Is a woman's right to choose for or against an abortion a right guaranteed by the 13th amendment of the US Constitution (the amendment that ended slavery & involuntary servitude)?
2007-08-19 16:42:21 · 19 answers · asked by NHBaritone 7 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Is denying this right due to religious preference an imposition of a religious requirement in direct contradiction to the religious freedoms guaranteed by the US Constitution?
- {♂♂} - {♂♀} - {♀♀} -
2007-08-19 16:43:27 · update #1
Well I must admit I'm VERY torn on this issue.
because I very firmly believe that it is not my right, or the right of the government, to take away or impose upon the choices of other people, for the most part.
and on one side of the arguement, saying that a woman cannot have an abortion would be almost as bad as saying that no one can have sex at all, unless they're trying to reproduce, or know that they can not. Which is of course ridiculous.
But then again, saying that a person will go to jail for murder- for knowingly *ending the life* of another human being, but then saying abortion is alright, is also contradictory.
It's a very fine line, and while I can not say for sure if I believe it's going against the 13th amendment; you obviously have a good arguement, because I can not say for sure that it is definatly NOT doing so, either.
All I can really say is that, in my opinion, it is wrong to have an abortion, definatly for me, and possibly just in general. While I feel that I have no right to define what's "right" for other people....I also feel that, there's no reason they should take a life away before it is even lived. I understand maybe not wanting or being able to have children in your life at a certain time, but there's *always* adoption at no tangible cost to the parent. And on a personal level, there are NO circumstances where I would have one, even if I knew there was a very high chance of me dying during the delivery, I wouldn't consider abortion....
but that's just my opinion
I understand the pro-choice side of the arguement as well as the pro-life one.
However those who use religious arguements are ridiculous, our government is NOT a theocracy. It has no right to dictate things like abortions, gay marraige, etc. merely on a religious outlook.
interesting question, you really made me think.
Blessed be!
2007-08-19 17:30:19 · answer #1 · answered by jess 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
@ Earl D:
If a woman doesn't have $5k to get an abortion, what makes you think she has the money to raise a kid? Your solution will turn abortion into something only the rich people get - like nose jobs & Louis Vuitton bags. It will also make poor people poorer through abortion fees or paying for a kid.
A kid that might have to grow up on welfare. It's funny how the same people against abortion are against increase assistance for the poor - and God forbid we raise taxes to help all these children of unwanted pregnancies with better WIC programs, better schools, medical care, college education, etc...
2007-08-19 17:03:06 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
making abortion illegal -puts women in slavery? WOW- sorry this is not true- EVERY LIFE HAS A RIGHT TO LIVE according to the constitution.
To the woman and others who feel that the fetus is part of the woman's body until she gives birth answer me this PLEASE-
does the woman have 2 heartbeats, 2 lungs, 4 arms ,4 legs? You get the picture. Let us call abortion what it is- murder of the most innocent!!
2007-08-19 16:58:03 · answer #3 · answered by AdoreHim 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
So it's ok to murder a baby while it's attached to its mother, but not after it has been born?
Is it ok to kill a baby while it is attached to it's mother's breast or does only attachment via the umbilical chord count?
What's the difference? Is a baby inside the mother less human than the same baby outside the mother?
The argument "A woman has the right to choose to do whatever she wants with her own body" doesn't hold up. We all believe in our right to privacy, but privacy has its limits. We all believe in choice, but choice has limits, too.
Our right to privacy and our right to choose ends where harm to another individual begins.
That's true with every law.
Every piece of legislation violates privacy and restricts choice to some degree, but the greater good outweighs the selfish interests of the indivual in such a case.
The unwilling mother is not totally without choice: She can choose not to conceive. If she gets pregnant against her choice, she can choose to carry the child to term and then keep her baby. Or she can choose to give the child up for adoption so he will be loved and cared for.
But she can't choose the quick way out of a difficult problem by taking the life of that little baby.
As to the connection between motherhood and slavery I'm afraid I can't see the link between the two? If your daughter came up to you and said, I'm tired of the involuntary servitude of taking care of Grandma and I feel like a slave to her, so I'm going to kill her", would you call a family meeting and discuss it and then leave the choice up to her or would you tell her it was murder and do your best to stop her?
Those who choose to keep their babies have a moral and legal obligation to feed, clothe, protect and educate them until they are of age - is that also legalised slavery? Shouldn't we be allowed to kill them if we no longer want them? Is it involuntary servitude to be forced by the State to either care for our child or adopt it out so someone else can care for it?
2007-08-19 17:30:41 · answer #4 · answered by jeffd_57 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Punching or kicking a pregnant woman is not considered attempted murder its when the fetus dies it is murder but for a woman to hire someone she could and say she had a miscarriage it's her decision but it would be stupid if in all her efforts her child still lived with deficiences.
2016-05-17 21:06:19 · answer #5 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
My objections to abortion have nothing to do with religious conviction (except for myself of course). The 13th amendment isn't relevant except in cases of rape and incest. All other applications of abortion have nothing to do with "involuntary servitude"...except in those limited cases above, having sex is entirely voluntary and nothing in the constution promises to protect people from the consequences of their own choices.
In my mind, abortion is decision to circumvent a natural law for the sake of convenience...to heck with the consequences. After all, if we don't have sex, we will die so we have the right to make laws that would protect us from any consequences we don't like no matter who it hurts! Our right to live the way we want to live is far more important than the right of a fetus to life! Oh, I forgot, we decided that a fetus isn't really alive until it can survive without help from the mother's body.
2007-08-19 16:57:26 · answer #6 · answered by KAL 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
I don't think that a law making abortion illegal is anymore enslaving then making a drinking age limit, what drugs you can or cannot use, how old you must be to drive a car or buy cigarettes...its another way of protecting life. Abortion isnt the answer...keeping her legs closed is, but who am I to make or break a law? I keep the laws of the land as long as they don't interfere with the laws of my King, Jesus Christ. Yes, the bible says that life starts in the womb, but I do believe that science proves it. It's the twisted opinion of mankind sadly...but everyone is a slave to someone. God or the Devil. The freedom we have, is the freedom to choose :)
2007-08-19 16:58:48 · answer #7 · answered by Lexpressive 2 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Yes. The anti-abortion organization is ruled by a bunch of men who know the best way to keep women down is by keeping them dependent on men by having children. It has nothing to do with saving children, it is about saving slavery.
2007-08-19 16:48:36 · answer #8 · answered by phil8656 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋
No it's not. The child that she carries didn't ask to be conceived. So if she didn't want to have it she shouldn't have so stupid as to get pregnant. Life begins at conseption and biology will prove that. So I believe that abortion should be illegal. Its the same as murder. Give the baby a chance. Where would you be if your mother chose that curse? And again how can people be that stupid to get pregnant if they didn't want it?
2007-08-19 16:53:14 · answer #9 · answered by raven_geisha 2 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Well, I am in favor of only allowing PAID abortion not free ones.
If a girl wants to screw around let her pay $5,000 in pennace.
No Blue Cross, either.
No FHP, either.
Let her pay for her silly ways
Let her pay for spreading her legs stupidly!
If Girls had to pay from their pockets, we'd see a big change in the scene.
Also, no free BIRTHS either. OK, I'll allow Blue Cross and FPH on that one.
But not tax payer financed ones
Capitalism all the way
PAY or fall by the wayside
PAY or get attached at the wages of HIM and HER at 25% for life.
Making babies is a serious thing.
SCREWING AROUND is just SCREWING AROUND
Why should WE have to pay for YOUR screwing around!
That's not fair.
If we let EVERYONE live off the fat of the land, who'll pay for it!
Make the GUY and GIRL PAY, of they don't, make the family pay. If they don't, STIFF THE DOCTORS.
You know under the new BANKRUPTCY rules you can't STIFF DOCTORS anymore.
It's into law now.
Doctors and Mastercard are now SCARED COWS.
STOP the taxpayer payments for MAKING BABIES and ABORTING THEM.
Make the PEOPLE who do all this pay. Make their FAMILIES responsible.
It's only fair.
Or can I get my appendix taken out on YOUR dollars!
Why is my appendix worth less than some girl's abortion or birthing!
Why!
FREE HEALTH CARE or NO FREE HEALTH CARE
It's that simple.
We either go CANADIAN or not.
2007-08-19 16:51:30 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 4⤋