Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

needledriver

(836 posts)
1. Well, of course.
Mon Dec 2, 2019, 10:21 AM
Dec 2019

Fervor for constitutional rights is entirely fluid and malleable - depending on which right excites your passion.

There are those who stridently advocate that a woman has a constitutional right to control their own body, most specifically in whether or not to choose to carry a pregnancy to term. However, the same woman, at the same time, can also stridently advocate against their own constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

There are also those who stridently advocate for their constitutional right to keep and bear arms. However, those same people, at the same time, can stridently advocate against a woman’s constitutional right to control their own body.

Gun control advocates point to 30,000 deaths a year as a justification to severely curtail the right to keep and bear arms.

Abortion control advocates point to 8-900,000 deaths a year as justification to severely curtail the right to control your own body.

That leaves constitutional rights advocates at a loss for how to explain to strident advocates that the constitution is not a buffet - you don’t get to just pick the rights you like. If you are passionate in favor of any right, you need to be passionate in favor of all of them.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»Two peas in a pod: Aborti...»Reply #1