Melt down, melt down
A long time ago, "the pill" worked by causing spontaneous abortion. The fertilized egg could not implant in the uterine wall.
I'm just curious if this is Thomas' aim in the desire to revisit Griswold decision.
Tax payers need to stop having their wages garnished to pay for said children. You birth help conceive or birth em, you pay for em.
https://twitter.com/Sparkle31888597/status/1540154678234734592
Hmmmmm. This thought just occurred to me.
Was MegaAnon really Megyn Kelly?
https://twitter.com/megynkelly/status/1540359223992795136
Anon is not opposed to preventing conception, so I'm confused by Thomas' wanting to re-visit this.
I can only think that maybe it has to do with the manner of contraception. As stated earlier, dome forms of birth control justvorevent the fertilized egg from implanting, thus, basically aborting.
Once conception has occurred, then I agree with Thomas.
Griswold v. Connecticut
Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965), was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court ruled that the Constitution of the United States protects the liberty of married couples to buy and use contraceptives without government restriction. The case involved a Connecticut "Comstock law" that prohibited any person from using "any drug, medicinal article or instrument for the purpose of preventing conception". The court held that the statute was unconstitutional, and that its effect was "to deny disadvantaged citizens … access to medical assistance and up-to-date information in respect to proper methods of birth control". By a vote of 7–2, the Supreme Court invalidated the law on the grounds that it violated the "right to marital privacy", establishing the basis for the right to privacy with respect to intimate practices. This and other cases view the right to privacy as "protected from governmental intrusion".
https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Griswold_v._Connecticut