Drlee wrote:
@Pants-of-dog
And for the umteenth time. You are asserting a right to "body autonomy" that does not exist and never has.
POD = Sure it does.
In Canada, for example.
This is a thread about the USA and its Supreme Court. Please stay on topic.
@Drlee said: For example. In the first 13 weeks (give or take) the SCOTUS has said a woman has the right to choose. This has nothing to do with what you call "body autonomy". It has to do with a decision by the authorities as to when viability begins.
POD = I doubt this.
I'm sorry. Did you forget to post your proof? I posted from the decision.
POD = Even though you guys have no explicit right to body autonomy, it does influence US civil rights.
Give us some examples of "body autonomy" being articulate in US law.
Dr Lee = A man does not have the "right" to your so-called "body autonomy". He can be drafted and forced at the threat of imprisonment or even death to sacrifice his body and even his very life to the government. And yes, the US still has a draft.
POD = The last person drafted was in 1973. 48 years ago.
When the last time abortion was limited in the USA was 48 years ago, you can make this comparison. But now it just seems incorrect
.
I don't care what it "seems". The Selective Service Act is still in effect, all young men must register, and they can be called to serve. My point stands as an example of the fact that the US has no concept of "body integrity" codified into law.
Dr Lee = No person has "body autonomy" anyway. For example, one can easily survive on one kidney, and a kidney can bring as much as $200,000.00. Never the less it is against the law to sell one's kidney.
POD = But you can donate it. So, it is not body autonomy that is restricted. It is, instead, the selling and buying of human organs.
Nonsense. If one owned one's body, one could do with it as one pleases. Also. The donating of organs from a live donor is highly restricted by law. One cannot just decide to donate a kidney.
Dr Lee said = No citizen has the right to put any substance into their body that they wish. The states are articulating the right to control how your body is used in that regard also. Voluntary euthanasia is illegal in the US.
POD said = The fact that the US ignores this right consistently and frequently does not mean they do not have the right. They just apply it inconsistently.
The USA is a nation of laws. Please give me an example of where the USA enforces the concept of "body integrity" by law. And oh by the way. The short answer to your reply is "actually yes it does".
Dr Lee = And also note that I pointed out that your constitution makes no mention of it.
So add to that the fact that the SCOTUS allows the forcing of women to bring a child to term and that is the end of it. We already know that you do not agree with them. A great many people don't. That does not alter the fact that there is, at least in the US, no right to "body autonomy".
POD = No, that is incorrect.
If that were the case, vaccines could be made compulsory.
I'm sorry. Did you accidentally post this thinking it was a thread about vaccines.
But since you bring it up.
The current state of the law is this: In Jacobson v. Mass the SCOTUS upheld vaccine mandates. In the decision the court touched on your fallacious argument about "body integrity" when it said:
“The liberty secured by the Constitution of the United States does not import an absolute right in each person to be at all times, and in all circumstances, wholly freed from restraint, nor is it an element in such liberty that one person, or a minority of persons residing in any community and enjoying the benefits of its local government, should have power to dominate the majority when supported in their action by the authority of the State.”
The current SCOTUS has already dismissed two cases brought before it by employees and students complaining of vaccine mandates claiming health concerns and religious objections.
Will they change their minds and overrule Jacobson? Maybe. But as it stands, vaccine mandates in the US are consistent with US Constitutional law. Some mandates have been put on hold by lower courts. This is not unusual in our system. Sadly we have a very partisan judiciary and "judge shopping" is a very real thing here.
You should know that in my state as in many if not all others, we have mandatory vaccination codified by laws which have been upheld by the SCOTUS. If the Republican Party had not seen political advantage in killing hundreds of thousands of Americans in some absurd notion that the COVID vaccine is any different we would not be having these discussions and a great many dead Americans would be alive.