Exactly. |
The Court itself is not banning abortion, but it appears that it would permit states to ban abortion. All in the name of democracy, of course. But what the Court appears to be saying is that there are no Constitutional limits on state abortion laws. In another words, under the US Constitution, a state could force a woman to carry a pregnancy to term, even in case of rape or life of mother. Whether a state would do so is not relevant. No Constitutional limits, apparently. And we actually know that several states are considering such laws. So, the Court apparently is saying that a form of slavery is okay under our Constitution. |
This is exactly what they’re saying. Women will be enslaved to the religious beliefs of crazy extremists. And, at least in the version Alito leaked because he was so proud of it, women can’t have rights because we didn’t always have rights. I wonder if Clarence Thomas understands what his colleagues think of him or if he’s just happy to be a part of the leopards eating faces movement and thinks it won’t affect him. |
There is blood on people’s hand no matter what the decision is. |
They decide to take away an important constitutional right from all our and their children and grandchildren and they can't tolerate protests? Give me a break poor poor little justices. Or will that take away that right next? |
There was no constitutional right to abortion. They can't take away something that wasn't there to begin with. |
You were doing fine until you equated protecting unborn children to slavery. Any argument for abortion that does not factor in the life of the unborn child is not going to be meaningful. |
Awwwwwww. They seem perturbed that most of the country would beg to differ. |
How many pregnancies, miscarriages, ivf procedures, and other serious reproductive issues have you actually had? You can make as many little pithy pronouncements as you want but you are not welcome or effective in these issues unless they are occurring in your own uterus or you are invited in. |
Not according to Alito. If you are going to follow originist theory as Alito proposes, the Constitution says that there are no rights until birth. So unborn children do not have any rights, including the right to life. |
The odd thing is that by the text of Alito's majority draft, SCOTUS can easily overturn Loving and invalidate Thomas' marriage. The right to marry other races was NOT legal prior to Loving and the language of Alito's draft says that citizens are not entitled to that right because it wasn't originally a right. Blacks had no right to marry whites. |
That is as ridiculous as overturning Roe. |
Dripping in blood since Roe vs Wade. |
Whether you are pro abortion or opposed, the only people living in fantasyland are those who try to deny that a baby is growing and developing inside its mother. |
You thinking you are involved in this issue concerning my daughter's uterus is fantasyland. This does not and will not concern you. |