@snapdragon
You do realize that you confirmed every one of my points as logical and your own position illogical.
All of a sudden you confirmed that the person in the womb has rights. You even acknowledged that it is the duty of the courts to protect them. And, of course, you decided that the rule of law does not apply to men in a paternity suit. Nor does body integrity.
But we are still stuck on stupid. None of it matters to the end conclusion that we must acknowledge:
Women have no right to what is described in this thread as "body integrity". Not under US law. (They have it in one state.) It is not guaranteed by the US Constitution.
The states regulate abortions. They also regulate speed limits, health rules, property ownership, the schools, taxes on sheep, weights and measures, how tall flagpoles can be and whether or not one can have fireworks to celebrate today. This is what the founders wanted and has been the basis of our laws since the beginning. The SCOTUS decision should have been thought of as "DUH. Of course they ruled that way." Even ultra liberal Ruth Bader Ginsburg acknowledged that Roe V. Wade was not about a woman's body integrity or equal rights under the law. Even she saw it as bad legislation from the bench.
The solution for abortion rights, is now and always has resided with the state legislatures. In that regard nothing changed except some quirky work around about doctor patient privacy that unleashed, you guessed it, SOME state legislatures.
When that lady yesterday, asked me to sign a petition for an equal rights amendment to the Arizona Constitution, she did more to further the rights of women in the US than all of the blather about body integrity and the potential for woman being allowed to have reasonable access to abortion than did all the whining and lecturing in this thread.
@Pants-of-dog Have you ever lived in a developed country?
Tell your mommy that you have been naughty again and are annoying the adults.
@Political Interest
I don't understand the concept that the unborn child is not a person before it is born.
No one has been able to provide any sort of adequate explanation for why it isn't.
And this is what the abortionist fanatics like to claim, that a foetus is not a person, but then why does it resemble a person?
It is an inconsistency with which they cannot deal. And it is the reason why the majority of Americans, including women, do not favor unlimited abortion rights. In many states the injuring of an unborn child in a criminal act is murder. Even in liberal California, killing a fetus in anything other than an abortion is murder.
Then we have the barbaric colonial backwater, Canada, which smugly allows a mother to murder her viable unborn child days before natural birth, which could not reconcile their beliefs and make an "killing in the act of birth" law that is beyond stupid yet carries the penalty of life in prison.
But let's pause about arrogant Canada and set the record straight. Abortion is not legal in Canada in the sense that it is a right under their constitution. Until the 80's Canada had a law on the books banning abortion. Then a court struck the law down leaving Canada with no federal law on abortion. Exactly as in the US, it is left up to the provinces. As late as 2021, the central government, penalized New Brunswick for not providing a full range of abortion practices. Many provinces have this same issue. From the left of center Global News:
"...abortion is already allowed — though often inaccessible..."
As it stands right now, abortion access in Canada is a patchwork.
While the Supreme Court of Canada struck down the federal law criminalizing abortion in 1988 as unconstitutional, no government has put in place legislation to replace it.
That means there is no law about abortion in Canada: abortion is legal at all stages of a pregnancy but it is effectively left up to the provinces to decide where people can access abortion and what services are exempt from being publicly funded through provincial health-care plans.
Hmmm. Sound familiar?
Frederique Chabot, health promotion director with Action Canada for Sexual Health and Rights, noted that while abortion is legal, many Canadians do not have access to it.
“The Canada Health Act already ensures that health-care services, including abortion, should be accessible to all people in Canada,” she said. “This is already the law in Canada when it comes to health care and can be enforced to ensure that all people can access the services that they need.
“We welcome that all parties, or the majority of parties at this point — we’re still looking at how the conversation unfolds — are moving beyond being pro-choice or not and taking a deeper dive in terms of what access or what barriers to access have looked like across the country.”
Well how about that? The much ballyhooed Canada absolute right to an abortion is more honored in the breach than in the observance it appears.
Sexual health advocates have long warned that multiple provinces fall short in meeting the requirement under the act to make sure that insured services like abortion are accessible.
Global News has also documented how dozens of Canadian women are forced to travel to other provinces or the U.S. for abortions each year out of a lack of access to the time-sensitive service at home.
Chabot noted barriers to abortion have been “persistent” in Canada for decades, particularly for those who live in rural areas or don’t have the money to travel to larger urban centres for abortion.
“We have seen problems that have been longstanding and that we need to see addressed in all of their complexities,” she said, noting lack of access to birth control remains a challenge for many.
Canadians coming to the US for abortions?
Here is a big eyeroll to all the smug Canadians who have been posting on this thread.
So you are right @Political Interest This is a dicey issue. One even that self-proclaimed, first world, bastion of women's rights can seem to get right. And they are pretty queasy about the thing. In a recent poll a vast majority (78 per cent) favour a law requiring doctors to inform patients about alternatives to abortion before performing the procedure.
So there you have it. They are not much better off than we are. The only real claim they can make is that they do not have a national law deciding the issue either way. Just some medical regulations. And that those are seriously being ignored in a lot of places.
But hey Snapdragon and Pants. If you can't get a timely abortion where you are, feel free to come to the US where it is legal and available in most places.