Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
little2add

Should a biological male transgender have a right to a abortion

Recommended Posts

little2add

In Last nights Democrat debate  a Democratic politician is suggesting here, with no prompting whatsoever from the moderator, that a trans female — a biological male who identifies as a woman — should have access to abortion under a federally funded health-care plan.

 Pardon my French but what the hell is he talking about?  

 I guess transgender surgery should also be funded by the federal government under a health care plan ?

 I looked at a copy of the constitution and I cannot find anywhere where it says a person has the right to change their gender and have an abortion at the expense of the federal government  

 It’s not found in the Bill of Rights either 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dUSt

Democrats have become so extreme on this issue. Even one of my most liberal friends admitted to me how he doesn't agree with abortion in the third trimester because at that point the baby could be given up for adoption. I quickly pointed out to him that this view would make him an outcast in today's Democratic party. Crazy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Luigi

Everything I hear Democrats saying these days is a way to buy votes, at taxpayer expense.

"Vote for me, and the government will give you what you want." That's not in the Constitution, either. It is not the government's job to give anything to anyone - we can make that the law if we want to, and we have done in a number of areas, but there seem to be no limits now.

And when the ruling class "gives" stuff to those who vote for them, they're always using taxpayers' money (government funds), whether the taxpayers approve of the giveaway or not.

Sigh...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Winchester
On 6/27/2019 at 4:32 PM, little2add said:

In Last nights Democrat debate  a Democratic politician is suggesting here, with no prompting whatsoever from the moderator, that a trans female — a biological male who identifies as a woman — should have access to abortion under a federally funded health-care plan.

 Pardon my French but what the hell is he talking about?  

 I guess transgender surgery should also be funded by the federal government under a health care plan ?

 I looked at a copy of the constitution and I cannot find anywhere where it says a person has the right to change their gender and have an abortion at the expense of the federal government  

 It’s not found in the Bill of Rights either 

The Bill of Rights wasn't written to enumerate the rights of the people, but to put emphasis on some of the rights the feds cannot abrogate. Madison explained that in Federalist 45 when he said that the rights of the people were numerous and indefinite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
little2add
43 minutes ago, Winchester said:

The Bill of Rights wasn't written to enumerate the rights of the people,

Who or What was it written  for then?

 

1 hour ago, CatherineM said:

We are beginning to do womb transplants, so this may be an issue someday. 

It maybe sooner than you think ...

Another milestone in free Healthcare, soon to be available at a free clinic near you.  

Male breastfeeding Kit Could Let Dads Nurse Their Babies 

Here’s how it works: As soon as his partner becomes pregnant, the father will start taking progestin, which is a hormone that stimulates the creation of milk-producing glands, once a day. Then, six weeks before the baby is due, he will add a dose of domperidone, which signals the body to start making breast milk. This allows him to begin breastfeeding when the baby arrives

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Winchester
11 hours ago, little2add said:

Who or What was it written  for then?

 

 

I literally answered that question in my post. You had to see it while you were copying only a portion of the sentence.

I even referred you to Federalist 45, written by the same guy who wrote the Constitution, although I go to far in saying he comments on the rights of the people there, he comments on the states.

Do you find something in the Constitution stating it's meant to enumerate the rights of the people? Every amendment referring to human rights in the US Constitution brings them up only in relation to how the federal government interacts with those rights. It doesn't sate that it's granting rights, but instead is written in such a way that those rights are presupposed. The Tenth Amendment makes clear the indefinite nature of the powers which remain with  the people and the states, going so far as to make it clear that the states lack only those powers which the Constitution explicitly denies (Article 1, Section 9 lists those).

Still the single best short resource for defending the Constitution as ratified from the novel nationalist interpretation: http://www.stephankinsella.com/2009/10/the-unique-american-federal-government/

Edited by Winchester

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
little2add
12 hours ago, Winchester said:

Do you find something in the Constitution stating it's meant to enumerate the rights of the people?

63-DC2399-08-D4-42-DD-AA67-1-EC8-E92-D5-

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Winchester
30 minutes ago, little2add said:

63-DC2399-08-D4-42-DD-AA67-1-EC8-E92-D5-

 

That's not an answer to my question, but the meme cuts off the full sentence.

"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

It's the last bit that should be used to argue that abortion cannot be legal even at the state level, not the bit your meme cited. But the ratification debates for the 14th (which some argue was not properly ratified) might wreck that argument.

I'm not making a pro-abortion argument by asking you to show me where in the US Constitution it says that it's written to enumerate human rights. If you have a contemporary document defending it, or something from the ratification debates, then that would work, too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
little2add

According to the U.S. Supreme Court the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides a "right to privacy" that protects a pregnant woman's liberty to choose whether or not to have an abortion.

Personally, i call it “BS”

Slavery had a similar argument in that colored people were not considered to be human beings 

just like human fetuses’ are not considered to be  human beings, today

Edited by little2add

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Seven77

People have the right to do whatever they beaver dam choose to do these days. Because they have free will and are completely free to misunderstand and misuse it because America. [/sarcasm] 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
little2add
On 7/4/2019 at 12:42 PM, Seven77 said:

completely free

:stubborn:

that depends on your definition of what “free” is!   

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  


It costs about $850 a year for Phatmass.com to survive–and we barely make it. If you’d like to help keep the Phorum alive, please consider a monthly gift.



×
×
  • Create New...