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

General Discussion

redqueen

(115,186 posts)

6. This part

Reply to usonian (Original post)

Sun Feb 4, 2024, 03:58 PM

Feb 2024

Alito's legal analysis in the Dobbs decision "relied upon the patriarchal notions of eminent authorities of old English common law, including Lord Matthew Hale." Hale's “beliefs were driven by his goal of keeping women from encroaching upon the rights of men," who thought that giving women “legally enforceable rights over their own bodies was a threat to the freedom of men."

How?!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

love_katz

9 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Abortion restrictions amount to sex-based discrimination, PA state Supreme Court says [View all] usonian Feb 2024 OP

There you have it. bucolic_frolic Feb 2024 #1

Alito as performed by Monty Python FalloutShelter Feb 2024 #2

Are there any laws restricting male health care? Sperm regulations? sanatanadharma Feb 2024 #3

Even Roe was too restrictive, just get it out of the legal system and into the healthcare system Bev54 Feb 2024 #4

People who can get pregnant coffeenap Feb 2024 #5

This part redqueen Feb 2024 #6

Ask Matthew Hale usonian Feb 2024 #8

... AKwannabe Feb 2024 #7

We've still got some good judges. Whew. lindysalsagal Feb 2024 #9