Why halt there?

Why end there?

Watch Reddit by DaFunkJunkieSee Supply

31 replies on “Why halt there?”

Woah woah! Lets slow down a bit! It’s too fast for them!

For legal reasons I must conclude this is in fact a /j moment


This overturning of Roe is the first time SCOTUS is overturning a long held precedent that protected the rights of individuals.

What’s weird is when people take other people’s statements and pass it off as their own.

I just watched Trevor Noah say that this morning almost word for word on a clip of his show.

So I guess when they say “small government” they actually mean “small federal government, while allowing states to be authoritarian cesspools”

It is so weird how the Supreme Court’s leaked ruling appears to use several Bible verses as it’s references instead of previous court cases. And in at least one instance, a quote from Amy Coney Barret’s church pastor.

Some people also say if you don’t like the abortion laws in your state, move to another. Apparently every woman in the US is a millionaire and can move wherever they like.

Are you serious??????? Individuals making their on choices. Next you’re going to be talking radical shit like choosing who you want to spend the rest of your life. Was this person hammered when they came up with this? 😂😂😂😂

Small government only applies if you makes the choices I want. Remember forcing mask mandates were taking away freedom of choice, so they forced people to not wear masks also taking away freedom of choice.

Sure would be great to live in a society where we respected one another enough to actually have real individual liberty. Instead we’re stuck trading absolute power back and forth between total authoritarians that basically just view us as livestock.

I’m all for states’ rights on a lot of topics, but this shouldn’t be one of them. Basic human rights should be guaranteed across the world, but since we can’t do that the best we can do is guarantee them across our country.

And yes, medical control over your own body is a basic human right. I don’t care if it’s abortion or being anti-vax(+), you should have the right to decide how you treat your own body.

States rights are for things like what age people should be able to drink/smoke, or how they want things run locally. If a state wants to ban a doctor from being able to perform abortions that’s different from banning women from getting them though it amounts to the same end goal.

(+) In the case of being anti-vax, there should be consequences like not being eligible for many public services. I’ve said it before if you want to live off the grid, you should have the right to do whatever so long as it doesn’t affect others

This is actually a really good way of phrasing it and I’d not thought about it like this before.

It’s not about states ‘rights’ at all. It’s about state authoritarianism.

I always ask “should we have done the same with segregation?”

Or women’s rights

Usually they just respond “those are different”

I have always believed that the correct role for the state in one’s health choices that have no effect on others’ health is the same as a medical curtain in a crowded ER. Anything behind that curtain should remain solely between you and your medical providers. Just like attorney-client privilege, the state should have no right in obtaining information about personal health choices that doesn’t directly harm others. That would include abortion services, as the state shouldn’t even be able to know until the fetus is viable outside of the womb that a woman sought an abortion. The state has no right to pull back that curtain if you aren’t a danger to any other’s health.

Because then Christians wouldn’t be getting to impose their will on everyone else. Can’t have that.

Well, it’s not only permission to abortion that matters, but also access. For equal access, there needs to be state-wide or federal legislation. Compare with Canada, which does not have this. For true equal access, you cannot have an individual exception for doctors or nurses to opt out of performing abortions for religions reasons or whatever.

Lol, except when the GQP is in charge, then the turtle says federal ban, so I guess it was never a state thing either.

The Supreme Court is supposed to protect basic human rights. It’s one of its main jobs. It has lost all credibility with Alito’s leak.

They don’t want to leave it to the states. They want to leave it to a level of government they can easily control. They captured the Supreme Court. Unless people drastically change where they want to live, they’ve also locked up the Senate for the foreseeable future, which also makes it increasingly likely that they will lock up the Presidency. “Leaving it to the states” is just a convenient unit of control.

Are you guys fucking real? Of all the things that is going on and US is talking about fucking abortions? Why would you try to fucking ban it? Even fucking third world radical backward islamist countries have them although they are limited. Like there are things called rapes and shit. What kind of lunatic or a caveman you must be to think abortion is a bad thing?

I assume republicans are the ones babbling this shit? I mean at this point right, Taliban is more progressive and mentally stable than they are jesus christ.

But that would mean respecting the rights of women and minorities. Next thing you know, neighborhood is gone.


We live in a world where so many people are concerned by other people’s personal choices. Simply ridiculous.

I’m pretty sure there was a war over states rights, I wonder when THAT right is gonna come up on the docket.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.