Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

gratuitous

(82,849 posts)
2. I tend to agree
Tue May 3, 2022, 01:43 PM
May 2022

But I also think that whatever the basis for a person to have control of his or her own body, it would have been attacked by these zealots. They aren't impressed with the right to privacy for other people, and I don't think it would hold them up for even a second if the grounding was equal protection under the law. Those letters carved on the Supreme Court building are just so much frou-frou to them. The only justice they recognize is their own, and their unquenchable need to oppress others would drive them to their goal regardless of the basis claimed for bodily autonomy.

At root, the right of a person to seek health care that is in their own best interest is a matter of simple humanity, an inalienable right conferred by that person's existence as a human being.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Yes.. asiliveandbreathe May 2022 #1
I tend to agree gratuitous May 2022 #2
Any chance of a do-over? no_hypocrisy May 2022 #3
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»RBG always said that the ...»Reply #2