• Stopthatgirl7
    link
    107
    edit-2
    7 hours ago

    If you look at the ruling, the judge went in HARD:

    *Women are not some piece of collectively owned community property the disposition of which is decided by majority vote. Forcing a woman to carry an unwanted, not-yet-viable fetus to term violates her constitutional rights to liberty and privacy, even taking into consideration whatever bundle of rights the not-yet-viable fetus may have.

    And:

    For these women, the liberty of privacy means that they alone should choose whether they serve as human incubators for the five months leading up to viability. It is not for a legislator, a judge, or a Commander from The Handmaid’s Tale to tell these women what to do with their bodies during this period when the fetus cannot survive outside the womb any more so than society could – or should – force them to serve as a human tissue bank or to give up a kidney for the benefit of another.

    Source

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      544 hours ago

      This bits great too:

      While the State’s interest in protecting “unborn” life is compelling, until that life can be sustained by the State – and not solely by the woman compelled by the Act to do the State’s work – the balance of rights favors the woman.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        448 minutes ago

        My dude came out and said “If ya aint paying for the unborn ya dont have nothing of value to say”