Kamala may be stretching it a bit because the right to privacy is guaranteed by the Constitution, the right to an abortion is not according to the Dobbs decision as written. That is all they tried to say. Abortion, according to DOBBS is a competing decision between the woman and the State on the decision on the fetus and therefore a legislature should be addressing it. The Court concedes that there is also nothing in the constitution that prohibits abortion. One key issue is both the ROE and DOBBS courts recognize the interests of the State due to existence at some point of a fetus or baby depending your belief or science, which is a 3rd party. All other rights to privacy involve the person or people together and their decisions free from government intervention as long as no accepted laws are broken. Therefore to say that this court will go after gay marriage or similar rights is a big stretch bordering on hyperbole and could backfire for the Dems. The DOBBS decision says: None of the other decisions cited by Roe and Casey involved the critical moral question posed by abortion. They are therefore inapposite. Other decisions refer to rights to privacy in marriage for example or who to marry. The Dobbs author says: ‘These attempts to justify abortion through appeals to a broader right to autonomy and to define one's “concept of existence” prove too much. Casey, 505 U. S., at 851. The Court is implicity recognizing the right to autonomy in decisions of marriage, procreation, child rearing etc... These simple sentences are basically upholding the precedent that this decision specifically addresses abortion and will do nothing to undo decades of precedent on establishing the right to privacy. Therefore the Dems need to realize that claiming DOBBS will be precedent to undo gay marriages or other rights is just not true.
Going from memory of this in the early '90s, wasn't there something about Georgia (Doe) requiring a committee to approve an abortion? This effectively made privacy a practical impossibility Edit: sorry you mentioned the committee, but it does make privacy impractical.
It seems lost on the entire world that a fetus does not have consciousness. A baby 1 YO does not have self-awareness. It really needs to be scientifically studied. At what point does a human become a person, and a personality? At what point does a life become life? Can anyone here recall life in the womb? If anyone here claims, "Yeah, I remember hearing my mom's heartbeat and the things she was talking about before I was born, because I heard it through her abdomen", I declare them a liar. Seriously, think about it. Without true memory, there is no existence.
Duh, once the personality is developed, the human is an individual. If they lose said cognizance late in life they are still a personality, and have an established life. Social security number, family bonds, memories...Those can be salvaged. But a fetus in a womb has none of that. B1, do you have pre-birth memories, man? Why the hell are you so against abortion?
A friend of mine runs an MRI research company and by five months babies exhibit a "late slow wave" which is a strong indicator of a little bit of consciousness, by eight months its very strong. They may not recognise themselves in a mirror but by a year there is some self-awareness. In any case many are really just in the every sperm is sacred religious camp and missed their waves however late these were.
And self-awareness can only be validated by memory recall! Without memory recall, there is no self! I think I am not getting my point across clearly, because clearly this is a complicated and deep issue to tackle. One thing I do know is that you really suck at using Python to make your point. After all, this thread is about abortion. C'mon Bugen, you can do better!