I have remarkable Readers. This Gentleman is one of them. Pass this on everywhere, my political friends. Fly!
From Larry Motuz:
I cannot determine what the SCOTUS will do.
Let's be clear though. In a free and democratic society, any absolute removal of the freedom to choose if and when to become a parent or have more children, including couples' abilities to decide if and when to expand their families --including all associated decisions about temporal spacing between one's children-- renders that society neither free nor democratic, but authoritarian and theocratic.
Whether that Court agrees or not, this has always been the goal of the anti-choice movement. I have said elsewhere that their intention is to take away the inherent power, right and authority of human beings to decide what is good for themselves and their families. They would do so by replacing this authority with their view that the biological heritage of mankind given by whatever god they worship requires the involuntary biological servitude of everyone to their god's dicta to beget children. Their god's dicta is whatever they choose to believe their god wants.
Thus, it is this biological begetting due to their own dicta which comprises the 'involuntary servitude' they seek to impose upon others. Note that since a biological pregnancy may begin as early as five years of age or less, well before pubescence, consent, or the physical, biological maturity to become pregnant and later beget without health hazards to the child begetting a baby, then these anti-choice persons must be considered fanatically opposed to human freedoms and human welfare.
This is not just a women's issue. It is also a family issue, a family welfare issue, a child issue and a child welfare issue. Ignoring these dimensions is the only way of imposing a theocracy upon a democracy.
I would like to see arguments made that undue burdens have been placed upon women, couples, families, and children. Such arguments could empower legislation preserving much of Roe vs. Wade against the burdensome incursions upon all of the above resulting from the Mississippi legislation being challenged and other States' legislation!
