OK, so you’re asking: how does one work abortion into the Second Amendment? Professor Mary Anne Franks has a piece in the Boston Globe in which she rewrites both the First and Second Amendments, and she reimagines the Second Amendment to be less about arms and militias and more about bodily autonomy, such as the right to not get shot and the right to an abortion.

Franks writes:

The Second Amendment’s idiosyncratic and anachronistic focus on militias and “arms” degrades the concept of self-defense. The right to safeguard one’s life should not be conflated with or reduced to the right to use a weapon, especially a weapon that is so much more likely to inflict injury and death than to avoid it. Far better would be an amendment that guarantees a meaningful right to bodily autonomy and obligates the government to implement reasonable measures to protect public health and safety:

All people have the right to bodily autonomy consistent with the right of other people to the same, including the right to defend themselves against unlawful force and the right of self-determination in reproductive matters. The government shall take reasonable measures to protect the health and safety of the public as a whole.

Putting the government in complete charge of protecting the health and safety of the public — just what the Founders had in mind when they wrote the Second Amendment. And we also like the qualifier, “reasonable measures” — and progressives claim the Second Amendment is too vague as it is.

She also rewrites the First Amendment to take into account abuse of free speech and the dignity of all persons:

Every person has the right to freedom of expression, association, peaceful assembly, and petition of the government for redress of grievances, consistent with the rights of others to the same and subject to responsibility for abuses. All conflicts of such rights shall be resolved in accordance with the principle of equality and dignity of all persons.

Both the freedom of religion and the freedom from religion shall be respected by the government. The government may not single out any religion for interference or endorsement, nor may it force any person to accept or adhere to any religious belief or practice.

That’s not quite as bad, but it’s bad.

Good point.

We’d like to see as many people worked up about that rewrite of the Second Amendment. Would it at least bar the president from mandating vaccines?


Recommended Twitchy Video