Roe Vs Wade Overturned

[Dill]

(12-08-2022, 08:48 PM)michaelsean Wrote: I’m not referring to any states rights people in particular. Read the comment and let me know if you agree with it or not.

Not sure which comment you are referring to. Big P's?

I've made clear that recognizing the original states righters desire to protect slavery does not equate to a claim
that, given this origin, anyone currently invoking states rights to defend some policy is therefore also pro slavery. 

If "states rights people" does not refer to 10thers or some such specific group, then the category is probably loose enough to
include me, who will invoke states' rights doctrine to defend MT's campaign contribution laws. 

I hope everyone notices that the tenor of my posts on this topic has been to expand the range of issues covered
by states' rights claims, not to strictly equate it with pro slavery sentiment.

If there is disagreement between you/Hollo and me, then I think that has more to do with the issue of WHETHER
and perhaps HOW SR history should be mentioned at all in discussion of current policies, such as those concerning 
abortion or gun laws. I am always going to fall on the side of historical contextualization, though I grant that just
invoking an ante-bellum movement is not, in itself, sufficient to meet that standard. I'm assuming all three of us agree that
just invoking states' rights on any current issue does not, ipso facto, make one pro slavery.