07-19-2022, 03:57 PM
(07-19-2022, 02:27 PM)michaelsean Wrote:As far as contraception, what exactly could the Supreme Court do? I can't picture what the case looks like that they could act upon.
IUDs and the day-after pill are major targets for the "pro-birth" crowd. They act to prevent the implantation of the fertilized egg in the uterus. Those types of birth control are considered abortifacients by them. The fight will come in states such as Oklahoma that have laws that have declared life begins at conception (without ever defining conception). IUDs are FDA-approved devices and the day-after pill is available OTC. IUDs are very effective at preventing pregnancy and have a different side effect profile from birth control pills which some women can not take. They have the benefit of being long-term implants, unlike a diaphragm which has to be inserted before sexual activity and removed afterward.
The other big way to impact contraception is for a state to pass legislation that requires parental permission for a minor to obtain birth control. Remember pro-birth pushers also have the unrealistic belief that abstinence is the only birth control teenagers need.
If SCOTUS upholds laws such as these, there will be a huge impact on women
I can't see any reason for Obergefell to be overturned. It is less a privacy issue and more an equal protection one. The government should have no interest in preventing marriage between 2 consenting adults regardless of sex. The Constitution allows for states to recognize marriages that legally occurred in other jurisdictions. If one is married in a state that allows for same-sex marriage then even states that don't allow it must recognize the legality of the marriage and afford all of the same protections that all married couples receive. Just like they do when a state allows an underaged girl to get married at 15 and they move to a state that doesn't allow 15-year-olds to marry. The ONLY objections to same-sex marriage are religious nothing in civil law that actually regulates marriage should prevent it under the equal protection clause
Fueled by the pursuit of greatness.
