Hey guys, do you realize the Supreme Court wants to tell you what you can do with your body?
What, wait a minute, isn’t that leaked ruling on abortion supposed to be all about women’s rights? I’m not a woman, what does it have to do with me?
Welcome to the slippery slope. Watch your step.
See what that ruling says in essence is that a woman (person) doesn’t have any rights when it comes to their own personal body. If a woman is pregnant then she has to, in the words of Kate McKinnon as Amy Coney Barrett, do her nine and pop it. In the opening paragraph of the opinion Sammy The Bullshit gives it all away by saying
Some believe fervently that a human person comes into being at conception and that abortion ends an innocent life. Others feel just as strongly that any regulation of abortion invades a woman’s right to control her own body and prevents women from achieving full equality.
So the “some” who have a moral belief that life begins at conception get to have their belief codified into law and the “others” are being told to go pound sand. Hence the court holds that moral beliefs supersede legal rights. Odd thing for a legal body to be saying. One would think a court, instituted to protect the rule of law, would side with legal rights over moral beliefs, but hey, this particular version of the Supremes is nothing but a conservative hit squad out to do the bidding of their big money friends.
What they are really doing is getting that pesky abortion issue out of the way so that when the time comes and some issue has to be decided that is patently against the interests of the American public at large but definitely in the interests of a certain monied class conservatives will back them up. An example would be an expansion of Kelo vs. City of New London, the case that allowed public entities (cities) to take private property and then give said property to private companies for them to develop and make money. Conservatives (Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee for instance) like to give lip service to individual property rights but if a large corporation wanted Mr. and Mrs. Small Farmer’s land and couldn’t get them to sell, they’d turn to the local government with pleas that the community would have a greater return on that land with them then Mr. and Mrs. Small Farmer and get the county to use eminent domain to seize it.
Funny how they don’t consider a woman’s body to be her personal property.
More importantly the question has to be asked where does this stop? I know there has been much talk about restricting contraception or overturning gay marriage, but even if they achieve those goals, they are not going to stop there. If Sammy the Bullshit can quote little known 17th century religious fanatics as rationale to strike down a woman’s right to choose, who’s to say he wouldn’t go back even further to come up with some bizarre precedent. “As Attila the Hun was quoted as saying….”
Hey Supremes, let’s go to the other gender in a medical/legal/personal decision case. If the government has the right to ban abortion then how long before a case is brought that says the government has a right to force people to have children. It’s amazing to think how easy that would be. “We need more children to take care of the earlier generation and pay into the social security system. Let’s make some laws”. Hence say good bye to not just contraception, but vasectomies as well. “I’m sorry Farmer Smith, I know you don’t want to have any more kids, but the state of Alabama says it’s illegal for me to cut the vas deference of a man”.
Oh, did that get your attention men?
Now I don’t want to say that there is a correlation between a man having a voluntary vasectomy and a woman being in the untenable situation of a necessary abortion. Obviously an abortion is far more life effecting for a woman than a vasectomy is for a man. But this is where we are headed. Sterilization of the mentally challenged? Sammy the Bullshit would say there are centuries of English Common Law and actual practice to back that up. Throwing the physically deformed into the sea to drown? We’re just cleaning up the race, he’d say, nothing in the Constitution says we can’t. Forcing the deaf to get Cochlear Implants? Well it’s in society’s interest to have everyone be able to hear and besides, the Constitution doesn’t say we can’t.
Sammy the BS lives in the land of the double negative. Unfortunately he wants us to live there with him.
I have long said that if you are morally opposed to abortion then don’t have one. Abortion is a moral question, it is not a legal question. And if it’s not a legal question then the government has no business being involved in it. That’s what is meant by separation of church and state. Again, not to make an equation, but it’s a personal moral choice whether I’m a vegetarian or keep kosher or halal or abstain from sex or am a libertine or a million other things, but they are my choice to make, not the government’s. Once the group starts saying the individual MUST accede to the group’s wishes, just because they feel it is the moral thing to do, we head down that slippery slope.
And if you don’t believe me, check the historical record. It’s under Germany, Nazi. If that’s too far to go may I suggest checking Iran, Islamic Republic of.