Roe vs Wade Revisited

I have read many articles and posts decrying the right of the mother to an abortion. Finally, I have gone to the trouble to articulate a solution which actually addresses the law which has established “the right of the mother to an abortion.” Here it is:
I must ask of the utility of such arguments that abortion violates the fetus’s right to life. I suppose “doing something about it” must begin somewhere, and perhaps these arguments can be preparatory to such action.
The law allowing the abortion of fetuses does not arise from the usual legislative processes. The judicial system is not intended to be a legislative body, yet, it’s interpretation of the constitutionality of any law, itself, becomes new law, as though it were legislated.
The article you post raises some very important questions. But, I must ask: is it for mere complaint, or is it intended, or can it be used, for some positive action to change the law arising out of Roe vs. Wade. Perhaps it can.
If one examines he Supreme Court case of Roe vs. Wade, the right to abortion was fashioned out of a broader constitutional right to due process. Due process basically means that one cannot lose a constitutional right except by due process of law. The Supreme Court fashioned a constitutional right arising from the right of due process: the mother’s right to privacy. The focus then was upon the mother’s rights. In the various cases that followed that case, the notion of viability of the fetus arose: at the time of the abortion, is the fetus viable? If not, the mothers right to privacy, meaning right to abortion, trumps any right of the fetus to live; if already viable, the fetus’s right to live trumps the mothers right to privacy (to an abortion). From those cases, the general principle arose that a fetus shall be considered to be viable after the 1st trimester of the pregnancy, and not viable before 3 months. That made a very simple law that could be uniformly applied, without the necessity of individual determination of the specific fetus’s viability.
How does one change the Supreme Court’s “established law?” By another court case that raises new factors never considered by the Supreme Court previously, or meriting the Supreme Court’s re-examination of the prior issue.
All of the “right to life” articles and arguments against abortion focus upon the fetus’s right to life as opposed to the mothers “right to an abortion.”. If people want to make more than a mere argument for argument’s sake concerning the fetus’s right to life, they must “create a test case” framing it as an undecided, but compelling right, deserving of the Court’s consideration. It must then marshall compelling facts showing, not the sacredness of life, but the facts relating to that sacredness which accrue to the right of the fetus to survive.
One related issue that I seldom see, actually, never see or hear argued, is the infant’s right to nurture and sustenance once born. That has easily been avoided in the past by the argument against notions of the “welfare state.” It strikes me that that issue is as compelling, perhaps more so, as any argument for the right to life.

Debate Concerning President Obama’s Call For Discourse on Gun Violence

Rob: Some musings today concerning President Obama on gun violence: he simply asks to begin the political discussion
Legitimate topics of discussion:
What about the right of the public to safety?

What are the limits on the right to bear arms?
What was “the right to bear arms” as it existed at the framing of the constitution?
The 2nd Amendment addresses that right in the context of state militias: what significance does that have?
Concerning those areas outside the veil of that right, what powers does the congress have to address the high level of gun violence we are experiencing? How can it appropriately assure the public’s right to safety?
Since the 2nd Amendment does nothing to grant a right to bear arms nor to limit the states’ powers to abridge it, what can state and municipal bodies do to address the right of the public to be safe from gun violence?
Cathy tend to focus on the “well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State” part of the 2nd amendment. In my opinion this does not refer to carrying a handgun or assault rifle through the street in the off chance that you come across a “bad guy” who isn’t a tyrant.

Janece f Recent mass killings were committed with guns obtained legally. Does that tell us that the screening process for getting weapons might not be safe and effective?

Robert E Wheeler These should be part of the dialogue.

Jim The Supremes have affirmed the peoples rights Bob, along with limited state and federal rights to regulate.
Your premise is wrong. The government has laws to protect its citizens from crimes, but the law can’t be everywhere at the same time.

Robert E Wheeler Well said. That is part of the dialogue, but shouldn’t be a trump card to end the discussion..

Anna Bon matter how many gun laws there are, the criminals and crazies always find a way to get guns

Everett The intention was clear even a century ago when they reorganized the militias into the military, state (paid) National Guard and the unorganized (volunteer) militias.
In short, all able bodied males ages 18-45, have the absolute personal right and second amendment right to keep and bear arms of any type, and as many as they can afford.

That is very clear on intent. What happens when we age out is not clear, But in an emergency, I doubt next year that they will turn me away as a sniper for the unorganized militia.

So what changed in society, besides news coverage, that the farmer or businessman who can drop everything else to defend their family, neighbors, and country is no longer acceptable?

Robert E Wheeler More musing: accepting the well articulated view of my former classmate and friend, Jim Corr, have the circumstances changed since the establishment of our own Constitution so that the “well armed citizenry” might itself present a tyrannous threat to the nation and its citizens?
There is no doubt about it: the Federalist papers show that the Second Amendment was intended primarily to allow for the arming of the citizens so as to effectuate their resistance to the tyranny of… their federal government.
Wouldn’t that necessarily imply that they have weapons effective against those of their tyrannous national government, including armored air power and nuclear weapons?
Would it now permit the tyranny of a few to impose their will or inflict fear upon the increased size of population who have greater reliance upon order within their government?
What effect increased gun violence against citizens?
Is it time to reexamine the Second Amendment in the light of a dramatically changed world from that existing at the time of its making?

Jim Disagree with your decription of “living constitution.” That’s a liberal view. The basic premise of this amendment is indesputable. If you want to change that you must amend the Constitution.
Now to the real problem of keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally ill. As far as we know Mercer purchased his guns legally. Is there anyway that could have been prevented? What if everyone diagnosed with a mental health disorder had that information placed in a government data base which could be flagged if the attempted to buy a gun?

Robert E Wheeler Fascinating discussion!

Everett Maybe part of the problem is the main benefit of armed citizens. What is that benefit? No one has been insane enough to start a military invasion of the USA during our lifetimes. Yes, there were the Pearl Harbor and 9/11 attacks. But they were attacks, not armed invasions. The founders remembered countries over running other countries in Europe. We should remember two world wars from at least history class, and be prepared to stop any invasion of our land.
Actual quote or not, this concept contains truth.

My second thought comes from two friends in fire and rescue squads. They both believe the statistics that show what percentage of assaults or deaths are “caused by gun use” are flat out wrong. But it is not wrong in the direction I figured they would say.

Rural and urban, people will use whatever is at hand to commit evil deeds. And according to the guys who try to save lives and mop up the messes, crimes using Flat Screen TV’s or a kitchen knife are grossly under reported.

It appears you are much more likely to be killed at home with fists or anything but the kitchen sink than by a mass shooter.

One likely scenario the rural one fears involves fertilizer, diesel, and a digital clock in a school or theater next time.

None of these objects can be regulated enough to overcome the evil in the human heart. You would have to start with the stick or rock Cain used to murder Able.

Jeremiah 17:9
The heart is deceitful above all things and is wicked. Who can know it!

Jim Well said.

Cathy Automobiles, kitchen knives, flat screen TV’s, fists, fertilizer, diesel, digital clocks: these are all objects that have other uses. Automobiles are actually tightly regulated. You have to be licensed and insured, and the vehicle has to be registered in order to operate one. Maybe that’s a good starting point. At the very least, let’s not pretend that gun violence isn’t really a problem in our society.

Jim Hundreds of thousands of babies killed through abortion compared to less than 9000 killed with firearms. I guess its how you define problem.

Cathy That of course is a separate issue, unrelated to gun violence. Is your point that gun violence is not a problem unless it is the only problem? I though we were at least in agreement that gun violence is a problem!

Jim Violence of any kind is a problem. The source of the violence isn’t the gun. It is the person firing the gun! I don’t have a solutuon to violence. Christ taught us to treat others as we would like to be treated. That is a rule i try to live by. It is frustrating that others dont see it that same way. You’re seeking a solution to a societal problem that has become compounded by drugs, alcohol, mental illness etc, when there is no one single solution.

Everett Cigarettes (and other tobacco products) have no other use. Not self defense, not hunting, no sporting use, and it is highly regulated. Tobacco, while still legal, harms then kills 440,000 each year. Why is it still legal? How many fires are started by careless smokers, and what about the property damage and deaths from those fires?

The VW diesel emission cheating scheme is projected to kill more people in the U.S. each of the next ten years than mass shootings have.

The press has us focusing on the wrong things. Educating and elevating the poor but willing and able, helping the disabled, treating those with substance abuse issues, and treating the mentally ill would save and improve so many more lives than banter about gun control. And the return on investment would be much greater than further gun legislation and seizure programs. But these things do not make exciting headlines.

Jim Absolutely agree Everett!

Cathy Everett, cigarettes and VW are worth talking about and doing something about. They are, however, unrelated to gun violence. Either gun violence is a problem or it isn’t. If it is, then we should do something about it, whether tobacco is legal or not (I personally don’t think it should be, but at least smokers are mostly just killing themselves).
Bringing up other problems doesn’t lessen the problem at hand. We are a nation of problem-solvers, and there are 300 million of us. We can devote some great minds to working on multiple problems at once.

Jim Violence in general is a problem (repeating myself). We should punish those who are guilty of it, not those who had no part in it. The one size fits all solution for gun violence is to ban guns. That won’t happen! You would be inviting civil war. The solutions then are to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, and of the mentally ill. Can we agree on that?

Cathy (Actually Cathy this time) I don’t think that Ernie is calling for an all-out ban on guns, but rather some sensible laws and precautions, but I’ll let him reply if he wants to.

What do you think about a federal licensing or permitting system like some states already have? People who want to buy a gun would pass a background check that includes a doctor’s form (much like the form that exists for kindergarten), training and exam, registration, and perhaps insurance. These are all things we do for our cars, so why not for guns?

The doctor’s form would help prevent some inappropriate people (homicidal/suicidal/ generally unfit for gun ownership) from obtaining a permit. The training would be beneficial for any owner. Registration would be helpful if the gun is stolen. Insurance, well, because it seems practical.

Jim When i go to purchase a firearm i have to complete this long form which goes to ATF i believe. In there i have to declare im a citizen and i believe that ive no mental illness. I could be wrong in that. I could live with a certificate from my doctor attesting to my mental well being. Doctors would want to be indemnified though from law suits. I dont get the insurance part. Insurance for what. I insure my guns from theft.

Cathy As with cars, liability for damage or injury caused by your improper use of the gun (after your first “accident” it may be hard to get insurance:) –E

Jim I know it exists. Making it mandatory is another separate issue. Kind of like forcing people to sign up for Obamacare. If you commit a gun crime you may be charged criminally, but you could also be sued in civil court.

Everett Require gun insurance for what exactly?

The rest of the idea is a lot of hassle and a potential restriction of freedoms for what is actually a very small number of deaths and injuries. Motor vehicles, while being a keystone of our lifestyle, still kill way too many people. Why should a similar program help responsible, legal gun owners? Car theft, accidents, and drunk driving still happen.

Firearm registration programs have led to abuse (newspaper publication of owners name and addresses to start with) and eventually to universal buyback and confiscation in places like England and Australia. Then like it or not, crime rates, including violent home invasions, go up. That is not how I want to live.

Jim The problem with the medical certificate is what happens if your condition changes after you by the gun? Would have to be a provision for the doctor to update.

Jim The medical privacy issue would be the most difficult to overcome. How about we guard our schools like we guard our government offices, banks, military installations, and movie stars…with armed guards.

Everett Yes, please!

Jim Goid night all!

Everett This sounds too incredible, but is true. I taught in a Nebraska school where the judge required a student to attend so he would stay out of further trouble. The kid was accused of robbing banks with his meth head brothers and their friends. He had also brought and passed a pistol around school. (He was avoiding a locker check.) This was soon after Columbine, and the judge overrode the school suspension because of the bank robbery charges.

I do not think he legally obtained the hand guns, and the staff would have appreciated some body guards.

Inner city schools could use help with gang and drug control, too. Metal detectors are not enough.
Annita Wheeler Parmelee Something else:…/our-tragic…/

Our Tragic Response to the Oregon Tragedy
Witnessing all the online fury, I can’t help but feel like this unspeakable tragedy in Oregon has just become — if…

Robert E Wheeler Good article, Annita. And it should not shortcut the political discourse that the President ernestly pleads for.

Sally I bet our Founding Fathers are turning in their graves. Change it because a bunch of people don’t like it. Bah! Guns don’t kill, People that are sick kill.

Robert E Wheeler What can I say!

Annita Ernie, trying to sort out what you really think from the sarcasm.. I assume you really don’t want Iran to have nuclear weapons. I doubt you think we can (or should) control people’s diets to reduce obesity. You do think we should limit “sick people’s” access to weapons, never mind praying. You do see a significant difference between the shootings that occur every day in Chicago and Iran wiping the nation of Israel off the map just because they are there.

Cathy Annita, these are all the same arguments we hear for not taking action on gun violence. If they sound ridiculous to you in this context, I can tell you that they sound equally ridiculous to many of us when we’re talking about trying to make sensible changes to gun laws.

Annita Ernie, Quoting myself…”Trying to figure out who can own guns is the wrong solution. Maybe a better question would be why are so many boys and young men in our country unemployed, angry, doing poorly academically, and feeling hopeless. We don’t value them as a group or individually. Have you noticed most of the “mass” shooters in recent years have been young men? It seems to me if we thought about this sociologically we might place some blame on our society. We’ve progressed to where we deny the reality of things that give meaning and purpose to life.”

Cathy I almost completely agree with you Annita. I remember growing up in a time when I didn’t worry about mass shooters, and didn’t do lockdown drills at school. The world was a fascinating and exciting place, rather than a dangerous place where we all needed to be armed. There were unlimited possibilities. Our society has become obsessed with violence and with guns. TV, movies, video games, and real life are all full of it. I want us to work on these things, just like you do! But I also want us to admit that the easy availability of weapons that allow you to make life or death decisions by moving a finger is making it easier for unhappy, maladjusted, hopeless, or just mentally ill people to do horrible things. We can work this problem from both sides simultaneously — they are not mutually exclusive!

Promises of Jesus’ Return and Establishment of the Kingdom of God

Matthew 10:1 – 16;
Jesus called his 12 disciples to him, and gave them authority to cast out evil spirits and to heal every kind of sickness and disease… Jesus sent them out with these instructions: “don’t go to the Gentiles or the Samaritans, but only to … [The Jews], God’s lost sheep. … When you are persecuted in one city, flee to the next! I will return before you reach them all!…”

Mark 9:1 Jesus is transfigured on the mountain
Jesus went on to say to his disciples, “some of you who are standing here right now will live to see the kingdom of God arrived in great power.”

Mark 13:1 Jesus tells about the future
But for the sake of his chosen ones he will limit those days…. “I tell you the truth, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.”

Matthew 24:1 – 25;
“I tell you the truth, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.”

Luke 21:5 – 24
“I tell you the truth, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.”

The Scourge through Ascension into Heaven

Mark 15:6 Pilate hands Jesus over to be crucified
Matthew 27:15 – 26; Luke 23:13 – 25; John 18: 38 – 19:16
Mark 15:16 Roman soldiers mock Jesus
Matthew 27:27 – 31
Mark 15:21 Jesus is led away to be crucified
Matthew 27:32 – 34; Luke 23:26 – 31; John 19:17
Mark 15:25 Jesus is placed on the cross
Matthew 27:35 – 44; Luke 23:32 – 43; John 19:18 – 27
Mark 15:33 Jesus dies on the cross
Matthew 27:45 – 56; Luke 23:44 – 49; John 19:28 – 37
Mark 15:42 Jesus is laid in the tomb
Matthew 27:57 – 61; Luke 23:50 – 56; John 19:38 – 42
Matthew 27:3 Judas kills himself
Matthew 28:62 guards are posted at the tomb
Mark 16:1 Jesus rises from the dead
Matthew 28:1 – seven; Luke 2.4:1 – 12; John 20:1 – nine
Mark 16:9 Jesus appears to Mary Magdalena
John 20:10 – 18
Matthew 28:8 Jesus appears to the women
Matthew 28:11 religious leaders bribed the guards
Mark 16:12 Jesus appears to two believers on the road – “afterword Jesus appeared in the different form to two of them while they were walking in the country.”
Luke 24:13 – 35
Mark 16:14 Jesus appears to the disciples (including Thomas)
Luke 24:44 Jesus appears to the disciples in Jerusalem
John 20:24 – 31
John 21:1 Jesus appears to the disciples while fishing
John 21:15 – 23 Jesus talks with Peter
Mark 16:15 Jesus gives the great commission
Matthew 28:16 – 20
Mark 16:19 Jesus ascends into heaven
Luke 24:5 – 53

Chief Priests Plot to Kill Jesus through Trial before Pilate

Mark 14:1 the chief priests and teachers of the law plot to kill Jesus
Matthew 26:1 – five; Luke 22:1 – two
Mark 14:3 a woman anoints Jesus with perfume
Matthew 26:6 – 13; John 12:1 – 11
John 12:12 Jesus rides into Jerusalem on the donkey
John 12:20 Jesus explains why he must die
John 12:37 most of the people do not believe in Jesus
John 12:44 Jesus summarizes his message
John 13:1 Jesus teaches his disciples – Jesus washes the disciples’ feet
John 14:1 Jesus is the way to the father
John 14:15 Jesus promises the Holy Spirit
John 15:1 Jesus teaches about the vine and the branches
John 15:18 Jesus warns about the world’s hatred
John 16:5 Jesus teaches about the Holy Spirit
John 16:33 Jesus teaches about using his name in prayer
Luke 22:31 Jesus predicts Peter’s denial
John 13:31 – 38
Mark 14:10 Judas agrees to betray Jesus
Matthew 26:14 – 16; Luke 22:3 – 6
Mark 14:12 Jesus prepares for the Passover
Matthew 26:17 – 19; Luke 22:7 – 13
Mark 14:17 Jesus and the disciples have the Last Supper
Matthew 26:20 – 30; Luke 22:14 – 30; John 13:21 – 30
Mark 14:32 Jesus agonizes in the garden
Matthew 26:36 – 46; Luke 22:39 – 46
John 17:1 Jesus prays for himself
John 17:6 Jesus prays for his disciples
John 18:20 Jesus prays for future believers
John 18:1 Jesus completes his mission – Jesus is betrayed and arrested
Mark 14:43 Jesus is betrayed and arrested
Matthew 26:47 – 56; Luke 22:47 – 53; John 18:1 – 11
Mark 14:53 high priest questions Jesus
Matthew 26:57 – 68
John 18:12 [Annas] questions Jesus
Mark 14:66 Peter denies knowing Jesus
Matthew 26:69 – 75; Luke 22:54 – 65; John 18:25 – 27
Mark 15:1 religious leaders condemn Jesus
Matthew 27:1, two; Luke 22:66 – 71
Luke 23:6 Jesus stands trial before Herod
Mark 15:2 Jesus stands trial before Pilate.
Matthew 27:11 – 14; Luke 23:1 – five; John 18:28 – 37; John 19:1 -21

The Gospels: Jesus Rides into Jerusalem through Teaching to Remain Watchful

Mark 9:14 Jesus heals a demon – possessed boy
Matthew 17:14 – 21; Luke 9:37 – 43
Matthew 17:24 Peter finds the coin in the fish’s mouth
Matthew 10:17 Jesus prepares the disciples for persecution
Matthew 11:1 Jesus teaches about the kingdom: Jesus uses John’s doubt
Luke 7:18 – 35
Matthew 11:20 Jesus promises rest for the soul
Mark 9:30 Jesus predicts his death the second time
Matthew 17:22, 23; Luke 9:44, 45
Mark 9:33 the disciples argue about who would be the greatest
Matthew 18:1 – 6; Luke 9:46 – 48
Mark 9:38 the disciples forbid another to use Jesus’ name
Luke 9:49, 50
Luke 9:42 Jesus warns against temptation
Matthew 18:7 – nine
Matthew 18:10 Jesus warns against looking down on others
Matthew 18:15 Jesus teaches how to treat a believer who sins
Matthew 1821 Jesus tells the parable of the unforgiving debtor
Mark 10:1 Jesus teaches about marriage and divorce
Matthew 19:1 – 12
Mark 10:13 Jesus blesses little children
Matthew 19:13 – 15; Luke 18:15 – 17
Mark 10:17 Jesus speaks to the rich young man
Matthew 12:38 religious leaders asked Jesus for a miracle
Matthew 19:16 – 30; Luke 18:18 – 30
Matthew 20:1 Jesus tells the parable of the workers paid equally
Mark 10:32 Jesus predicts his death the third time
Matthew 20:17 – 19; Luke 18:31 – 34
Mark 10:35 Jesus teaches about serving others
Matthew 20:20 – 28
Mark 10:46 Jesus heals a blind beggar
Matthew 20:29 – 34; Luke 18:35 – 43