It’s been known for decades that roe v wade was a weak basis for abortion rights. The constitution does not have any law on abortion, and it’s Congress’s job to create federal laws.
Rights do not stem from the Constitution - as the language of the constitution itself shows: they are natural rights, some of which are explicitly laid down in paper. The right to do what you will with your own body is a natural right, and can't be alienated by anything, not even the will of the majority.
Even if you swallow the argument that a fetus is a "person", you still have to temper the rights of the fetus who is a parasite on the mother, who is a living, breathing person with rights of her own, including "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness".
If a dead person can't be forced to give up organs without prior consent, a living woman should not be forced to provide life support (at a risk to her own life by the way) for a fetus. Just like I can't be forced to donate a kidney to another person, a woman should not be forced to donate blood, bone and full life support to a fetus.
IOTW, it's literally a matter of competing rights to life. Carrying a pregnancy to term is a mortal risk. Certain pregnancies will kill the mother if not ended, and the fetus will never be viable. Other times the fetus is already dead, but since the law doesn't actually consider the fetus a person, it can't be removed due to abortion bans, and the woman is forced to carry a dead parasite and risk fatal sepsis.
All of this should be left to the woman, her doctor, her circumstances and her conscience, not a bunch of old men in legislatures and courts.
On the issue that the mother's life is at risk, or the baby is a product of incest or rape. This shouldn't even be debatable. Are the majority of conservatives really against abortion in these cases?
> All of this should be left to the woman, her doctor, her circumstances and her conscience
I agree completely, however if we are contending with the counter argument that a fetus does become a "person" at some point late in the pregnancy, having an abortion after this point for no other reason than "I don't feel like it/ I changed my mind" would by definition have to be murder. The "competing rights to life" argument would not apply here.
Do you think the majority of democrats would support granting "personhood" to the fetus at some late stage in the pregnancy if conservatives would support legislating abortion into law (abortions before the fetus reaches personhood for any reason, after which only if the doctor believes the mother's life to be in danger.) Or this is too much of a compromise, women should be able to abort at any time for any reason?
I am responding to someone whom I presume to be pro-choice and am trying to see if a compromise is even possible. The most common counter argument to "the baby has the right to life" is that the mothers life takes priority. The situation where the mother's life is in danger (also including rape and incest) is in the minority of cases (citation needed), therefore the majority of abortions could be prevented if conservatives would concede those scenarios.
No, because a woman's right to her own body is not in conflict with a fetus' right to live, even if you believe the fetus does have that right.
People who claim they care about the fetus' rights, and that they oppose abortion from this point of view, are either hypocritical or haven't given it enough thought. If they did, they would at best insist upon the woman carrying the fetus until it becomes viable, then having the right to a C-section where it is removed and placed on life support, and given up for adoption. But no one holds this position.
In reality, people use the rhetoric of the fetus' rights to muddy the waters, and to avoid admitting that they don't believe women have a right to control their own bodies. They hold collectivist views that are typical of conservatives, who believe all people should be subservient to the social fabric (while espousing individualistic views when it comes time for the social fabric to help those same people in turn) - no free sex, no freedom to use drugs, etc
reply