Fetal heartbeat and the abortion fight - Page 20 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15012797
You are arguing something that has nothing to do with abortion and asserting some right that you are unwilling or unable to support with evidence.

I have explained myself enough. Read back and answer my questions. I will no longer play your silly game.

(This is where he usually posts something beginning....As long as we agree.....) Don't.
#15012804
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodily_integrity

    Bodily integrity

    Bodily integrity is the inviolability of the physical body and emphasizes the importance of personal autonomy and the self-determination of human beings over their own bodies. In the field of human rights, violation of the bodily integrity of another is regarded as an unethical infringement, intrusive, and possibly criminal.[1][2][3][4][5][6]

    ....

    Government and law

    ...

    United States

    The United States Constitution does not contain any specific provisions regarding the rights one has with respect to his or her physical body or the specific extent to which the state can act upon bodies.[12] However, the U.S. Supreme Court has upheld right to privacy, which, as articulated by Julie Lane, often protects rights to bodily integrity. In Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) the Court supported women's rights to obtain birth control (and thus, retain reproductive autonomy) without marital consent. Similarly, a woman's right to privacy in obtaining abortions was protected by Roe v. Wade (1973). In McFall v. Shimp (1978), a Pennsylvania court ruled that a person cannot be forced to donate bone marrow, even if such a donation would save another person's life.

    Conversely, the Supreme Court has also protected the right of governmental entities to infringe upon bodily integrity. Examples include laws prohibiting the use of drugs, laws prohibiting euthanasia, laws requiring the use of seatbelts and helmets, strip searches of prisoners, and forced blood tests.[13]

    Canada

    In general, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms defends personal liberty and the right not to be interfered with. However, in certain unique circumstances government may have the right to temporarily override the right to physical integrity in order to preserve the life of the person. Such action can be described using the principle of supported autonomy,[14] a concept that was developed to describe unique situations in mental health (examples include the forced feeding of a person dying from the eating disorder anorexia nervosa, or the temporary treatment of a person living with a psychotic disorder with antipsychotic medication).

    One unique example of a Canadian law that promotes bodily integrity is the Ontario Health Care Consent Act. This Ontario law has to do with the capacity to consent to medical treatment. The HCCA states that a person has the right to consent to or refuse treatment if they have mental capacity. In order to have capacity, a person must have the ability to understand and appreciate the consequences of the treatment decision. The law says that a person is capable with respect to a treatment, admission to a care facility or a personal assistance service if the person is able to understand and appreciate the information that is relevant to making such a decision.

    Human rights

    Two key international documents protect these rights: the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

    The Human Rights and Constitutional Rights project, funded by Columbia Law School, has defined four main areas of potential bodily integrity abuse by governments. These are: Right to Life, Slavery and Forced Labor, Security of One's Person, Torture and Inhumane, Cruel or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

    Women's rights

    Though bodily integrity is (according to the capabilities approach) afforded to every human being, women are more often affected in violations of gender-based violence. These include sexual assault, unwanted pregnancy, domestic abuse, and limited access to contraception. These principles were addressed in the CCL Working Conference on Women's Rights as Human Rights. The conference defined bodily integrity as a right deserved by all women: "bodily integrity unifies women and that no woman can say that it does not apply to them".

    As defined by the conference participants, the following are bodily integrity rights that should be guaranteed to women:

    Freedom of movement
    Security of persons
    Reproductive and sexual rights
    Women's health
    Breaking women's isolation
    Education
    Networking[15]

#15012807
Yes. I read the Wiki article. It shows that there is no right to bodily integrity. Roe V. Wade certainly affirmatively stated that a woman could be forced to carry a child to term at some point. So if you wish to discuss US law you will see that your question about body parts has no relevance to the discussion. There is no articulated right to it and our Supreme Court has already limited it to the point that it has no legal meaning.

Now tell us why your discussion about body parts is germane to this discussion.
#15012821
Yes. I read the Wiki article. It shows that there is no right to bodily integrity.


Actually, it shows that it does. Just because the right does not exist in the US constitution does not mean it does not exist.

And it is even applied in US law.

Just inconsistently and often in a sexist manner.
#15012824
Again. What is this "right to bodily integrity" with regard to US abortion law.

Also. Please present evidence that our privacy laws (which is what you are leaning on) are sexist. Not that sexism is relevant to this discussion but I am curious for you to show a US privacy law that is sexist.
#15012825
Pants-of-dog wrote:Actually, it shows that it does. Just because the right does not exist in the US constitution does not mean it does not exist.

And it is even applied in US law.

Just inconsistently and often in a sexist manner.

I am confident this will be decided in the courts. No need to worry.
#15012836
Pants-of-dog wrote:In general, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms defends personal liberty and the right not to be interfered with...

Human rights

Two key international documents protect these rights: the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.


How can you argue your point in this thread by leaning on modern human rights documents like the Canadian Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, but at the exact same time in the other thread about communism you support denying people in communist countries like Cubans their basic mobility rights, which are also guaranteed in human rights documents like Canada's Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights?

Do you support basic liberal universal human rights or not?
#15012929
Unthinking Majority wrote:How can you argue your point in this thread by leaning on modern human rights documents like the Canadian Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, but at the exact same time in the other thread about communism you support denying people in communist countries like Cubans their basic mobility rights, which are also guaranteed in human rights documents like Canada's Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights?

Do you support basic liberal universal human rights or not?


This is off topic, and even if I were a hypocrite, my arguments would still be correct.
#15013064
Pants-of-dog wrote:This is off topic, and even if I were a hypocrite, my arguments would still be correct.

Yet you have failed to explain what your argument about bodily integrity has to do with the topic at hand. Does this imply that the baby in the mother's womb has a right to bodily integrity?
#15014635
@Wellsy That's fucking insanity.

“Today, Marshae Jones is being charged with manslaughter for being pregnant and getting shot while engaging in an altercation with a person who had a gun. Tomorrow, it will be another black woman, maybe for having a drink while pregnant. And after that, another, for not obtaining adequate prenatal care,” Reyes said. Yep. They're fucking retarded in those Southern states.
#15014695
@Suntzu Good, because these pro-birth cunts don't give a fuck about any life once they are born into poverty.
#15014917
Godstud wrote:@Suntzu Good, because these pro-birth cunts don't give a fuck about any life once they are born into poverty.

Being born into poverty or wealth is not the issue. Just being born is what we care about most.
Praise the Lord.
#15014922
There's more to caring about children than simply making sure they are made. You have to take care of them after they are born, and that's when people like you show how hollow your care for children actually is, by taking away child care, and not caring about children born into poverty, or put into foster homes.

Hindsite wrote:Very Satanic of you.
Thank you.

Oh, wait. Was that meant as an insult? How very Christian of you to make a judgement on me, and an insult at the same. I am sure Jesus would have approved of you saying asshole things.
#15014927
Godstud wrote:There's more to caring about children than simply making sure they are made. You have to take care of them after they are born, and that's when people like you show how hollow your care for children actually is, by taking away child care, and not caring about children born into poverty, or put into foster homes.

That sounds like a strawman argument to me since I am for good child care.

Godstud wrote:Thank you.

You're welcome.

Godstud wrote:Oh, wait. Was that meant as an insult? How very Christian of you to make a judgement on me, and an insult at the same. I am sure Jesus would have approved of you saying asshole things.

It was meant as truth and I am sure Jesus would approve of saying the truth.
HalleluYah
#15014928
Seeing as you are not a Christian, I doubt you'd know what Jesus would have said.

Halleluyah
Praise the lord
#15014931
Godstud wrote:Seeing as you are not a Christian, I doubt you'd know what Jesus would have said.

Halleluyah
Praise the lord

This is what Jesus said:

You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it.
(John 8:44 NKJV)
  • 1
  • 18
  • 19
  • 20
  • 21
  • 22

This is a shitshow. Though America does have so[…]

Fired Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin, w[…]

Investment Strategies

Here is my investment strategy geared towards reti[…]

Trump/Twitter insanity

https://twitter.com/zlj517/status/1238111898828066[…]