Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

pahnzoh t1_ivunuih wrote

Reply to comment by NHGuy in Free Staters might actually have *more* legislative control now in the state House thanks to the even split? -- Brown said. “So the narrow margin had the effect of actually creating a budget that was farther to the right.” Could get interesting. by AMC4x4

You will lose different rights whether you vote R or D.

A fully R state government kept 24 week legal abortion, so that's not a rational fear really.

−3

AMC4x4 OP t1_ivuptqy wrote

Yeah, but the fears of the nationwide ban I'm sure had a ripple effect on legislature votes. It's a rational fear. For 50 years, people thought it wasn't. Now they know it is, thanks to GOP overreach nationally.

5

pahnzoh t1_ivurib3 wrote

I am not in favor of abortion bans, but abortion was definitely never a right in the constitution. The supreme court decision was right as a matter of honest interpretation, even though I disagree with the outcome.

The GOP never should have advocated for a national legislative ban, just like the Dems never should have said they would codify Roe which is clearly a 10th amendment violation.

The problem with abortion is that it's a divisive issue with no clear ethical solution because it involves weighing parental rights against termination of a potential human.

Under our system the correct approach is probably to amend the constitution. But our system is hardly workable as it is, so probably not super realistic.

But as far as the state legislature, that's irrelevant really.

6

AMC4x4 OP t1_ivuvv8s wrote

>abortion was definitely never a right in the constitution

Neither were a lot of things. Right to a fair trial, right to vote, right to a jury of peers, right to marriage, right to privacy, etc. I don't think we want to go down this road, right?

5

pahnzoh t1_ivuxah4 wrote

Well I'm not stating my normative opinion when I say that. The constitution is what it is. Some of those are in the bill of rights explicitly. Others are not.

I think the 9th amendment should have been given teeth from the begining to preserve rights that were not powers expressly delegated to the government. It is the "left wing" jurists who have always voted in favor of expanding state power to legislate in areas arguably protected by individual rights.

The problem with just making rights up out of whole cloth is that they can be taken away using the same logic.

2

wegandi t1_ivuwlwu wrote

This is one area I disagree with Anti Federalists about. The 10th amendment should have been the defacto writ of personal rights because its not specific and when you get specific you then get shit well its not expressly mentioned so that right doesnt exist. Constitution should have been only about restricting the Government (and for the most part it is), not about codifying any specific right.

Should the Government....no.

1