Your analysis seems to me to be an attempt to call action non-action and non-action action.
Even if you see a constitutional amendment upholding the rights of the unborn as something that prohibits the government from action, to truly protect the unborn does require government action, namely, positive law that makes it clear that it is a crime to kill unborn human beings.
“I just posted that a prohibition on abortion is not a matter of criminal law, but about prohibiting government from passing a law (allowing abortion) that takes away the inalienable rights of the pre-born.”
Even if, for the sake of argument, one says that the “prohibition on abortion is... about prohibiting government from passing a law (allowing abortion) that takes away the inalienable rights of the pre-born,” one can’t say that it isn’t a matter of criminal law.
Of course it’s a matter of criminal law. The rights of the unborn can’t be vindicated without recourse to criminal law.
sitetest
Which raises a different question, do people have the RIGHT to have their rights vindicated by government?
The HLA would not make law. Some suggest it would REQUIRE states to then make laws, but can any action really REQUIRE a body to pass a law?
What if we eliminate all laws that say abortion is legal, but don’t pass any laws that define criminal penalties for it? I know that won’t really stop a lot of abortions, but at least it won’t be a protected act anymore.
Obviously, if having recognized the right of the pre-born, and eliminating all laws that permitted the killing of the pre-born, we find that people are killing the pre-born, the government would naturally be expected to take action to stop the violation of rights. But they wouldn’t be REQUIRED to do so — or is the consensus that the constitution requires government to pass laws and enact punishments sufficient to stop individuals from violating the rights of other individuals?
I know the constitution ALLOWS government to pass such laws, but does it REQUIRE it?
For example, would the federal government, based on the “right” to burn a flag, be required to pass a law that punished people who stopped someone from burning a flag?