Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Logos124

Powers not enumerated for the federal government or reserved for the states belong to the people.

What part of the Constitution says the Fed govt can regulate abortion?


4 posted on 03/15/2005 6:48:13 AM PST by boofus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: boofus

Isn't murder a federal crime?


8 posted on 03/15/2005 6:50:10 AM PST by Frank_Discussion (May the wings of Liberty never lose a feather!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: boofus

What part of the Constitution says the Fed govt can regulate abortion?

No part


10 posted on 03/15/2005 6:51:31 AM PST by Leatherneck_MT (3-7-77 (No that's not a Date))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: boofus
Amendment V: "No person shall... be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law..."

Still, I would settle for making it a state issue.

13 posted on 03/15/2005 6:53:37 AM PST by The Ghost of FReepers Past (Legislatures are so outdated. If you want real politcal victory, take your issue to court.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: boofus
Scalia gives the rule I could live by: "If you think aficionados of a living Constitution want to bring you flexibility, think again," Scalia told an audience at the Woodrow Wilson Center, a Washington think tank. "You think the death penalty is a good idea? Persuade your fellow citizens to adopt it. You want a right to abortion? Persuade your fellow citizens and enact it. That's flexibility."

The fact that people differ on whether or not an unborn child is a person is at issue. (Of course some thought slaves not fully human, but still...and the court was on the WRONG side of that one. In the end, without the consent of the governed you will always reap tension and strife.) I can live with the persuasion rule. That's what our whole system of government was supposed to be based on. That way everything gets thoroughly debated and debated and debated. We vote. Debate. Vote. Debate. Etc. We can change our minds back and forth, tweak it this way and that, and in the end we have a pretty decent standard that most of the people respect. When the judges legislate it is final, and there is nothing left for the losers but anger and passion. The plantiff side has an advantage because they can keep suing. Once something is overturned -- the right to decide taken away from the people -- then it is pretty final.

22 posted on 03/15/2005 7:03:02 AM PST by The Ghost of FReepers Past (Legislatures are so outdated. If you want real politcal victory, take your issue to court.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: boofus

Supposedly the "right to privacy," which in convoluted reasoning is found in the Fourth Amendment. Blackman twisted, turned and bent that "right" until it resembled a "Krazy Straw" when he was done. That opinion in so full of descriptions of medical procedures, etc., etc., that I guess even his clerks were loathe at the time to remind the Justice that the regulation of professions such as medicine and law were the province of the individual states.

At least that is my understanding from my old Con Law professor, because I'll be honest - even after reading Roe, I was at a loss to explain where he found a U.S. Constitutional question that warranted the granting of cert in the matter.


28 posted on 03/15/2005 7:12:43 AM PST by Right Cal Gal (Armed, Female and Southern!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson