Also in any debate on this topic, it's usually customary to focus on a trimester.
I'm not interested in
that debate. I specifically said I don't want government to decide
when I'm entitled to my rights. It's just giving the government more power than the founders meant for it to have.
You seem to think at conception (which is where the sperm and egg unite in case you are thinking that means birth) is where one becomes both an American and one with rights.
As I said, you can argue about trimesters forever. There's no precise point when it stops being a blob of cells and becomes a person, conception is the least arbitrary point you can choose. This is the point when a cell gains DNA that is uniquely different from the mother's and father's, then begins to self-replicate rapidly.
The constitution was never directed at pre-born anyone...pretty much not even children for the most part.
I'm not a constitutional scholar, but I don't think it says that you gain your rights when you are
born. What about babies that are delivered via cesarean section? Could a desperate / failing government simply redefine "birth," claim the baby, and have it raised as a "disposable" military grunt? I guess they can because the baby isn't "born" under specific circumstances that grant basic rights. In the Declaration of Independence, founders used the specific term "
created equal" for a reason. It was meant to clarify that you don't suddenly have your rights granted to you at some point after you were created. The founders knew that most governments would gradually take more and more power, so they tried to ensure that individuals retain the most basic human rights and and the government would not be able to decide when we are entitled to it. Likewise, individuals are supposed to have absolute authority over their own property and federal government should have the least control of all...but we're already a long way from that.
Going off on a tangent here...
Now we all seem to accept the idea that federal law can supersede law of sovereign states. The federal government is not supposed to have any power that is not specifically granted to it by the states. It still blows my mind that states allowed the federal government to come up with something like prohibition. The federal government should have NO control over that sort of thing. It should only deal with issues of inter-state commerce, international commerce, and national defense. Defense should be funded by taxing inter-state and international transactions (not individuals). This would encourage the country to actually
produce goods for ourselves (rather than importing everything). As a side-effect, this would also increase exports. If our system still worked like it was originally intended, the legality of certain abortion practices would vary by state. The constitution clarifies your "right of free ingress into other States, and egress from them." You could simply choose to live the state that suits your ideals.
...
The worst thing a court could do is force someone to be a parent though...
Government didn't force irresponsible behavior that leads to most unwanted pregnancies. In cases of unwanted pregnancies that were the result of gross negligence, the mother and father should have to live with the consequences. Of course, there should be exceptions if the pregnancy was the result of rape or is an unusual risk to the mother. Even if you have a baby, the government can't force you to be a parent. You could allow an unwanted child to be adopted.
Do orphanages still exist?
OK,
NOW I'm trolling.