Is abortion a violation of the 14th amendment to the constitution of the US?

The question is not about right to life as most people would think. It is about freedom of choice. A woman has a right to choose what to do with her body as the law stands now. Basically translated to mean that a woman has the right to determine whether or not she will be a parent. Why doesn't a man have that same choice?

A man and a woman both seniors in college pre-law or pre-med, not that it should matter but it does to many, decide to go on a date. Did they both have a choice? Yes, otherwise, it would be considered kidnapping.

As the date progresses, they both decide to have sex. Did they both have a choice? Yes, otherwise, it would be considered rape.

As precautious people they both decide to use contraception in some form, again both making a choice. However, the contraception fails. What happens to choice here?

The woman can have the child, give the child up for adoption, abort the child. What choice does the man have, whatever the court dictates. Choice? ah.. No!

First of all, the law has much to say about what you can or can't do with your body. The law states that you cannot rape someone, or assault someone, or even touch someone in an unwanted manner (simple assault). There are typically over 100 pages of Penal Code statutes that specify what we can or can鈥檛 do with our bodies. Actually, the Penal Code must provide a written exception to homicide that allows a mother to murder her unborn child through the act of a medical procedure. What I am waiting for is the first father who actually cares enough about his unborn child to file a lawsuit against the mother who aborts the baby has deprived him of his 鈥減roperty鈥?(i.e. 50% of the child鈥檚 DNA belongs to the father) and has therefore violated the father鈥檚 constitutional rights. The 14th Amendment states that no one (that includes men) may be deprived of life, liberty, or PROPERTY without due process of law. So, even if you refuse to admit that the unborn child has the right to life, you CANNOT deny that one-half of the baby belongs to the father. Therefore, before a mother could destroy the unborn child, a court hearing would have to be allowed before the father could be deprived of his property rights and interests of the child. Keep in mind there is NO RIGHT TO PRIVACY clause contained within the U.S Constitution like the justices suddenly found in 1973. However, the right to Due Process prior to a deprivation of a property interest is CLEARLY a guaranteed right.

The first sentence of the 14th amendment clearly states that it applies to those BORN and naturalized within the US. Report It

Yes, I think that the man who caused the pregnancy would have to be a US citizen to claim rights don't you

the courts have already established that they don't think the unborn have any .... duh?!@ Report It

No it isn't

There is much Feminist Jurisprudence within the legal system, and men's rights have been undermined.

In any event, the Roe vs Wade decision that provides a license to kill disguised as "choice" is as sick you can get. The choice exists when people make the choice to spread their legs or unzip their pants.

Yes it seems it does, I think it should b equal rights all the way around, woman need to get over themselves and stop wanting all this freaking 'special" treatment.

And they wonder hwy they have a hard time making it in the corporate world, its because they beotch and moan about everything not being fair, but they dont want Fair, they want superiority.

Good points. However the rights of the unborn child are always forgotten.

What ever happened to: "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness"? Should not this apply to those too weak to speak?

Your assumption that says that the issue is simply about whether to become a parent is the place where you are going wrong, I think. The issue affects the woman MUCH more than the man, the woman is the one who has to deal with the issue for 9 months, not the man. It is not a simple decision about whether to become a parent, unfortunately.

good question, however since the woman is the one who is carrying the child in her own body, my thought is that the choice belongs to her according to law.
this doesn't, of course, address the small issue of support for a child that she decides to birth, but the father did not want OR on the other hand, the grief he feels when the woman decides to abort. And even further - the father who wanted it but the mother who gave it away for adoption......


I know you didn't want a comment about it, but since this clearly demonstrates the tangled web we are weaving regarding human sexuality and reporoduction, doesn't abstinence and making abortion illegal look more and more attractive?

The woman is the one who gives birth. It's about her body, therefore her choice.

And frankly, men don't have a very good track record of taking care of/supporting children. There are 10 million single mothers in the US, and 2 million single fathers.

no. it's not a violation. and consider yourself lucky to be a man because you don't have to deal with periods once a month. so let us choose what we want to do with our bodies.

Abortion is not mentioned in the Constitution. By the 10th Amendment, legalizing it is reverted to the individual states. It is not the court's job to make laws.

Your point is good.

It could well be a violation of the 14th amendment for the unborn child--no choice at all there!!

But, alas, no representation either!

Well man don't have physical connection to the baby like umbellical cord. So the baby is considered part of woman's body. Roe v Wade concluded woman have right over her body. But many still argue other wise by pointing out consititution does not actually include abortion right as Roe v Wade had concluded. Justice Scalia is big critic of Roe v Wade and thinks it should be over turned on the base that constitution doesn't guarantee abortion right and not that abortion should be banned through out.

But your argument on man not having 'choice' won't go any where unless you find a dude with umbellical cord connected to baby inside woman's belly.

Abortion is a violation of the Constitution because it stops the right to life of an unborn person.

excuse me for saying this politely! if you going to play then you going to have to deal with the consequences so if that means you get pregnant then you deal with it. for one if you don't want children then you don't have children or have sex to start with. now if you find yourself pregnant then you can give up the baby for adoption. to start with you should be using birth control pills if you do not want to get pregnant. abortion is not a form a birth control it is a baby not a fetus life begins at conception rather you want to admit it or not. second I am not going to to call it a fetus now if you going to use unsafe sex and he could use rubbers then you will get pregnant what else can you do give up the baby for adoption. you can keep the baby just think about what you going to do before it happens before you end up in the situation. abortion is murder and you do not know what it does to baby it screaming for it life do you want your baby to suffering of course not. do you want to do this for connivance and not only that there the emotional suffering you go through. when you go through an abortion you can bleed to death is worth your life. not only that you go through post abortion trauma which you can you go through suicide just because you boyfriend does not mean you give it to him. you do the right thing let your baby live. give it to a nice family and don't let anyone talk you into it. what about the rights about the unborn they have none someone needs to speak for the rights of the unborn child. no one speaks for the rights of the unborn child so what I waiting for is maybe farthers to stop abortions from happening and bills to make abortion doctors to tell women the truth. I also waiting for a place where a women can go into home where they have no place to go and find themselves pregant and they can stay there to raise there baby where the state funds them home. they can pay what they can with a low income but the baby would be saved. the baby would be saved. we need to find a way to help these women.