Let's think of some things we can say bye to if Roe V. Henry Wade is overturned

[RB TexLa]

HIPPA is the first one that comes to mind.

Laws saying the government has an overriding interest in a birth occurring from someone's body would go into effect immediately. The next will be everyone lining up with their overriding interests. My wife could go to my doctor, insurance company and the MIB and say she has an interest in my health information greater than my privacy since it has an effect on her life and way of life. The courts would now have the precedence since I am no longer guaranteed privacy over what happens within my body. And certainly an employer would have an interest in knowing the health information of a prospective employee to determine if they can perform a job which has physical requirements and what kind of claims they might bring to their health insurance.

[no_hypocrisy]

1. Also the right to legal birth control. Once you establish there is

no inherent or fundamental right to privacy from the government, laws can be enacted to limit your right to procreate as you deem in your best interest.

[MonkeyFunk]

3. Probably not

the right to marital privacy came from Griswold v Connecticut, not Roe.

[no_hypocrisy]

5. One of two things.

A) If the inherent right to privacy is effectively challenged, marital rights will be subject to the whims of government, or

B) If the right to privacy is protected only for married people, then the right to birth control and be restricted if not prevented altogether to unmarried consumers.

[MonkeyFunk]

6. But there are other cases

defining the right to privacy, not just Roe or Griswold.

I doubt very much Roe would ever be overturned. I think parts of it could be changed, though, and I'm opposed to that, but I don't think the underlying right to privacy could be overturned at this point. Too many other decisions rely on it.

I could see the court tweaking it around the edges, but not overturning it wholesale. Nor do I think the Right Wing even WANTS to try - it's too much of a fundraising issue for them to actually want to change it.

[no_hypocrisy]

7. I can concede and agree with many of your points, provided the

"new" Roe decision goes the way you predict. I can unfortunately and cynically wonder whether the Supreme Court will overreach in his reasoning for a potential overturning of the decision.

[MonkeyFunk]

8. Then we just have to make sure

no more nutjobs get on the court.

Vote Democratic.

This is why the "I won't vote for XXXX..." threads are so annoying. Go vote for Nader, but then you can't bitch when a Bork-clone gets on the court.

[kestrel91316]

10. Remember, these freaks are quite open in their intention to

go after Griswold as soon as they have overturned Roe.

They intend to take us to The Republic of Gilead (a la Handmaid's Tale). Reproductive enslavement of women.

[MonkeyFunk]

11. Nah

they use it for fundraising. They know any real attempt to do so would eliminate the Republican party.

They've had the White House for 18 of the last 26 years, and the Congress for a sizeable portion of that. Not once has there been a real attempt to propose a constitutional amendment negating Roe, much less Griswold.

They have no real intention of overturning either - it's just meat for the base to slobber over.

[blm]

2. I don't believe ONE LAWMAKER in DC, Democrat or Republican really believes that

Roe v Wade will ever be overturned by law.

I think they just use it for their political battles and need for it to stay the way it is, while nibbling at its peripheral issues every now and then to make it seem more in play or threatened than it is. A GOP administration will tinker with it for their base, and the next Dem administration will put it back to where it was and where they all expect it to stay for the most part.

DC powerstructure has come up with a few key issues they can be volleyed back and forth between the two parties to keep the public focused away from the creeping fascism - abortion is one of them.

[ripmolly]

4. yes

I agree with you

[fooj]

9. If the repubs really wanted to overturn Roe v. Wade

They had 5+ years to do so. They didn't. It won't happen, imo. They had an opportunity and didn't go NEAR it. Wonder why that is...:sarcasm: