Anonymous
05/03/2022 21:52
Subject: Re:“We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled," Justice Alito writes in an initial majority draft
Anonymous
05/03/2022 21:51
Subject: “We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled," Justice Alito writes in an initial majority draft
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I’m making myself read the damn thing and I don’t think I’ve ever been more disgusted. Apparently women have no fundamental rights to bodily autonomy that are rooted in the country’s history. Well. That sounds about right.
Expand the court.
Also historians are pointing out that Alito’s main assumption is incorrect. In most states, abortion was legal before quickening. Deeply rooted in history.
Well then, historians don’t know that the absence of criminal prohibitions is not the same as the presence of a deeply rooted right. If it were tuxedo Wednesdays would be a fundamental right
No. He made a big deal that back before women could vote, most states criminalized abortion, and that somehow means there can never be a right to abortion ever. But most of those old laws punished abortion only after quickening, which means there was a recognized right before quickening. That was also the common law history. It wasn’t controversial.
Also, the correct analogy would be that having Tuxedo Wednesdays is none of the government’s business.
On the tuxedo Wednesday thing, we agree: it is none of the government’s business in the same respect that abortion is none of the government’s business. In other words, there is no constitutional dimension to either
DP. You have a right to tuxedo Wednesday. The government can’t stop you because the constitution enumerates the powers of the government. Not the rights of the people. And the government can’t stop me from ending a pregnancy I don’t want. Someone show me where the constitution gives the government that power, because I’m not seeing it in this BS “opinion”
lol ok so you believe I have a constitutional right to tuxedo Wednesday? Ok bud
Of course you do. Go for it!
Anonymous
Anonymous
05/03/2022 21:50
Subject: “We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled," Justice Alito writes in an initial majority draft
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I’m making myself read the damn thing and I don’t think I’ve ever been more disgusted. Apparently women have no fundamental rights to bodily autonomy that are rooted in the country’s history. Well. That sounds about right.
Expand the court.
Also historians are pointing out that Alito’s main assumption is incorrect. In most states, abortion was legal before quickening. Deeply rooted in history.
Well then, historians don’t know that the absence of criminal prohibitions is not the same as the presence of a deeply rooted right. If it were tuxedo Wednesdays would be a fundamental right
No. He made a big deal that back before women could vote, most states criminalized abortion, and that somehow means there can never be a right to abortion ever. But most of those old laws punished abortion only after quickening, which means there was a recognized right before quickening. That was also the common law history. It wasn’t controversial.
Also, the correct analogy would be that having Tuxedo Wednesdays is none of the government’s business.
On the tuxedo Wednesday thing, we agree: it is none of the government’s business in the same respect that abortion is none of the government’s business. In other words, there is no constitutional dimension to either
DP. You have a right to tuxedo Wednesday. The government can’t stop you because the constitution enumerates the powers of the government. Not the rights of the people. And the government can’t stop me from ending a pregnancy I don’t want. Someone show me where the constitution gives the government that power, because I’m not seeing it in this BS “opinion”
lol ok so you believe I have a constitutional right to tuxedo Wednesday? Ok bud
Anonymous
05/03/2022 21:49
Subject: “We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled," Justice Alito writes in an initial majority draft
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I’m making myself read the damn thing and I don’t think I’ve ever been more disgusted. Apparently women have no fundamental rights to bodily autonomy that are rooted in the country’s history. Well. That sounds about right.
Expand the court.
Also historians are pointing out that Alito’s main assumption is incorrect. In most states, abortion was legal before quickening. Deeply rooted in history.
Well then, historians don’t know that the absence of criminal prohibitions is not the same as the presence of a deeply rooted right. If it were tuxedo Wednesdays would be a fundamental right
Abortion and contraception was legal in the US before Emancipation. Chew on that, and understand what that REALLY means.
If you’re suggesting that emancipation was once illegal, I’m not sure that’s correct?
NP here:
No, the point is that abortion and contraception was legal when it was still legal to rape your slave. They then banned abortion after the slaves were freed.
Get it yet?
Bruh, do you even Blackstone?
Anonymous
05/03/2022 21:49
Subject: “We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled," Justice Alito writes in an initial majority draft
Anonymous wrote:Any laws in the books restricting a man's ability to make decisions for it's body
LOL, hell no.
Anonymous
05/03/2022 21:48
Subject: “We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled," Justice Alito writes in an initial majority draft
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I’m making myself read the damn thing and I don’t think I’ve ever been more disgusted. Apparently women have no fundamental rights to bodily autonomy that are rooted in the country’s history. Well. That sounds about right.
Expand the court.
Also historians are pointing out that Alito’s main assumption is incorrect. In most states, abortion was legal before quickening. Deeply rooted in history.
Well then, historians don’t know that the absence of criminal prohibitions is not the same as the presence of a deeply rooted right. If it were tuxedo Wednesdays would be a fundamental right
His argument specifically states that abortion has historically been illegal. That is false and shoddy history intentionally distorted to provide a veneer of respectability to a patently political act. Yet history is his main argument. It's just like their inability to understand deism or anything else complex and nuanced about the past.
If you think Alito’s argument can be boiled down to the proposition that you have a constitutional right to engage in any activity that has not been “historically…illegal” and that abortion is not such a right then you’re just misreading the opinion.
Anonymous
05/03/2022 21:47
Subject: “We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled," Justice Alito writes in an initial majority draft
Anonymous wrote:Any laws in the books restricting a man's ability to make decisions for it's body
Nope. I can’t think of any restriction for obtaining any other healthcare services on the books. Roe was wrong in that it gave the government power it doesn’t have to limit the choices of women in their healthcare. That’s all I’ll allow and it doesn’t mean it should be overturned to expand that nonexistent power.
Anonymous
05/03/2022 21:47
Subject: Re:“We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled," Justice Alito writes in an initial majority draft
Anonymous
05/03/2022 21:46
Subject: “We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled," Justice Alito writes in an initial majority draft
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I’m making myself read the damn thing and I don’t think I’ve ever been more disgusted. Apparently women have no fundamental rights to bodily autonomy that are rooted in the country’s history. Well. That sounds about right.
Expand the court.
Also historians are pointing out that Alito’s main assumption is incorrect. In most states, abortion was legal before quickening. Deeply rooted in history.
Well then, historians don’t know that the absence of criminal prohibitions is not the same as the presence of a deeply rooted right. If it were tuxedo Wednesdays would be a fundamental right
No. He made a big deal that back before women could vote, most states criminalized abortion, and that somehow means there can never be a right to abortion ever. But most of those old laws punished abortion only after quickening, which means there was a recognized right before quickening. That was also the common law history. It wasn’t controversial.
Also, the correct analogy would be that having Tuxedo Wednesdays is none of the government’s business.
On the tuxedo Wednesday thing, we agree: it is none of the government’s business in the same respect that abortion is none of the government’s business. In other words, there is no constitutional dimension to either
If it’s none of the government’s business then the government can’t ban it. That is in the Constitution.
Anonymous
05/03/2022 21:46
Subject: “We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled," Justice Alito writes in an initial majority draft
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I'm a Democrat, pro-choice, and a law professor. With that said, I agree with Justice Ginsburg: the logic of Roe was haphazardly pieced together. Casey is proof of that. My sincere hope is the final decision gives some limited federal protection at the federal level, kicks it back to the states, and opens the door for an equal protections argument in the future.
In other words, you do not believe women have the right to bodily autonomy or to make their own medical decisions.
I do, but the Roe legal argument was not super great. Roe should be about equal protection, not privacy.
and do you believe that would stop republicans from passing anti-abortion laws?
Anonymous
05/03/2022 21:45
Subject: “We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled," Justice Alito writes in an initial majority draft
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I’m making myself read the damn thing and I don’t think I’ve ever been more disgusted. Apparently women have no fundamental rights to bodily autonomy that are rooted in the country’s history. Well. That sounds about right.
Expand the court.
Also historians are pointing out that Alito’s main assumption is incorrect. In most states, abortion was legal before quickening. Deeply rooted in history.
Well then, historians don’t know that the absence of criminal prohibitions is not the same as the presence of a deeply rooted right. If it were tuxedo Wednesdays would be a fundamental right
Abortion and contraception was legal in the US before Emancipation. Chew on that, and understand what that REALLY means.
If you’re suggesting that emancipation was once illegal, I’m not sure that’s correct?
NP here:
No, the point is that abortion and contraception was legal when it was still legal to rape your slave. They then banned abortion after the slaves were freed.
Get it yet?
Anonymous
Anonymous
05/03/2022 21:42
Subject: “We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled," Justice Alito writes in an initial majority draft
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I’m making myself read the damn thing and I don’t think I’ve ever been more disgusted. Apparently women have no fundamental rights to bodily autonomy that are rooted in the country’s history. Well. That sounds about right.
Expand the court.
Also historians are pointing out that Alito’s main assumption is incorrect. In most states, abortion was legal before quickening. Deeply rooted in history.
Well then, historians don’t know that the absence of criminal prohibitions is not the same as the presence of a deeply rooted right. If it were tuxedo Wednesdays would be a fundamental right
His argument specifically states that abortion has historically been illegal. That is false and shoddy history intentionally distorted to provide a veneer of respectability to a patently political act. Yet history is his main argument. It's just like their inability to understand deism or anything else complex and nuanced about the past.
Anonymous
05/03/2022 21:42
Subject: “We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled," Justice Alito writes in an initial majority draft
Any laws in the books restricting a man's ability to make decisions for it's body