LogFAQs > #973820628

famfam posted...

that has nothing to do with strict interpretation of the constitution, and in fact, abortion is not a right guaranteed in the constitution

Roe v Wade declared a right to privacy, in this case medical privacy. That's why Thomas immediately said he wanted to challenge other cases based off that right to privacy, to end anti-sodomy laws, contraception, and I believe same-sex marriage as well.

And if you think that the Founding Fathers, the guys who made sure to make an amendment saying no forced quartering of soldiers, didn't intend for us to have a right to some sort of privacy just because they didn't literally put it in the Cons. then you are very open to fascism.

This court is legislating off of their Christian Nationalist beliefs, we see that in regards to Roe as well as siding with the football coach praying on the 50 yd line which has been used by TX to justify forcing every classroom to have a large-scale Ten Commandments so they can indoctrinate children.

And recently Thomas was the deciding vote revoking the protections on wetlands because Harlan Crowe's son wants to develop on it.

If you truly believe that this right-wing christo-fascist court actually cares about consistency or even the literal lettering of the law unless it suits them, then I dunno what to tell ya other than you likely agree with how they've been ruling.