“Every sperm is sacred,
Every sperm is great,
When a sperm is wasted,
God gets so irate!”
Monty Python — The Meaning of Life
“If Justice Alito wants you to be governed by the laws of the 17th century, you take a close look at that century. Is that where you want to live?”
Margaret Atwood, author of The Handmaid’s Tale, in her column, “I invented Gilead. The Supreme Court is making it real.”
The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) yesterday struck down women’s rights to control their own reproductive choices.
Furthermore, Justice Clarence Thomas said the Supreme Court should now review past decisions that permitted contraception. But I thought Clarence hated abortions. So why would he want to prevent women from reducing the need/interest/choice to resort to abortion?
If contraception is a little bit bad, and abortion is horrifically bad, why would he suggest curtailing the numbers of unwanted pregnancies? Maybe this makes sense, somehow, in the Roman Catholic Church, but the logic escapes me. If a small bad thing, as he sees it, prevents a large bad thing, where is the sense in reducing the minor “sin” and thereby increasing the prevalence of the major “sin”?
Who is it that should make decisions on women’s reproductive choices? Let’s see: should it be person who is pregnant? In the case of an underage pregnant child, should her parents have a say? (incestuous fathers and/or rapists need not apply)
Or perhaps the majority of the SCOTUS justices?
Suggested supplemental reading:
• John Irving’s The Cider House Rules
• Joyce Carole Oates’ A Book of American Martyrs
• Margaret Atwood, The Handmaid’s Tale, The Testaments
Another good read is the Hidden History of the Supreme Court and the Betrayal of America, by Thom Hartman.
The Supreme Court is the biggest joke in the United States. Nine People dictate what over 300 million people can do or not do. They are so political now. That makes them an even bigger Joke. Thomas lives with his wife who tried to ruin democracy. Is He a good choice to have the power to dictate all of our lives! Better wake up!
Dennis – the Supremes have gotten very political, as you point out. No word yet about what Justice Thomas thinks about a right established for Americans, called Virginia V. Loving, in which the right to interracial marriage was codified. I assume he wants that right to stay in place. . . but you never know.
Were the “Supremes” very political when they ruled on Row v. Wade?
Mr. Traxler, Please refrain from using logic, it just makes things too complicated.
Correction: the correct citation for the ruling that allows interracial marriage is Loving V. Virginia
Nicely done, Basura. These lyrics from “The Meaning of Life” have been rattling around in my brain ever since Justice Kavanaugh was confirmed. The possibility that Justice Thomas’s threat may come to pass is as chilling as “Every sperm is sacred.”