AerospaceFan
Topic Author
Posts: 6990
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 1:43 am

Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Thu Jan 18, 2007 3:02 pm

In thinking about the implications of a discussion pertaining to whether the beliefs of a particularly conservative political party were well-founded, the question came to mind some moments ago as to whether the expansion of rights by the United States Supreme Court can or should be legitimately reversed by the Court itself.

Technically, the Court can freely reverse its own decisions. However, is there a sense in which it would be morally wrong for the Court to reverse decisions that have expanded rights so as to limit them?

Please consider, for example, the following argument, modified from a post that I made in another thread advocating the view that the Constitution itself is not changed even when the Supreme Court changes its view on the Constitution:

Assume, for the moment, that the question is whether the Constitution guarantee of equal protection should extend to all forms of sexual relationships.

Quote:
1. The text of the Equal Protection Clause does not reference sexual relations.

2. The phrase "sexual relations" does not appear in the Constitution.

3. There are many cases valid today in which the application of the Equal Protection Clause has been held not to protect various citizens against various laws. For example, the Equal Protection Clause does not protect against certain forms of discrimination against white applicants -- who are citizens -- where there is a compelling state interest in affirmative action (referring here to the recent University of Michigan Law School case) in relation to the rules relevant to that case. Your implication that the Equal Protection Clause equally protects all citizens in all cases, producing a result that eliminates all discrimination against citizens, is flat wrong; it depends on the issue and the rule.

4. The Supreme Court in the Bowers case previously decided that states could, in fact, discriminate against homosexual sodomy. The later Romer case reversed that ruling to the extent incompatible with same. At some future time, another case could, by the same token, reverse the Romer case. Yet the fact is that the text of the Equal Protection Clause has not changed for centuries. The only way that this makes any sense is to say that the Equal Protection Clause has no intrinsic reference to sexual relations or in regard to any specific application of the law. The majority in Romer would not, and does not, contest this fact. If it did, there would be no role for the Supreme Court in deciding the application of any Constitutional provision. It is the interpretation of the Equal Protection Clause that has changed through the years -- and it can change in any direction.

If, hypothetically, the Supreme Court decides in a future case that Romer is wrong and adopts the position taken by the dissent, then that still doesn't mean that the Equal Protection Clause either does or does not specifically address the question of sexual relations. It only means that that certain component of Constitutional law that comprises the Court's interpretation of the Constitution has establshed that the Equal Protection Clause does not apply to protect against discrimination on the basis of homosexuality. Both by parity of logic and common sense, as well as by Constitutional and legal reasoning, therefore, neither then does the fact that Romer reverses Bowers mean that the Equal Protection Clause intrinsically references or contemplates sexual relations. If it wouldn't make sense to say that the Equal Protection Clause fails to protect against discrimination on the basis of sexuality in one case, then equally it wouldn't make sense to say that it does in fact instrinsically protect against it in another. The Equal Protection Clause states a principle -- not an application of that principle. The actual text of the Clause hasn't changed; merely the interpretation has changed.

Put another way, if, in a few years, Romer is reversed by the Court, would you therefore agree with those who may claim that the Equal Protection Clause intrinsically declines to protect against discrimination against homosexuality? I would think that you would not, and you would be right. You would argue that the Court made a mistake and would say that the Equal Protection Clause should protect against such discrimination. But, nevertheless, your argument wouldn't mean that, under Constitutional law, the Equal Protection Clause had changed, nor would it mean that reading the Clause would intrinsically compel everyone to support your view. Again: The Equal Protection Clause hasn't changed; it's merely the interpretation that has changed -- precisely as the interpretation of it has changed between Bowers and Romer. Under the principles of Marbury v. Madison, the state of the Constitutional law at that point would be that the Equal Protection Clause does not protect against such discrimination.

One should never assume that merely because the Supreme Court has stated that the Equal Protection Clause protects a certain class of individuals or as regards a specific kind of conduct in one case, that the Clause (or any other part of the Constitution of the United States considered in and of itself) has a specific reference to it. It does not, unless by the terms of the text itself, it does, irrespective of the truth that the results of the Court's interpretation of it as applicable at any given time are binding under Marbury. To do otherwise would be historical revisionism of the most fundamental and absurd kind.

Query: Given the above, even though, as I have argued, the physical text of the Constitution may be variously interpreted and even though such interpretations may be reversed, is there nevertheless some moral obligation on the Court that requires it never to reverse case so as to eliminate or greatly curtail rights that it has previously found to exist?

Thank you in advance for your considered responses to this question.

[Edited 2007-01-18 07:08:25]
What's fair is fair.
 
LHMark
Posts: 7048
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2000 2:18 am

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Thu Jan 18, 2007 3:58 pm

Yes. The expansion of civil rights is irreversible.
"Sympathy is something that shouldn't be bestowed on the Yankees. Apparently it angers them." - Bob Feller
 
AerospaceFan
Topic Author
Posts: 6990
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 1:43 am

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Thu Jan 18, 2007 3:59 pm

Quoting LHMARK (Reply 1):
Yes. The expansion of civil rights is irreversible.

Would the right to abortion be included?
What's fair is fair.
 
Falcon84
Posts: 13775
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2004 11:52 am

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Thu Jan 18, 2007 9:52 pm

Quoting LHMARK (Reply 1):
Yes. The expansion of civil rights is irreversible.

I disagree. If a extremely conservative court were ever in place-and I mean 9 Scalia's on the bench-then Civil Rights would be in grave danger, not recently won rights, but many of them.

Nothing is irreversable.

And I wonder why AF is so interested in this topic?
Work Right, Fly Hard
 
halls120
Posts: 8724
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2005 3:24 am

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Thu Jan 18, 2007 10:02 pm

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 3):
Quoting LHMARK (Reply 1):
Yes. The expansion of civil rights is irreversible.

I disagree. If a extremely conservative court were ever in place-and I mean 9 Scalia's on the bench-then Civil Rights would be in grave danger, not recently won rights, but many of them.

Nothing is irreversable.

Do I believe fundamental civil rights as guaranteed by the terms of the Constitution would be rolled back? Only if there were a second Constitutional Convention.

Do I believe fundamental civil rights as developed by 200 years of Supreme Court interpretation would be rolled back? Highly unlikely, even if there were 9 Scalias on the Court - which itself is almost impossible.

Will there be continued debate on what other rights ought to be considered fundamental? Yes. But that is the sign of a healthy democracy.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 3):
And I wonder why AF is so interested in this topic?

well, it could be that he his interested in the topic, or perhaps he wants to up his post count, or provide himself with yet another forum where he can insult other Anet members.

Probably all three.
"Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." Mark Twain, a Biography
 
ANCFlyer
Posts: 21391
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 3:51 pm

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Thu Jan 18, 2007 11:03 pm

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 4):
Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 3):
And I wonder why AF is so interested in this topic?

well, it could be that he his interested in the topic, or perhaps he wants to up his post count, or provide himself with yet another forum where he can insult other Anet members.

I wish he'd answer the questions posed to him in other threads before he goes off in another, and another, and another . . . rather monotonous . . .
FOR THOSE THAT FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A FLAVOR THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW OR UNDERSTAND
 
PanAmOldDC8
Posts: 934
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 9:25 pm

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Thu Jan 18, 2007 11:07 pm

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 5):
wish he'd answer the questions posed to him in other threads before he goes off in another, and another, and another . . . rather monotonous . . .

It is his right to rant and rave, we don't have to answer him if we don't want too. No one has a gun at our heads
Barbados, CWC soon, can't wait
 
halls120
Posts: 8724
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2005 3:24 am

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Thu Jan 18, 2007 11:14 pm

Quoting PanAmOldDC8 (Reply 6):
Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 5):
wish he'd answer the questions posed to him in other threads before he goes off in another, and another, and another . . . rather monotonous . . .

It is his right to rant and rave, we don't have to answer him if we don't want too. No one has a gun at our heads

True. But an ASF post is like playing TV channel roulette. Spinning the dial, you stumble on two women fighting on the Jerry Springer show. You know you shouldn't be watching it, but you just can't help yourself.  Wink
"Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." Mark Twain, a Biography
 
AirCop
Posts: 5553
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 2:39 am

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Fri Jan 19, 2007 12:49 am

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 7):
True. But an ASF post is like playing TV channel roulette. Spinning the dial, you stumble on two women fighting on the Jerry Springer show. You know you shouldn't be watching it, but you just can't help yourself.

And we're the guests sitting on the stage. (Please don't throw a chair)

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 4):
Do I believe fundamental civil rights as developed by 200 years of Supreme Court interpretation would be rolled back?

If they were I would expect riots in the streets like the 1960's, unless Americans have grown to passive and they take their rights for granted. (Example: For the life of me, I still can't figure out why Americans put up with the TSA bullshit, but thats another topic)

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 4):
well, it could be that he his interested in the topic, or perhaps he wants to up his post count, or provide himself with yet another forum where he can insult other Anet members.

Appears with all his downtime AF has become our constitutional expert, which every forum needs.  cheerful . Does one get a toaster for having the largest post count at the end of the year?  checkeredflag  Couldn't help but notice that once again he revised his post after posting it.  redflag 
 
AerospaceFan
Topic Author
Posts: 6990
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 1:43 am

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Fri Jan 19, 2007 3:40 am

Quoting AirCop (Reply 8):
Appears with all his downtime AF has become our constitutional expert, which every forum needs.

Yeah. Where's my check?

 Big grin

Quoting AirCop (Reply 8):

If they were I would expect riots in the streets like the 1960's, unless Americans have grown to passive and they take their rights for granted. (Example: For the life of me, I still can't figure out why Americans put up with the TSA bullshit, but thats another topic)

Query: If Romer were reversed, would most of America truly be moved to demonstrate? I'm not sure of that.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 3):
Nothing is irreversable.

And I wonder why AF is so interested in this topic?

Falcon, it's because I think that there is a real chance that abortion rights will, in fact, be rolled back under the Roberts Court.
What's fair is fair.
 
AirCop
Posts: 5553
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 2:39 am

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Fri Jan 19, 2007 5:25 am

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 9):
Yeah. Where's my check?

You know its in the mail.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 9):
it'srnbecause I think that there is a real chance that abortion rights will,rnin fact, be rolled back under the Roberts Court.

Which would be a shame, since that appears to the lighting rod issue for the far right..(Please note I am not taking sides on the abortion rights issue in this post)
If that happen what issue would the energize the right wing? What would the debate team at Liberty University argue.
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Fri Jan 19, 2007 5:30 am

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 2):
Would the right to abortion be included?

Is abortion a "civil right"? I don't want to veer your topic off where you intended it to go, but since it seems you wanted to talk about abortion under the guise of civil rights, I believe it's a fair question, even though we know from experience that it might jeopardize the existence of the thread itself.
International Homo of Mystery
 
bushpilot
Posts: 1674
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 4:37 am

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Fri Jan 19, 2007 5:39 am

I think our civil rights are the most valuable and important things we have as Americans. Why would we want to reverse them?
 
AerospaceFan
Topic Author
Posts: 6990
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 1:43 am

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Fri Jan 19, 2007 6:34 am

Quoting Bushpilot (Reply 12):
I think our civil rights are the most valuable and important things we have as Americans. Why would we want to reverse them?

I would agree, in principle, but I think that the question is whether, hypothetically, there is a moral imperative against it. If the Supreme Court should act to roll back civil rights as I've mentioned, how could we argue against it?

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 11):
Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 2):
Would the right to abortion be included?

Is abortion a "civil right"?

A legitimate question -- and so, what is your answer?

Quoting AirCop (Reply 10):
If that happen what issue would the energize the right wing? What would the debate team at Liberty University argue.

I think that abortion is considered a civil right by many, or something close to it. However, I disagree that it is. I would imagine that a right-wing debate team would agree with me.

Quoting AirCop (Reply 10):
You know its in the mail.

That's what they all say.  Wink
What's fair is fair.
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Fri Jan 19, 2007 6:41 am

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 13):
A legitimate question -- and so, what is your answer?

It's a medical procedure, nothing more, nothing less. Some pediatricians refuse to do circumcisions, but you don't see elections fought over foreskins.
International Homo of Mystery
 
AerospaceFan
Topic Author
Posts: 6990
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 1:43 am

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Fri Jan 19, 2007 6:45 am

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 14):
It's a medical procedure, nothing more, nothing less. Some pediatricians refuse to do circumcisions, but you don't see elections fought over foreskins.

Well, in the same sense, capital punishment in California is just intravenous treatment. But I think that it's a very limited sense.
What's fair is fair.
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Fri Jan 19, 2007 6:56 am

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 15):
Well, in the same sense, capital punishment in California is just intravenous treatment.

Choosing to have a medical procedure done, and paying the price for one's crimes have nothing in common whatsoever.
International Homo of Mystery
 
AerospaceFan
Topic Author
Posts: 6990
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 1:43 am

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Fri Jan 19, 2007 6:58 am

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 16):
Choosing to have a medical procedure done, and paying the price for one's crimes have nothing in common whatsoever.

But whether there is a right to that choice is at issue, and that, I think, is seen as a civil right by many. If the latter are correct, then a rollback of that right would be a rollback of a civil right.
What's fair is fair.
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Fri Jan 19, 2007 7:00 am

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 17):
But whether there is a right to that choice is at issue, and that, I think, is seen as a civil right by many. If the latter are correct, then a rollback of that right would be a rollback of a civil right.

A right to what? The medical procedure for abortion or the killing of a convicted criminal?

I'll wait for the edit to your above reply before continuing, so we understand what you're talking about.
International Homo of Mystery
 
AerospaceFan
Topic Author
Posts: 6990
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 1:43 am

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Fri Jan 19, 2007 7:02 am

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 18):
A right to what? The medical procedure for abortion or the killing of a convicted criminal?

The right to choose to have the procedure that kills the unborn child. They see this as their right.
What's fair is fair.
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Fri Jan 19, 2007 7:07 am

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 19):
They see this as their right.

It's a medical procedure. You have a "right" to medical procedures of your choosing without having to make it into a "civil right" that requires legislation or court orders to accomplish.
International Homo of Mystery
 
bushpilot
Posts: 1674
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 4:37 am

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Fri Jan 19, 2007 7:23 am

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 13):
how could we argue against it?

Revolution.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 13):
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 11):
Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 2):
Would the right to abortion be included?

Is abortion a "civil right"?

A legitimate question -- and so, what is your answer?

The civil right here is not extended to an unborn thing. It is about the woman carrying that fetus and her right to choose what medical procedures are necessary for own health.

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 14):
but you don't see elections fought over foreskins.

Now that would make for an interesting race.
 
CastleIsland
Posts: 3212
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 1:40 pm

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Fri Jan 19, 2007 7:49 am

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 20):
You have a "right" to medical procedures of your choosing without having to make it into a "civil right" that requires legislation or court orders to accomplish

But 'Westy, that's exactly what it took to allow abortion.
"People don't do what they believe in, they just do what's most convenient, then they repent." - Dylan
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Fri Jan 19, 2007 8:00 am

Quoting CastleIsland (Reply 22):
But 'Westy, that's exactly what it took to allow abortion.

Of course, but I don't believe it should have been outlawed in the first place. I believe too many basic "human rights" have been the subject of legislation or court decisions that never should have been an issue in the first place. Is my being gay or you being straight a "human right" or a "civil right"? Funny how hets don't need "civil rights" for what comes naturally to them, whereas what comes naturally to me, and harms no one, has been the subject of legislation and court decisions.
International Homo of Mystery
 
CastleIsland
Posts: 3212
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 1:40 pm

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Fri Jan 19, 2007 8:08 am

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 23):
Funny how hets don't need "civil rights" for what comes naturally to them, whereas what comes naturally to me, and harms no one, has been the subject of legislation and court decisions.

Nicely put. While I've always supported gay rights, the way you say that makes it clear that the mere concept that people do or do not support these rights is ridiculous. In this sort of matter, people should just be.
"People don't do what they believe in, they just do what's most convenient, then they repent." - Dylan
 
AerospaceFan
Topic Author
Posts: 6990
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 1:43 am

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Fri Jan 19, 2007 8:26 am

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 20):
It's a medical procedure. You have a "right" to medical procedures of your choosing without having to make it into a "civil right" that requires legislation or court orders to accomplish.

That doesn't jibe with the fact that the law gives the right to life to an unborn child in a criminal setting, as follows: If a pregnant woman is killed (think of Lacy Peterson), then, unless by some miracle her unborn child survives, the act committed is considered a double homicide. This is the law in California and certain other jurisdictions -- perhaps even the majority of them. This is also why Scott Peterson is on Death Row for double murder.

Quoting Bushpilot (Reply 21):
The civil right here is not extended to an unborn thing. It is about the woman carrying that fetus and her right to choose what medical procedures are necessary for own health.

Please see above. I think that the right to life could be deemed a civil right.

Quoting CastleIsland (Reply 24):
Nicely put. While I've always supported gay rights, the way you say that makes it clear that the mere concept that people do or do not support these rights is ridiculous. In this sort of matter, people should just be.

CastleIsland, I don't think that abortion and gay rights are all that similar.
What's fair is fair.
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Fri Jan 19, 2007 8:31 am

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 25):
That doesn't jibe with the fact that the law gives the right to life to an unborn child in a criminal settin

That law is not identical in every jurisdiction around the world. Obviously, it's open to interpretation, and may even depend upon how far advanced the pregnancy is.
International Homo of Mystery
 
AerospaceFan
Topic Author
Posts: 6990
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 1:43 am

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Fri Jan 19, 2007 8:47 am

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 26):
That law is not identical in every jurisdiction around the world. Obviously, it's open to interpretation, and may even depend upon how far advanced the pregnancy is.

I think that the right to life of an unborn child is Constitutionally unquestioned under the circumstances I've noted, and if you find any jurisdiction in the United States that has specifically ruled otherwise, I would be interested in knowing what it is. There may be jurisdictions that do not have that specific law protecting the unborn child, but this is no indication that the right itself could not be recognized by law under the terms of that jurisdiction's governing law.
What's fair is fair.
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Fri Jan 19, 2007 8:57 am

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 27):
I think that the right to life of an unborn child is Constitutionally unquestioned under the circumstances I've noted, and if you find any jurisdiction in the United States that has specifically ruled otherwise, I would be interested in knowing what it is.

The topic of this thread is "civil rights" and whether they are "irreversible", is it not?

You're now veering off onto a tangent of rights in the cases of criminality, which is a subject of its own.

Please state clearly and unequivocally, what topic you'd like discussed.
International Homo of Mystery
 
halls120
Posts: 8724
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2005 3:24 am

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Fri Jan 19, 2007 9:00 am

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 15):
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 14):It's a medical procedure, nothing more, nothing less. Some pediatricians refuse to do circumcisions, but you don't see elections fought over foreskins.
Well, in the same sense, capital punishment in California is just intravenous treatment. But I think that it's a very limited sense.

Wow. Just how many people on death row volunteer to have the needle stuck in their arm?

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 17):
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 16):Choosing to have a medical procedure done, and paying the price for one's crimes have nothing in common whatsoever.
But whether there is a right to that choice is at issue, and that, I think, is seen as a civil right by many. If the latter are correct, then a rollback of that right would be a rollback of a civil right.

 wideeyed  inmates on death row have NO choice in the matter. How can you possibly compare an inmate facing the death penalty and a woman deciding whether she should have a abortion?

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 18):
I'll wait for the edit to your above reply before continuing, so we understand what you're talking about.

 rotfl 

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 25):

CastleIsland, I don't think that abortion and gay rights are all that similar.

but you have no problem equating death by lethal injection and an abortion.  confused 
"Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." Mark Twain, a Biography
 
bushpilot
Posts: 1674
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2007 4:37 am

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Fri Jan 19, 2007 9:12 am

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 25):
Please see above. I think that the right to life could be deemed a civil right.

But the theory and decision being that the right of the woman carrying that unborn child trumps the right of the unborn.

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 27):

You are comparing a US supreme court decision, with a legislative matter. It is state legislatures that pass the measures making the murder of a pregnant woman a double murder. There is a distinct line between murdering a woman who is pregnant and that child dies when it otherwise would have been carried full term, and the decision a woman has to undergo a medical procedure.
 
AerospaceFan
Topic Author
Posts: 6990
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 1:43 am

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Fri Jan 19, 2007 9:22 am

Quoting Bushpilot (Reply 30):
You are comparing a US supreme court decision, with a legislative matter. It is state legislatures that pass the measures making the murder of a pregnant woman a double murder.

What I'm saying is that it is within the ambit of state legislatures under our Constitution to pass laws that essentially confer the civil right to life to an unborn child. The Constitutional import is the same, therefore, as to whether this latitude should be extended.

The civil right to life of a fetus, indeed, could be used as an argument to defeat an already Roe v. Wade and progeny, regardless of whether abortion is seen as a civil or other fundamental right.
What's fair is fair.
 
AirCop
Posts: 5553
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 2:39 am

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Fri Jan 19, 2007 9:30 am

Hold on here AF, here you talking about civil rights and the rights of the unborn, yet on the Border Patrol thread, you stated or implied (waiting for your next edit) that it is okay to shoot and kill any fleeing person. I'm getting confused.  confused  Do you realize once again that you hijacked your own thread again, going from civil rights to equating captial punishment to abortion.  scratchchin 
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Fri Jan 19, 2007 9:33 am

Quoting AirCop (Reply 32):
Do you realize once again that you hijacked your own thread again, going from civil rights to equating captial punishment to abortion.

 yes  I did try to keep this thread on track here:

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 28):
Please state clearly and unequivocally, what topic you'd like discussed.

... but it seems as though I've been ignored. Can't say I didn't give it the old college try.
International Homo of Mystery
 
AerospaceFan
Topic Author
Posts: 6990
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 1:43 am

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Fri Jan 19, 2007 9:33 am

Quoting AirCop (Reply 32):
Hold on here AF, here you talking about civil rights and the rights of the unborn, yet on the Border Patrol thread, you stated or implied (waiting for your next edit) that it is okay to shoot and kill any fleeing person.

No -- I was referring to the "fleeing felon" doctrine of criminal law. Not any fleeing person. The circumstances of those Border Patrol agents were unusual enough so that the President is considering pardoning them.

The critical issue here, of course, revolves around whether someone is known to be, or at least suspected of being, a felon. An unborn child is obviously incapable of being known or suspected to be a felon.
What's fair is fair.
 
AerospaceFan
Topic Author
Posts: 6990
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 1:43 am

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Fri Jan 19, 2007 9:36 am

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 33):
Please state clearly and unequivocally, what topic you'd like discussed.

The question revolves around civil rights, which may include the right to abortion, and whether the Court should be morally barred from reversing them. Relevant considerations are whether abortion, considered as a civil or other fundamental right, should be barred on any grounds, whether legal or moral, and whether abortion itself is a violation of civil rights that morally legitimize the rollback of abortion rights.

I'm not going to do this every time you play the role of topic monitor. I'm doing this for you to illustrate how it's relevant so that you might understand the connections between issues and the topic of a thread, but please don't expect similar consideration in the future.
What's fair is fair.
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Fri Jan 19, 2007 9:53 am

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 35):
I'm doing this for you to illustrate how it's relevant so that you might understand the connections between issues and the topic of a thread, but please don't expect similar consideration in the future.

Why thank you. I believe there were a few others who had similar concerns, and I do recall reading the following in another thread, so I'm not sure why you would single me out when I'm merely attempting to keep the thread on track:

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 115):
I try never to let personal issues get in the way of an interesting debate

Be that as it may,

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 35):
The question revolves around civil rights, which may include the right to abortion, and whether the Court should be morally barred from reversing them.

As I stated above, I believe abortion is a medical procedure which shouldn't be clouded with issues of "civil rights", and the option should be left up to the mother carrying the fetus.
International Homo of Mystery
 
AerospaceFan
Topic Author
Posts: 6990
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 1:43 am

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Fri Jan 19, 2007 10:03 am

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 36):
As I stated above, I believe abortion is a medical procedure which shouldn't be clouded with issues of "civil rights", and the option should be left up to the mother carrying the fetus.

Not everyone agrees with you. The American Psychological Association, for example, considers abortion a civil right.

Please see:

http://cpcworldnews.com/story.php?id=193

[Edited 2007-01-19 02:04:30]
What's fair is fair.
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Fri Jan 19, 2007 10:06 am

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 37):
The American Psychological Association, for example, considers abortion a civil right.

So? The American Psychiatric Association used to think that homosexuality was a mental disorder up until sometime in the 60s/70s.
International Homo of Mystery
 
AerospaceFan
Topic Author
Posts: 6990
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 1:43 am

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Fri Jan 19, 2007 10:11 am

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 38):
So? The American Psychiatric Association used to think that homosexuality was a mental disorder up until sometime in the 60s/70s.

All right. Ever heard of Betty Friedan, the famous feminist?

A quick Google search found:

http://66.218.69.11/search/cache?p=a...t%22&d=RwGsj0VuOAMJ&icp=1&.intl=us
What's fair is fair.
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Fri Jan 19, 2007 10:16 am

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 39):
All right. Ever heard of Betty Friedan, the famous feminist?

Yes, of course. I'll go over this with you once again:

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 23):
Of course, but I don't believe it should have been outlawed in the first place. I believe too many basic "human rights" have been the subject of legislation or court decisions that never should have been an issue in the first place. Is my being gay or you being straight a "human right" or a "civil right"? Funny how hets don't need "civil rights" for what comes naturally to them, whereas what comes naturally to me, and harms no one, has been the subject of legislation and court decisions.

My position has already been clearly stated. I'm not sure why you're asking me to state the same positions repetitively.
International Homo of Mystery
 
AerospaceFan
Topic Author
Posts: 6990
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 1:43 am

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Fri Jan 19, 2007 10:19 am

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 40):
My position has already been clearly stated. I'm not sure why you're asking me to state the same positions repetitively.

You misunderstand -- I'm reacting to your allegation that the APA's view might be erroneous by citing another source -- in this case, a reference to a work by a major feminist leader of the recent past who takes the view that abortion is a civil right. I fully respect your right to disagree.
What's fair is fair.
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Fri Jan 19, 2007 10:24 am

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 41):
a reference to a work by a major feminist leader of the recent past who takes the view that abortion is a civil right.

Of course she would refer to it that way, since abortion had been legislated. Every author speaks to his/her audience in terms that they understand and hopefully endorse. I wouldn't expect Ms. Friedan to be an exception to that rule when speaking to a national audience. It doesn't, however, change my opinion on whether those things that never needed legislation in the first place must be civil vs. human rights.

[Edited 2007-01-19 02:32:14]
International Homo of Mystery
 
halls120
Posts: 8724
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2005 3:24 am

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Fri Jan 19, 2007 11:02 am

Quoting AirCop (Reply 32):
Hold on here AF, here you talking about civil rights and the rights of the unborn, yet on the Border Patrol thread, you stated or implied (waiting for your next edit) that it is okay to shoot and kill any fleeing person. I'm getting confused. ÊÊ Do you realize once again that you hijacked your own thread again, going from civil rights to equating captial punishment to abortion. ÊÊ

Of course he does, which is why he's gone partially mute. In typical ASF fashion, when he has no ability to respond to a post that doesn't involve someone sucking up to him, he stops debating. So in addition to the point you've raised, he's also not addressing his ludicrous assertion that felons facing a needle and a woman getting abortion are essentially equal.
"Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." Mark Twain, a Biography
 
CastleIsland
Posts: 3212
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 1:40 pm

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Fri Jan 19, 2007 11:03 am

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 25):
CastleIsland, I don't think that abortion and gay rights are all that similar.

I see a distinction as well, but you started this thread about civil rights, and then snuk (sic) abortion in here later.
"People don't do what they believe in, they just do what's most convenient, then they repent." - Dylan
 
AerospaceFan
Topic Author
Posts: 6990
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 1:43 am

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Fri Jan 19, 2007 11:04 am

Quoting CastleIsland (Reply 44):
I see a distinction as well, but you started this thread about civil rights, and then snuk (sic) abortion in here later.

Abortion might very well be seen as a civil right, CastleIsland. I've already proved that.
What's fair is fair.
 
halls120
Posts: 8724
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2005 3:24 am

RE: Is The Expansion Of Civil Rights Irreversible?

Fri Jan 19, 2007 11:16 am

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 45):
Abortion might very well be seen as a civil right, CastleIsland. I've already proved that.

Wow. You've "proved" that something "might" be a civil right.

Give yourself a gold star!
"Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." Mark Twain, a Biography

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: moo, wingman and 22 guests