# Resolved: We need a constitutional amendment guaranteeing marriage/reproductive rights **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 30, 2022, 12:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-we-need-a-constitutional-amendment-guaranteeing-marriage-reproductive-rights/974014 "2022-10-30T12:24:41Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2022, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-we-need-a-constitutional-amendment-guaranteeing-marriage-reproductive-rights/974014/21 "2022-10-30T14:58:31Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > So a pregnant woman can smoke and drink and do hard drugs and that is not a form of child abuse under the law? That would be what sole sovereign would mean, however hard drugs are illegal for her to take just like any other person. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2022, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-we-need-a-constitutional-amendment-guaranteeing-marriage-reproductive-rights/974014/22 "2022-10-30T15:16:05Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > Notwithstanding the ewwwww factor, why if they are adults should close relatives not be allowed to marry from a simple contractual issue? Remember I am trying to move away from “married couples must be breeders” thinking. Politics. People who might otherwise support this proposal will oppose it because of the implied legalization of incest. ---
**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2022, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-we-need-a-constitutional-amendment-guaranteeing-marriage-reproductive-rights/974014/23 "2022-10-30T15:17:35Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > > [@kayaker](#): > > > > Do you want to limit it to two people right off the bat? > > But how to phrase it to disallow polygamous or polyandrous marriages? Why would you want to do that? You construct it in a way such that marriage cannot be used as a tool for oppression, but I find it diffcult to see why, other than based on some religious aesthetic or personal squick factor, you would feel the need to restrict polyamourous bonding. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2022, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-we-need-a-constitutional-amendment-guaranteeing-marriage-reproductive-rights/974014/24 "2022-10-30T15:32:59Z")
> [@Bootb](#): > > So after the child is born, does the mother also have the bodily autonomy to punch the child badly enough to kill it? After all – “Her body, her choice what to do with it!” > > This is one of the biggest weaknesses of the pro-abortion argument– > The fact that the alleged rights of the mother depend **solely and exclusively** on the physical location (inside the womb or outside the womb) of the child. I don’t get it; don’t _plenty_ of rights depend on, as you say, “the physical location”, or some such? ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2022, 3:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-we-need-a-constitutional-amendment-guaranteeing-marriage-reproductive-rights/974014/25 "2022-10-30T15:37:01Z")
> [@Bootb](#): > > So after the child is born, does the mother also have the bodily autonomy to punch the child badly enough to kill it? After all – “Her body, her choice what to do with it!” > > This is one of the biggest weaknesses of the pro-abortion argument– > The fact that the alleged rights of the mother depend **solely and exclusively** on the physical location (inside the womb or outside the womb) of the child. First, try to show a little respect to both sides by calling them by their chosen names; pro-choice and pro-life. Calling it the pro-abortion argument is like saying the other side is making the anti-freedom argument. Second, the issue of physical location is a pretty significant one and can’t be lightly dismissed the way you do. The bodily autonomy issue is ridiculous if you apply it to punching another person. But it’s a real issue when a fetus is inside a woman. ---
**Author:** ![FinsToTheLeft](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finstotheleft/32/2930_2.png) [@FinsToTheLeft](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinsToTheLeft)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2022, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-we-need-a-constitutional-amendment-guaranteeing-marriage-reproductive-rights/974014/26 "2022-10-30T15:38:25Z")
> [@Bootb](#): > > So after the child is born, does the mother also have the bodily autonomy to punch the child badly enough to kill it? After all – “Her body, her choice what to do with it!” > > This is one of the biggest weaknesses of the pro-abortion argument– > The fact that the alleged rights of the mother depend **solely and exclusively** on the physical location (inside the womb or outside the womb) of the child. First of all, there is no pro-abortion argument. There is an abortion rights argument, don’t poison the well. Secondly, once the baby is born it has its own bodily autonomy with the parent acting in the best interest of the child. Beating a child is wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2022, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-we-need-a-constitutional-amendment-guaranteeing-marriage-reproductive-rights/974014/27 "2022-10-30T16:03:07Z")
> [@Bootb](#): > > So after the child is born, does the mother also have the bodily autonomy to punch the child badly enough to kill it? After all – “Her body, her choice what to do with it!” This doesn’t make any sense. If it’s been born, it’s not “her body” anymore. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2022, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-we-need-a-constitutional-amendment-guaranteeing-marriage-reproductive-rights/974014/28 "2022-10-30T16:25:08Z")
> [@Bootb](#): > > This is one of the biggest weaknesses of the pro-abortion argument– > The fact that the alleged rights of the mother depend **solely and exclusively** on the physical location (inside the womb or outside the womb) of the child. “What are you doing?” “Uh, mowing the lawn.” “You’re mowing your lawn?” “Yep.” “Are you going to mow the lawn over here?” “No, that’s not my yard.” “And therefore _not_ allowed? “Right.” “So it depends on the physical location?” “Yep.” “Well, that’s a weakness of your argument!” “It — really isn’t.” ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2022, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-we-need-a-constitutional-amendment-guaranteeing-marriage-reproductive-rights/974014/29 "2022-10-30T16:26:50Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > > [@FinsToTheLeft](#): > > > > Bodily autonomy is why. > > Remember, this is not about the philosophical nature of abortion but writing an amendment regarding marriage and reproductive rights. ISTM that is part of the problem here. You need some basis upon the general from which to build the specific. On the abortion/reproduction/general sexual condict front, a “natural” right to bodily autonomy is, to us _ **today in 2022,** _ a damn no-brainer. But in reality for time immemorial it was not, it was “understood” that society could legislate on matters of personal morals and outlaw or refuse to recognize “abnormal” behaviors, and thus “originalists” will tell you it was _ **not** _ one of the unenumerated rights the framers meant in the 9th. Plus as mentioned before it then raises the issue as to whether we can legally regulate self-injurious behavior. I am reminded of the late Justice Ginsburg’s issue with _Roe_, which was that it should have rested on the constitutionally textual Equal Protection basis, rather than the then relatively recently interpreted Right to Privacy. _To this very day_, a very large segment of the population _including people “learned in the Law”_, stand by that the “Right of Privacy” is something that someone pulled out of their fundament, or at the very least, that society **should be** empowered to censure some private consenting behavior as _malum per se_, regardless of “victimless” nature, if not because of some sort of higher-power commandment, then because consent to it is intrinsecally invalid or is detrimental to social stability. ISTM marriage could be the simpler matter to handle, but there the further issue is about how our culture and society privileges the state of marriage as something that is beyond any other “mere” civil contract in not just degree but nature – face it, if it were just seen as a “mere” contract about who makes decisions for whom and who shares in property, marriage equality would not have been as hard-fought. I suppose you _could_ seek language establishing that _a right of civil marriage between competent consenting adults may not be abridged on the basis of race, color, sex, gender identity, origin, nationality, disability or economic condition, nor shall such category disparage any right, entitlement or privilege granted by marriage under the law; provided that, no person of whatever age may be compelled into marriage by any other party regardless of relation to the person_ – and leave to the state the matter of what is the age of adulthood and what are the degrees of consanguinity to exclude. > [@Miller](#): > > > [@Bootb](#): > > > > after the child is born, does the mother also have the bodily autonomy to punch the child badly enough to kill it? After all – “Her body, her choice what to do with it!” > > This doesn’t make any sense. If it’s been born, it’s not “her body” anymore Yeah, really… once you are born, you are a distinct person. And in civilized legal systems, it then becomes the parents’ legal duty to _protect_ the minor. ---
**Author:** ![flurb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/51bf81/32.png) [@flurb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flurb)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2022, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-we-need-a-constitutional-amendment-guaranteeing-marriage-reproductive-rights/974014/30 "2022-10-30T16:33:38Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Politics. People who might otherwise support this proposal will oppose it because of the implied legalization of incest. Yep, remember how the ERA was going to force women to serve in combat? ---
**Author:** ![FinsToTheLeft](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finstotheleft/32/2930_2.png) [@FinsToTheLeft](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinsToTheLeft)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2022, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-we-need-a-constitutional-amendment-guaranteeing-marriage-reproductive-rights/974014/31 "2022-10-30T16:42:43Z")
> [@JRDelirious](#): > > ISTM that is part of the problem here. You need some basis upon the general from which to build the specific. > > On the abortion/reproduction/general sexual condict front, a “natural” right to bodily autonomy is, to us _ **today in 2022,** _ a damn no-brainer. You don’t need it as a basis for an amendment, since the the amendment becomes the governing law. You are not trying to use common law or precedent, you are simply declaring the unfettered right of the gestational parent to terminate a pregnancy (possibly before some definition of viability) at their sole discretion. As long as there is no conflict with any other provision on the Constitution, you are done. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2022, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-we-need-a-constitutional-amendment-guaranteeing-marriage-reproductive-rights/974014/32 "2022-10-30T18:12:58Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > The right for two persons legally allowed to enter into contracts to marry shall not be denied or abridged. I’m confused by the wording. If it is to read “legally allowed to enter into contracts to marry” then it seems self-confirming. I would assume that you mean, that any two people who have the right to enter into a general contract, can further enter into a marriage contract/agreement/ceremony. Contrary to popular belief, minors can enter into contracts, but those contracts, in some instances are voidable on reaching the age of majority. The ten year old kid who walks down to the corner store and picks up groceries has entered into a contract. I think this proposal needs work unless you want to legalize a lot of the unseemly marriages mentioned above. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2022, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-we-need-a-constitutional-amendment-guaranteeing-marriage-reproductive-rights/974014/33 "2022-10-30T18:15:36Z")
Then how would you word it? ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2022, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-we-need-a-constitutional-amendment-guaranteeing-marriage-reproductive-rights/974014/34 "2022-10-30T18:17:04Z")
I disagree with the idea as I have said many times before but if what you are wanting to do is legalize same sex marriage then you can say that “Persons of the same sex or gender have the identical right to marry as previously enjoyed only by those of the opposite sex or gender.” That seems to work. ---
**Author:** ![What\_Exit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/what_exit/32/10652_2.png) [@What\_Exit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_Exit)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2022, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-we-need-a-constitutional-amendment-guaranteeing-marriage-reproductive-rights/974014/35 "2022-10-30T18:21:42Z")
---
**Author:** ![What\_Exit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/what_exit/32/10652_2.png) [@What\_Exit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_Exit)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2022, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-we-need-a-constitutional-amendment-guaranteeing-marriage-reproductive-rights/974014/36 "2022-10-30T18:23:55Z")
As this thread seems to have backdoored into a prohibited subject, I’m closing it for review. > [@New Rules for Great Debates and Elections – January 2020](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/new-rules-for-great-debates-and-elections-january-2020/845726/1): > > **Men’s Rights Advocacy**. This can include threads about how men are somehow disadvantaged in society, women are somehow genetically inferior or have a predisposition toward specific gender roles and other threads about the ways in which men are somehow naturally entitled to be in charge We’ll decide by tomorrow if it can be reopened or if it stays closed. @Aspenglow & @raventhief, I’ll flag this and we’ll need to discuss it. * * * * * * * * * We had our discussion and the thread will be reopened. # **Modnote** : This thread is not for arguing Men’s Rights. That does include arguing over child support and a say in the mother have procedures of any sort done. If I missed any of the Men’s rights postings, please flag it to let us know ---
**Author:** ![What\_Exit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/what_exit/32/10652_2.png) [@What\_Exit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_Exit)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2022, 12:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-we-need-a-constitutional-amendment-guaranteeing-marriage-reproductive-rights/974014/37 "2022-10-31T12:12:49Z")
---
**Author:** ![Jasmine](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jasmine/32/2964_2.png) [@Jasmine](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jasmine)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2022, 12:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-we-need-a-constitutional-amendment-guaranteeing-marriage-reproductive-rights/974014/38 "2022-10-31T12:19:32Z")
I agree, but it is never going to happen because it is so difficult to amend the Constitution. > The Constitution provides that an amendment may be proposed either by the Congress with a two-thirds majority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate or by a constitutional convention called for by two-thirds of the State legislatures. The Republicans have shown time and time again that they will always vote as a block, so the democrats would actually need to have a 2/3 majority in the House and the Senate or a 2/3 majority of the states. It just isn’t politically feasible the way things stand in this nation. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2022, 1:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-we-need-a-constitutional-amendment-guaranteeing-marriage-reproductive-rights/974014/39 "2022-10-31T13:36:47Z")
There is also the possibility of an Article V convention for passing amendments. ---
**Author:** ![Jasmine](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jasmine/32/2964_2.png) [@Jasmine](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jasmine)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2022, 1:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-we-need-a-constitutional-amendment-guaranteeing-marriage-reproductive-rights/974014/40 "2022-10-31T13:39:12Z")
Good point, but it still requires a 2/3 vote in Congress to initiate that. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-we-need-a-constitutional-amendment-guaranteeing-marriage-reproductive-rights/974014.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-we-need-a-constitutional-amendment-guaranteeing-marriage-reproductive-rights/974014.md?page=3)