Merciful heavens, no! Think it through- first problem is the Jews. They're going to have a REAL big issue being told they can't mutilate their sons any more. That was what kicked off the Maccabite revolt, remember. And the sadly widespread mindset that "victim=good" means that few people are going to be willing to go against them; most of those who will are those who're pissed about Israel, and so won't be willing to go against the Muslims on it.
But let's say you manage to put that aside. Who's next? The Wakefield crowd, naturally. The credibility of the medical establishment took a HUGE blow when they started pushing an untested drug with NO IDEA what the possible long-term complications might be, but they also did quite bit of damage to the cause of legitimate skepticism by trying to associate it with the "vaccines=autism" bunch. You risk destroying both the FDA's and the doubter's legitimacy (at least in the public mind) by trying to force the issue.
Then comes the SS. While there are few who will defend it directly, there are even fewer who will attack it directly, and almost none who will accept that its thirteenth-Amendment-violating ass should've been shoved straight up Lincoln's butt the moment he came up with the idea.
And that's not counting the sovereign citizens, the libertarian nutsos, the purveyors of drug-addicted prostitutes, and the general human traffickers.
good luck with that. Thats literally why these laws exist. Abortion wasn't on anyones radar till "so long as they're not..." talking about killing fully developed babies outside of the womb, or dropping the "Rare" from "safe, legal and rare." And get this, this is how you KNEW they knew they were going too far. https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/YKHQA6GQVQI6RJG3DBBRDUTRFE.jpg&w=767 They did everything in their power to keep this movie from being made. Why on Earth would they want to shut down what NOT safe, NOT legal, NOT rare abortions looked like?
Nobody gives a fck about your crack smoking till it starts to affect them. Lolbertarians would have more success if they addressed this caveat but no "muh principles!" Well stay stuck at 2% support then.
All it would have taken was some regulation to rain in the worst of abortion. Now the worst of abortion will still be happening in Democratic stronghold States and women in Republican states are going to suffer for all of this.
It has a 1% failure rate with perfect use so 1 out of every 100 fucks is going to be a dangerous one. That could be potentially several pregnancy scares every year even if you just have sex only once a day.
That's a tough one. I feel like that could be abused in so many ways.
On the other hand, it's hard to say it isn't everyone's natural right to decide what to do with their bodies.
I don't think we've explored what federal laws can do well enough yet. Let's remember, roe v wade is not really an end all be all and laws can still be passed that specifically outline what is and isn't allowed.
It was silly that was the reason abortions were legal anyway. Let's just do it the right way now.
Are you asking me if they should do it? Certainly not these people in congress.
If you are asking if they will do it? Nah.
Should that be eventually properly and consistently codified? Yes. And it's technically not hard, you just have to be a bit more explicit with some amendments. With due process, criminalizing an act without an injured party could be excluded.
You have private property rights that would forbid criminalizing assistance to self-harm, and guarantee the production for personal consumption in said private property at least, or provisioning of services pro bono, bared exceptions for national security.
Last you have the 14th forcing like things to be treated like equivalences.
Yes. Every time someone says some right is implied by some other right in the constitution, it isn’t enough. Ideally our courts shouldn’t be political, but in reality this decision and the strategy used to get this decision is political. What the court says one day about a right being implied may mean that it no longer applies. We need things like the Equal rights amendment, a right to privacy, and a right to bodily autonomy.
Yes, but also no. Yes on protecting the right to abortions, no on the drugs.
I honestly think we are better off constitutionally banning drinking alcohol, smoking, and taking recreational drugs in general.
I'm aware people will still do it behind closed doors, and I'm aware they may do homebrew versions that are more dangerous after no longer being able to legally buy them.
But they also won't be doing any of it in public, or going into public while still intoxicated from prior use without risking arrest, so I won't have to put up with their stupidity effecting my health and safety, and thats what I'm actually concerned with.
I honestly think that smoking near someone should be legally considered assault, and that any victim has the right to physically defend themselves for it.
Also drunk and high/stoned people fucking stink. I shouldn't have to put up with horrendous BO and drug fumes just because someone doesn't give a shit about their own health.
We already have such an amendment at the federal level. The 10th Amendment does that.
The tricky part is when one part of the Constitution clashes with a different part. In the case of drugs, I think it's constitutionally hard to justify them being illegal at the federal level.
Keep in mind that when it comes to drugs, making them legal also means Pharmaceutical companies no longer have federal regulation and approval.
I thought you wanted drugs to be legal. You do realize that a LOT of illicit drugs come from pharmaceutical companies. So should Vicodin be legal or not?
Are you saying that I can legally go to the corner and buy something called "Vicodin" from some guy with no background in chemistry, biology or medicine who made it in his bathtub? But the real thing should be illegal?
There's a difference between making a decision to take a drug for kicks and then what your doctor prescribes you to help you and your trust in your doctor.
I agree that it's different. I'm just trying to make a point about something that would need to be resolved.
That particular point is kinda irrelevant to the overall question and my answer. If the Constitution was adhered to, there would be no need for a new amendment. There would not be a need for a lot of other amendments either. The 10th amendment is a catch-all amendment that addresses a very wide variety of things.
These amendments are not in plain enough language, they can be twisted. The average citizen is not going to think about what the 10th Amendment means in the implications, it needs to be in very plain language exactly what it means. Every effect, written down word for word.
There should be amendments for privacy, bodily autonomy and so on that are made in very clear and certain terms. No vagueness, no flowery language at all, just straight to the point and made to be almost impossible to misunderstand.
Every amendment should be made with the very clear realization that the oligarchy is going to try to twist it in every way to their advantage possible.
At the time they wrote the Constitution they did try to anticipate the future. They did try to write it clearly. But anticipating the future is just about impossible. They assumed things because at the time it was completely understood what the wording meant.
The entire purpose of the 10th amendment was for exactly this reason. It was supposed to be a catch-all. The 10th amendment itself is pretty darn clear. What is not completely clear is the wording of some parts of the main body of the Constitution.
"The general welfare" can be easily abused to justify almost anything. To this day people argue about the meaning of that. There are a huge number of things that the feds do that can't be justified in any other way, other than simply ignoring the Constitution. If you look at it historically and look at what they were saying back then, the meaning of "general welfare" is more clear, but it's still a vague concept.
With your example of drugs. At the federal level, you either have to find something in the Constitution that justifies making them illegal, or you have to just ignore the Constitution, and specifically the 10th amendment.
how about the right to kill children right until they draw their first breath in the delivery room? For every fetus tossed into a composter , an outdoor cat gets euthanized -"to save the environment". Or how about the existing right to utilize BIRTH CONTROL or not sleeping with worthless POAs in the first place? How about MY right to not to be robbed of my EARNINGS to pay for irresponsible idiots? I'm fine with people doing their own thing AT THEIR OWN EXPENSE-which is what this-like other Leftist crap like "free university tuition"- is REALLY about: "FREE" SHIT that working men are forced to pay for.
Should I also consider my sperm cells and her egg two pieces of a human yet to form? Come on man, by your logic we are killing potential humans every time we ejaculate and don't produce spawn.
The constitution has no amendment and never should protective the life of another human, instead, the constitution is about the protection of the rights of the people under which a local government should adhere to. The constitution is a manuscript for the formation of a fair and honest government which the people, in a republic, are given the rights to fend off a tyrannical government.
It’ll be interesting to see if those who want to force everyone to take the COVID “vaccine” as well as annual boosters think this amendment would cover that situation as well.
Look you can't 100% guarantee that someone smoking or shooting meth legally isn't going to get behind the wheel or be around kids or lose their crap and attack someone. So don't sit here and try to lump that kind of crap in with your issues with roe v. wade being overturned. As someone that had a couple meth head neighbors who had a fight where one stabbed the other several times, you are an idiot if you think hard drugs should be decriminalized.
I have noticed that people tend to think if they change something for the "greater good" they tend to think they will not be subject to any of the potential consequences of such change. That and several life experiences have made me start to lack empathy towards people that want to make changes for the "greater good"
Hell it's made me the kind of person that is very quick to say I told you so if someone ignore the potential consequences of their actions and end up suffering from the consequences of theirs action. So if you and other want to legalize drugs like crack and meth or cancel the police, go ahead. Just don't expect anything but a I told you so from me if things go sideways. Also don't expect any help from me when things slide sideways. Because I'll be to busy protecting myself and my own against your stupid decisions.
Nope, just have heavy alcoholics and drug users in my family. Also happen to have some crazy meth head neighbors growing up. Also had a second job working at the grave yard shift at a gas station. The place was robbed on my shift and I wound up being cut open by the guy robbing the place with a hunting knife. So my life experience has shown me that this world isn't all sun shine and rainbows and to avoid people that think it is. Because naive and foolish people tend to paint a huge target on themselves for the kind of people that will kill you and steal whatever you have to feed their drug habit.
Certainly not, we should removed bad options from life, so society doesn't need to clean up the mess people make when picking them. So we remove the drugs before you have the option to put them in your body.
@AmourHoney where the fuck are you even drawing that conclusion? You have no idea who I am so stop assuming that I support rape or something I have NEVER raped someone and even then there are resources available.
Can I understand that argument? yea... But I think it is a living innocent human being and it is NOT that babies fault of what happened.
Again we are talking a exception rather then the rule though
@AmourHoney so are you... so am I a clump of cells... Why did you even bring rape up in the first place EXCUSE me but you are the one who brought it up
I brought it up because women are raped and going to forced to give birth to their rapists babies, their rights will be taken away. Have we all forgotten the story about the 11 year old girl forced to give birth to her rapists baby? My point is abortion should always be available for women because getting pregnant isn't always in our control. And then we’re left to face those consequences and men can happily leave and have no part in the child’s life and they won’t even be questioned for it.
Men are hardly ever forced to deal with the consequences of getting a woman pregnant. Hell my dad left before I was born and because he refused to sign my birth certificate he never had to pay child support. It frustrates me so fucking much that a lot of women will be going through this alone because they had their rights taken away.
@This_Is_My_Opinion8 And you think that gives you the right to kill another human being? Do you have the right to kill your children? They are just as parasitic as the unborn baby. They cannot live unless you supply them food, warmth, and a safe place to stay.
The solution is very simple. If you do not want children, do not have sex. How hard is that for you to understand? That is the choice you have. Partake in a risky practice, or don't.
That makes no difference. The DNA is formed in the first cell and is replicated in every cell thereafter. This Human DNA proves that this is a human being and an individual since this DNA is different than either the mother or the father. Your attempts to bypass these scientific facts are feeble at best, as if you have no brain stem!!
Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
+1 y
Most Helpful Opinions