those drugs do not constitute an overt danger to others), Sure (but shouldn’t be plan A), and post viability abortions are as much of a danger to the mother as allowing the pregnancy to proceed to term.

What if the mother wants to have an abortion regardless of the health risks?

[Chestaan]

Those of you who are pro-choice on the basis of the right to bodily autonomy, what are your opinions on prostitution, legalisation of drugs and selling organs? Also if you believe there should be a time limit on when abortion can be carried out why do you believe this?

Given that effective regulation of legalised prostitution has proved to be positive for the individuals engaging in sex work...

I'm fully in favour of the legalisation of prostitution.

[Geneviev]

Those of you who are pro-choice on the basis of the right to bodily autonomy, what are your opinions on prostitution, legalisation of drugs and selling organs? Also if you believe there should be a time limit on when abortion can be carried out why do you believe this?

Given that effective regulation of legalised prostitution has proved to be positive for the individuals engaging in sex work...

Has it? I mean, if it works then sure.

[Cekoviu]

Those of you who are pro-choice on the basis of the right to bodily autonomy, what are your opinions on prostitution

Should be legal and government-subsidized.

legalisation of drugs

Legalize all the drugs.

selling organs

Legal, but one shouldn't be pressured into doing it.

Also if you believe there should be a time limit on when abortion can be carried out why do you believe this?

There can be exceptions in dire situations, but I'd say abortions should be only legal to carry out before the third trimester in most cases. Fetuses tend to have a great enough intellectual ability after that that they could plausibly pass the threshold of legal personhood.

[Chestaan]

Those of you who are pro-choice on the basis of the right to bodily autonomy, what are your opinions on prostitution

Should be legal and government-subsidized.

legalisation of drugs

Legalize all the drugs.

selling organs

Legal, but one shouldn't be pressured into doing it.

Also if you believe there should be a time limit on when abortion can be carried out why do you believe this?

There can be exceptions in dire situations, but I'd say abortions should be only legal to carry out before the third trimester in most cases. Fetuses tend to have a great enough intellectual ability after that that they could plausibly pass the threshold of legal personhood.

Why does it matter if the fetus is a person or not? Isn't the issue that it is within the woman's body and thus she has the right to abort?

[Neutraligon]

Sure (so long as they are licensed, medically safe, and follow necessary precautions), Sure (as long as those drugs do not constitute an overt danger to others), Sure (but shouldn’t be plan A), and post viability abortions are as much of a danger to the mother as allowing the pregnancy to proceed to term.

What if the mother wants to have an abortion regardless of the health risks?

Then it is up to the doctor if they are willing to take that risk. Also, abortions after viability are incredibly rare.

[Chestaan]

What if the mother wants to have an abortion regardless of the health risks?

Then it is up to the doctor if they are willing to take that risk. Also, abortions after viability are incredibly rare.

Of course, but some people who are pro-choice will be against abortions after a certain time. A position that really puzzles me to be quite honest.

[Benuty]

I chose option eight, but not out of anything such as stupid family planning measures practiced formerly in China. Instead hypothetically speaking natural reproduction as a phenomenon must cease with all of humanity being sterilized. Children will be born through other measures, and the need for abortions will be a thing of the past. As for humanity-wide sterilization viruses in the form of sterility plagues, and biochemical weapons without the nasty side effect of unnecessary death, and mutilation could work. There will be those sad that natural reproduction is over, and that the matter of choice when it comes to pregnancy will be considered redundant, but they will get over it.

[New Emeline]

I chose option eight, but not out of anything such as stupid family planning measures practiced formerly in China. Instead hypothetically speaking natural reproduction as a phenomenon must cease with all of humanity being sterilized. Children will be born through other measures, and the need for abortions will be a thing of the past. As for humanity-wide sterilization viruses in the form of sterility plagues, and biochemical weapons without the nasty side effect of unnecessary death, and mutilation could work. There will be those sad that natural reproduction is over, and that the matter of choice when it comes to pregnancy will be considered redundant, but they will get over it.

We cannot as of now make a human without some aspect of natural reproduction.

Also, why

[Neutraligon]

Then it is up to the doctor if they are willing to take that risk. Also, abortions after viability are incredibly rare.

Of course, but some people who are pro-choice will be against abortions after a certain time. A position that really puzzles me to be quite honest.

Normally because after viability the fetus is capable of living on it's own and thus there are alternate ways to ensure the bodily sovereignty of the mother and the life of the fetus. In essence after viability the two rights are not directly in conflict as the fetus can be removed without killing it.