• @bostonbananarama@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    111 months ago

    And you strike me as an originalist.

    Definitely not.

    Kavanaugh, Barrett, and even Gorsuch all specifically said they would never vote to overturn the 50 years of precedent

    Did you believe them? Never had a doubt they’d vote that way.

    I’ve read every majority, minority, and concurring opinions from Griswold, Roe, Lawrence, Planned Parenthood v Casey, Lawrence, Windsor, Obergefell, and, of course, Dobbs.

    Congrats, you and every other 1L.

    Clarence Thomas’ is especially mortifying.

    For a refreshing change of pace?

    Roe was terribly reasoned and made for bad law. In the same way Dobbs was the result of starting with a conclusion and then reasoning it, so was Roe.

    A better basis for abortion access is bodily autonomy. A constitutional right to say how one’s body is used is at the heart of all other rights. That’s a much better foundation than privacy.

    • @HandBreadedTools@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      011 months ago

      Refreshing change of place? Motherfucker Thomas’ opinion said they should “revisit” other cases like Lawrence. Obviously when he says “revisit” he means overturn. You saying that confirms literally all I need to know about your intent

      Stop trying your manipulative, disingenuous arguments here, they mean the same as the shit fascists like DeSantis say

      • @bostonbananarama@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        011 months ago

        Refreshing change of place? Motherfucker Thomas’ opinion said they should “revisit” other cases like Lawrence. Obviously when he says “revisit” he means overturn.

        So you have no sense of sarcasm?

        Stop trying your manipulative, disingenuous arguments here, they mean the same as the shit fascists like DeSantis say

        I’m sorry, you’re too stupid to continue this. Nothing I said was manipulative or fascistic, your reading comprehension is abysmal.