The argument for me is simple. You either argue for freedom or subjugation. I try and stay consistent in my beliefs while adapting to the evidence I can ascertain. Freedom to carry a firearm is a freedom I hold dearly. The freedom to choose what happens to my body is another freedom I hold dearly. Pro-gun and freedom to choose are consistent. I believe that any religion attempting to use the political process to subjugate a population to its belief system is violating the principles of freedom.
I don’t like abortion and my personal belief system is against it. However, I don’t think it should be legislated away. I consider religion politics at its root. Arguing to subjugate somebody to my belief system is inherently wrong as a citizen of the nation. Ethics and morals are mine. Freedoms and laws are ours. We should not impose one with the other.
My test for a law or legislation is does it preserve and create freedom or does it restrict and subjugate. If the latter, we must be skeptical and test this with a default of it’s not right. The principle is consistent whether pro-choice, anti-Disney, open carry of firearms, or mandated Covid Vaccines.
Example: Law enforcement that subjugates communities and requires specific behaviors be met is bad. Law enforcement that protects the rights of communities to go about their life free from violence is good.
To quote the aphorism, “The liberty to swing your fist ends where my nose begins.” The fine line of freedom and victimization is for a court to decide absent the polity of public opinion. The Supreme Court of the United States exists solely for the purpose of protecting liberty and often the unenumerated rights created by the principle of the 9th amendment and how to read the Constitution.
I see the idea of representative democracy thrown around to support banning a right to choose as what the majority wants. To be sure the majority of the nation does not support banning abortion. A majority of the nation does not support the legislation of one religion’s screed. The Supreme Court of the United States exists to ensure that liberty is maintained and the law of civil rights (not federal rights, not religions rights, not state rights) are maintained. The 9th amendment tells us how to read the constitution and that is toward protecting the penumbra of privacy and personal choice.
Even if there was a majority the Supreme Court of the United States exists not to enact the policy of the majority but to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority. We’ve fought this ideological conflict multiple times. Most people voting to enslave a minority is simply wrong. A religious movement removing choice and imposing consequences on one gender is wrong.
I see people throw out “What about vaccines?” Yes, what about them? When your choice means you can make others sick you violate their rights. So, we get to tell you not to fly if you’re not vaccinated. Remember your rights go right up until they impact me. It’s a slippery slope and the fact people use this argument with a freedom to choose does not surprise me. The same person arguing against reproductive choice for choice in vaccine is a narcissist.
Given the principle of justice and liberty it is the responsibility of the Supreme Court of the United States to arbitrate and ensure governments do not overreach. It is a fundamental requirement to ensure liberty and justice are maintained not a political tool to retroactively reduce, rescind, and subjugate. The justices stated unequivocally they believed in a basic principle of Roe as given fact (settled law) in front of congress, and apparently lied and perjured themselves. The question by congress was there to protect and keep a basic principle intact. The justices knew that and understood that. The core evil here is a religious and political movement that will lie, cheat, steal, and engage in insurrection. It’s time to impeach the justices.