Yes it does. “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed” is pretty clear language. Telling someone that they can’t own a gun because they are in the “waiting period” is a pretty definite infringement by definition alone.

I figure that the crowd who endorses a “cooling off period” for gun purchasers should have no problem with this.

13 year old should not have screwed anything that moves, then it would not be pregers.

1 – 13 year old pregnant is a “she”, not an “it”

2 – in your world, I guess rape never happens

Why don’t you offer something intelligent about how to handle 13 year old pregnant girls instead of this?

Great logic there…

And if you’re going to make it mandatory that women be told about this study, what are you willing to accept before exercising other rights? Having to read the writings of Sarah Brady before buying firearm? Listening to Barry Lynn speeches before going to church? Visiting the ACLU website prior to voicing your opinion?

All that is obviously something different.

A reasonable waiting period before buying a firearm does not infringe on my right to bear arms. Neither does a reasonable waiting period before performing an abortion. And you should ALWAYS be informed of the risks you take before you agree to a medical procedure of any kind.

Btw, the Constitution treats religion differently saying ” Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion” so they can’t regulate religion in the way they can regulate firearms.

…rights that are handed down by a court and “”rights” that are handed down by the courts and rights that are dictated in the Constitution. I believe that those rights given in the Constitution (free speech, bear arms, etc) should be held in a higher regard and thus less regulated, if at all, than those rights that are given out by judges.

Rights are neither dictated by the constitution nor handed down by courts. Humans are endowed with rights that exist regardless of what governments decide. Governments can recognize rights, but just because they deny rights doesn’t mean those rights don’t exist. (That’s what that whole ‘We hold these truths to be self evident’ thing was about.)

We tend to recognize this truth when looking at other countries, say North Korea. We know NK regularly denies human rights, but the NK government doesn’t recognize the same human rights we do. From our vantage point it’s easy to see that just because they deny the existence of certain rights doesn’t make it so.

OTOH, be careful what you wish for, guys. I know how passionately you feel about this issue. But if you start placing these kinds of restrictions on abortion you’re not any different than those on the other side who want to limit our other rights.

It’s one thing to demand parental notification or to ban partial-birth procedures. But a waiting period because ‘you’ want to be sure the woman has sufficiently ‘thought about it?

And if you’re going to make it mandatory that women be told about this study, what are you willing to accept before exercising other rights? Having to read the writings of Sarah Brady before buying firearm? Listening to Barry Lynn speeches before going to church? Visiting the ACLU website prior to voicing your opinion?

Regards…

Two conflicting quotes pulled from one website. Regulation is often a bad thing, even if done with good intentions. Your use of the second quote leads me to think you understand that, but you will make exceptions for your pet causes. As previous commenters have noted, that’s what the other side does.