• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Federal Judge Blocks Wisconsin Abortion Law

minnie616

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 4, 2012
Messages
21,682
Reaction score
25,068
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Independent
In The News:
;B][SIZE=]Federal Judge Blocks Wisconsin Abortion Law [/SIZE][/B]

MADISON, Wis.--August 5, 2013.

A federal judge issued a preliminary injunction on Friday blocking a Wisconsin law that places medically unnecessary restrictions on abortion providers and that would have forced two of the four health centers that provide abortions in the state to close.
<SNIP>

The law, which requires every physician who performs an abortion to have admitting privileges at a local hospital, is similar to Alabama and Mississippi laws that were blocked by federal district courts earlier this year, and a North Dakota law blocked by a state trial court just last week.

Doctors and leading medical groups, such as the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the Wisconsin Public Health Association, have opposed such requirements because they are unnecessary for the provision of safe, high-quality health care, and because they prevent women from getting necessary services.

Wisconsin law does not require doctors providing surgery at other health centers to have admitting privileges even for more complicated procedures.


<SNIP>

"This law is just one in an already too-long list of legislation passed this year and designed solely to interfere with a woman's private medical decisions," said Alexa Kolbi-Molinas, staff attorney with the ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project. "We will not stand silent as extremist politicians attempt to take away women's access to safe and legal abortion care."
Federal Judge Blocks Wisconsin Abortion Law
 

Juanita

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 26, 2013
Messages
3,981
Reaction score
863
Location
now? COLORADO
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
Good. We can be looking forward to the GOP explaining in court why it's not actually about safety for women, but rather controlling, and removing, a woman's right to choose.



And why they consistently disregard and disrespect our Constitution......
 

TiredOfLife

Banned
Joined
Jul 31, 2013
Messages
2,817
Reaction score
582
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
As always, the lawyers are happy. Abortion bills are Jobs Programs to them.
 

JayDubya

Struggler
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 18, 2011
Messages
17,181
Reaction score
4,037
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
And why they consistently disregard and disrespect our Constitution......
That's hilarious... the Constitution that talks so extensively about abortion, you mean? :roll:
 

TiredOfLife

Banned
Joined
Jul 31, 2013
Messages
2,817
Reaction score
582
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
That's hilarious... the Constitution that talks so extensively about abortion, you mean? :roll:
It doesn't mention birth control, porn, or raising your children either but I suspect you'd like to be left alone about those things eh?
 

Paschendale

Uncanny
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 3, 2010
Messages
12,510
Reaction score
12,604
Location
New York City
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Socialist
That's hilarious... the Constitution that talks so extensively about abortion, you mean? :roll:
"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

Unlike the quote in your sig, the 9th amendment is actually law in this country.
 

JayDubya

Struggler
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 18, 2011
Messages
17,181
Reaction score
4,037
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

Unlike the quote in your sig, the 9th amendment is actually law in this country.
Yeah, like the 9th amendment and the 14th amendment...

The 9th Amendment was never meant to be the means by which the Supreme Court bypasses the entire amendment process, creates its own rights from wholecloth, AND incorporates those rights against the state.


The 9th Amendment means that just because the Constitution doesn't say you have the right to something it doesn't mean you don't have the right to something. And that's true, and well, and good...

NOTE, HOWEVER, that it does not mean that you automatically therefore have the right to do anything. It means you might have the right to do something, but that right isn't a "constitutional right." Such as, oh I don't know, hiring a hit man.

I am physically capable of hiring a contract killer to shoot you in the head right now. It's immoral, so I wouldn't, and it's illegal, as it should be, but I can do it.

THE POINT, of course, is that I have as much of a "constitutional right" to hire that gunman as a pregnant mother has to hire an abortionist - none. None whatsoever. You may think it appropriate to be able to legally hire a contract killer, but you cannot hide behind the Constitution as justification.
 
Last edited:

Kal'Stang

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 10, 2009
Messages
42,744
Reaction score
22,569
Location
Bonners Ferry ID USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
THE POINT, of course, is that I have as much of a "constitutional right" to hire that gunman as a pregnant mother has to hire an abortionist - none. None whatsoever. You may think it appropriate to be able to legally hire a contract killer, but you cannot hide behind the Constitution as justification.
You're basically right JayDubya, the 9th does not cover everything that a person may think is a right. However you are wrong about the bolded. A pregnant woman does have a right to hire an abortion provider. Why? Because the abortion provider is a doctor. And the courts have deemed that the woman has a right to privacy in regards to what goes on between her and her doctor. It is that right to privacy that gives the woman the right to hire an abortionist.

Also you should note that your arguement is a double edged sword that works against you just as much as it works for you. For no where in the Constitution is a ZEF/baby/human being protected.
 

Paschendale

Uncanny
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 3, 2010
Messages
12,510
Reaction score
12,604
Location
New York City
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Socialist
The 9th Amendment was never meant to be the means by which the Supreme Court bypasses the entire amendment process, creates its own rights from wholecloth, AND incorporates those rights against the state.

The 9th Amendment means that just because the Constitution doesn't say you have the right to something it doesn't mean you don't have the right to something. And that's true, and well, and good...
These are all true. But this means that the often heard excuse "the constitution doesn't say you have a right to _________" is wrong. The constitution not enumerating a right is not grounds for denying people that right.

NOTE, HOWEVER, that it does not mean that you automatically therefore have the right to do anything. It means you might have the right to do something, but that right isn't a "constitutional right." Such as, oh I don't know, hiring a hit man.
That is correct, though in order to deny you any right, a law must pass constitutional muster. A rule preventing people from wearing hats, for example, would need to meet a rational basis test. We each have a default liberty interest in wearing whatever kinds of hats we like. The rest of your post proclaiming a lack of constitutional protection for abortion is factually wrong, but the point remains that the constitution prohibits denying any right to anyone without justification.
 

Juanita

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 26, 2013
Messages
3,981
Reaction score
863
Location
now? COLORADO
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
The 9th Amendment was never meant to be the means by which the Supreme Court bypasses the entire amendment process, creates its own rights from wholecloth, AND incorporates those rights against the state.


The 9th Amendment means that just because the Constitution doesn't say you have the right to something it doesn't mean you don't have the right to something. And that's true, and well, and good...

NOTE, HOWEVER, that it does not mean that you automatically therefore have the right to do anything. It means you might have the right to do something, but that right isn't a "constitutional right." Such as, oh I don't know, hiring a hit man.

I am physically capable of hiring a contract killer to shoot you in the head right now. It's immoral, so I wouldn't, and it's illegal, as it should be, but I can do it.

THE POINT, of course, is that I have as much of a "constitutional right" to hire that gunman as a pregnant mother has to hire an abortionist - none. None whatsoever. You may think it appropriate to be able to legally hire a contract killer, but you cannot hide behind the Constitution as justification.

Ahhh, but it's against the law to hire a gunman, it is NOT against the law to have an abortion..
 
Top Bottom