Jump to content
An Old School Catholic Message Board

Is The Roe V Wade Law... Constitutional?


Lounge Daddy

ROE V WADE Constitutional  

20 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

KnightofChrist

Well I narfed... hit the wrong radio button! So take away one for yes, and add one for no.


Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness is outright denied by abortion.

Edited by KnightofChrist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

no option for none of the above?

a. Roe v. Wade is not a law, it is a judicial interpretation of a law, or a case
b. The constitutional underpinnings of the decision are perhaps a stretch
(the penumbras of the constitution protect a personal right of privacy)
(or was that Doe v. Bolton?)
but given my personal feelings about the role of government, highly appropriate
it's the same rationale that says
the government can't arrest me with a good reason
the government can't imprison me without a trial
the government can't convict me without a fair trial
the government can't search my property without a warrant
etc etc etc
c. As it is the direct result of the highest court's application of the Constitution to a state statute, by definition it has to be Constitutional
d. it may be in error, but it is not unconstitutional

Interesting topic for Passion Week . . . Jesus' trial before the Sanhedrin probably violated Hebrew due process . . . certainly violated modern American due process, which wasn't invented yet, but there are many aspects of the latter which, through the evolution of the common law, borrowed from the former . . . the most well known of which might be the right to confront the witness (think of the OT recounting of the trial Susanna . . . Daniel 13)(think of Caiphas' plea for just two witnesses who would agree)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I voted No.
I have reasons, but I do want to point out that 'Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness' is from the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution. Look it up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Putting aside the immorality of abortion... Roe v Wade was just lousy judicial reasoning. Even Justice Ginsburg herself considers it flawed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Farsight one

I unfortunately can't remember where it is exactly, but there is a line in the constitution that specifically protects the right to life of those yet born...lemme see if I can find it...here we go:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence[1], promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Posterity being defined as current and future offspring, sounds like abortion is pretty unconstitutional to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Anomaly' post='1225634' date='Apr 1 2007, 09:23 AM']I voted No.
I have reasons, but I do want to point out that 'Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness' is from the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution. Look it up.[/quote]Okay...
[quote][b]The United States Constitution - Amendment V[/b]
"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, [u][b]nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law[/b][/u]; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."
[url="http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.billofrights.html"]http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/co...llofrights.html[/url][/quote]The original quote the “founding fathers” of the United States weretrying to use said “life, liberty, and property” ([i]John Lock I believe wrote this[/i]) but they in the Declaration wrote “pursuit of happiness” for to stress that they were not happy under the King of England.

[b]Farsight one[/b], I like the cut of your jib... good argument...

Edited by Mr.CatholicCat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

An adamant "NO!!!" on my part.

Where is this "right to privacy" in the Constitution? And, if it exists, how does this apply to the taking of another person's life? It goes back to the notion that practicing our rights as Americans ends at the moment they infringe on the rights of another American. Abortion infringes on the right of the unborn to live. The "it's my body" argument makes me want to vomit. You're beaver dam right it's your body and you can do with it as you wish; however, your actions cannot cause the death of another person, inside or outside of your body.

I'm sorry....I get real revved up about this issue...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='kujo' post='1226004' date='Apr 1 2007, 03:25 PM']An adamant "NO!!!" on my part.

Where is this "right to privacy" in the Constitution? And, if it exists, how does this apply to the taking of another person's life? It goes back to the notion that practicing our rights as Americans ends at the moment they infringe on the rights of another American. Abortion infringes on the right of the unborn to live. The "it's my body" argument makes me want to vomit. You're beaver dam right it's your body and you can do with it as you wish; however, your actions cannot cause the death of another person, inside or outside of your body.

I'm sorry....I get real revved up about this issue...[/quote]
Wow, Kujo - I actually agree with you on something!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Roe v. Wade is indeed unconstitutional, as it directly violates the 10th Ammendment.
[quote]The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved for the States respectively, or to the people.[/quote]
Roe v. Wade ruled that the states may not make their own laws regarding abortion.

Protecting abortion is not a power delegated to the U.S. Federal Government by the Constitution, and thus it has no Constitutional right to enforce such a policy.

Roe v. Wade is judicial tyranny, plain and simple.

Edited by Socrates
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Farsight one

[quote name='kujo' post='1226004' date='Apr 1 2007, 04:25 PM']It goes back to the notion that practicing our rights as Americans ends at the moment they infringe on the rights of another American. Abortion infringes on the right of the unborn to live.[/quote]Careful with that argument. Since legally speaking, someone isn't a U.S. citizen until they are actually born, the fetus is not technically an American. However, if you widen it to all people, then you're covered and you won't have pro-choice people jumping down your throat about it. It's not just Americans with these rights, it's ALL people. If you kill a japanese tourist, it's still murder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='journeyman' post='1225609' date='Apr 1 2007, 07:02 AM']b. The constitutional underpinnings of the decision are perhaps a stretch
(the penumbras of the constitution protect a personal right of privacy)
(or was that Doe v. Bolton?)
but given my personal feelings about the role of government, highly appropriate
it's the same rationale that says
the government can't arrest me with a good reason
the government can't imprison me without a trial
the government can't convict me without a fair trial
the government can't search my property without a warrant
etc etc etc[/quote]
How do any of those things indicate a right to murder another innocent human being? That is illogical madness.

[quote]c. As it is the direct result of the highest court's application of the Constitution to a state statute, by definition it has to be Constitutional
d. it may be in error, but it is not unconstitutional[/quote]
So whatever the Supreme Court claims is by definition constitutional?
Then there can be no bad rulings. That is nonsense, and justifies judicial tyranny.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd be interested to know how many people have actually read Roe v. Wade ... maybe I will start my own poll ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Terra Firma' post='1226593' date='Apr 1 2007, 09:13 PM']I'd be interested to know how many people have actually read Roe v. Wade ... maybe I will start my own poll ...[/quote]
Read it. And it's an unconstitutional ruling for the reasons I stated above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...