It’s not the job of the Courts to create laws, though.
That’s because there is no answer in terms of weeks, months, trimesters, or whatever.
Sure there is! You yourself set the far end at the mostly fictitious but highly inflammatory “On Demand 39 weeks”.
Can you support abortion being legal at 37 weeks, 30 weeks, 24 weeks, or 12 weeks? What is the absolute lowest number of weeks the “No Abortions!” limit should be set?
In my deep blue state, by my probably limited understanding of the law, abortion is allowed for any reason up to 24 weeks, and at ANY time if it affects the birthing person’s “health and well-being, including, but not limited to, physical, emotional, psychological, and familial health and age.”
(Aside: WTF is familial health?)
In any case, that’s the law in my state. Duly passed by the People’s elected representatives and signed by the Governor. Why does it have to be the law in Mississippi or Ohio, though? Cannot their representatives choose different standards?
I could have looked up the law in your state-that wasn’t what I asked. Do you support it, or would you have it changed if possible?
BTW, how often do on-demand 39 week abortions happen? Since you are so firmly against it, I have to assume that you have heard about it happening. I myself am against using babies as basketballs right after birth (how moral of me)…but since I have never heard of it actually happening I have never found a need to bring it up in a conversation about women’s rights.
No, of course I don’t support it. But I recognize that it IS the law. The only way to change it is through electing different representatives and Governors. Not through the courts.
And you would like it changed to…?
Sorry, not gonna be your dance monkey, or play gotcha.
I’ve got no problem with that, as long as those decisions aren’t heavily influenced by influences outside the state.
No prob. I believe you last set your limit at 38 weeks, so we can leave it at that.
No, you are misrepresenting my position. The number of weeks doesn’t matter. Life doesn’t work that way.
How does it work?
As I said, I’m done with your line of “argument”. I bid you adieu.
At the risk of putting words into D’Anconia’s mouth posts, lemme guess: He’s referring to those much-hyped (by Republicans) “partial-birth abortions” because, y’know, every time one happens, they make it sound like they are happening by the hundreds and thousands every day.
Nah, that can’t be it, because those usually happen for some medical reason. He specifically said on demand 39 week abortions.
I don’t think that the die-hard anti-abortion crowd generally recognize such fine distinctions.
I asked you a question, I didn’t make a statement. To be clear–there are important constitutional issues to consider now that Roe v Wade is overturned. As a matter of constitutional law (not your personal preferences or whatever), do you believe a State can now criminalize miscarriages?
What is your position? ‘This is the law in my state, so I support it?’ If that is true, then as to why someone in Mississippi have to accept a greater number of weeks than someone in your state? Because of equal protection under the Constitution. Or is ‘life’ more, or less, valuable in one state or another?
Obviously, the number of weeks does matter. Before a certain time, a fetus is not viable and cannot be considered a ‘person’. After that time, the fetus has a chance of survival outside of the womb and might be considered a ‘person’. So you see, live does work like that.
The question posed isn’t a ‘gotcha’. The question Czarcasm asked is to determine your actual position on abortion rights. If you believe ‘live begins at conception, so no abortions should be allowed after zero weeks’, then just say it. If there is a certain number of weeks before which abortions should be allowed and after which they should not be allowed, then say that. And it would be helpful if you explain your answer. To refuse to answer makes you sound disingenuous.
Do you think you made a point here, or are you at the point where you’re just spouting random talking points?
Creating tests to determine the Constitutionality of a governmental action certainly is the job of the Court.
And I couldn’t help but notice you ignored the test of my post about the basis for the right to an abortion. Unsurprising from you.
Moderating:
(Emphasis mine.)
This verges on a personal attack. Please refrain from commenting on the poster and keep your responses focused on the post. Thanks.
Not a warning.