I'm not even hoping for it,I want democrats punished in 2022 and 2024. I think abortion is a big enough issue to get many pissed off democrats out to the polls who otherwise would have stayed home though.
Kamala Harris has been reading the forum. This is the right argument but they need to get bolder and explain how it is actually oppression.
And the response is, there is no right to murder someone in private. The government has been "interfering" in decisions to murder for a long time.
Well by way of extension, should the draft of the Dobbs opinion become law it allows for abortion at a state level so technically it’s not murder even under Dobbs.
Dobbs does not outlaw abortion so abortions will continue in the U.S. despite your objections to it...so the SC does not call it murder.
Well I guess the US could now remove need for permission to take organs for transplants. What's yours is not yours if another life depends on it. Anyway, life is not sacred, that's just not how the world works. Terr understands this posting Telegram videos of people getting blown to bits. The value of life and the legality of ending it is always situational.
Just because you have no "right" to do something doesn't mean it can't be done. Lots of things are done, and not everything done is done because it is a "right". But no, there is no and should not be a "right" to murder someone.
What the SC rightly says is that there is no such "right". So whether it *can* be done or not should be decided by legislatures at state level.
To understand her privacy reference largely requires knowing what both Roe and Doe were about but few understand how Doe v. Bolton plus Roe v. Wade judgements were joined. Well few have heard of Doe I expect. If memory serves from my mom discussing it a looong time ago, the right to privacy (within a marriage) came more from then Doe side of the coin.
The right to privacy in a marriage came from a few cases collectively such as Griswold; Loving; and Lawrence cases. Since Roe was not about marriage it simply tried to expand the discussion in Griswold to include abortion. Doe was regarding GA statutes on abortion that required a physician and a special committee before abortion was allowed etc.. There was a married couple but it followed Roe basically The right to privacy was inferred by several Court decisions by collectively reading the following amendments together: First Amendment: Provides the freedom to choose any kind of religious belief and to keep that choice private. Third Amendment: Protects the zone of privacy of the home. Fourth Amendment: Protects the right of privacy against unreasonable searches and seizures by the government. Fifth Amendment: Provides for the right against self-incrimination, which justifies the protection of private information. Ninth Amendment: This amendment is interpreted to justify a broad reading the Bill of Rights to protect your fundamental right to privacy in ways not provided for in the first eight amendments. Fourteenth Amendment: Prohibits states from making laws that infringe upon the personal autonomy protections provided for in the first thirteen amendments. Prior to the Fourteenth Amendment, a state could make laws that violated freedom of speech, religion, etc. R v W read this right to also include abortion and Dobbs basically says no and that it is not part of this RECOGNIZED right to privacy (i.e. SC does not dispute right to privacy, just that abortion is not part of its protections).