Quote:
Originally Posted by BobbyStrawberry
It's worth noting that the reading of the 2nd amendment you describe ("having your cake and eating it too") is exactly the way that Alito's majority opinion interprets the 14th amendment in relation to the SC's recent overturning of Roe v. Wade. Because abortion was not considered "acceptable" in the 1860s (at the time the 14th was ratified), it cannot be acceptable now, despite it being settled law for nearly a half-century.
Many who cheer on the cadre of rich old men asserting their (and their supporters') ability to control women's bodies are the same ones who happily ignore the fact that AR-15s did not exist when the 2nd amendment was written (and of course that the rights in the constitution were only for white male property owners).
|
Can we have another thread for Roe? This thread is not about abortion even though it keeps being made the topic. Though it is quite amusing that you are apparently upset the court has upheld a right that actually and very directly is in the Constitution, and left to the people to decide an issue that is pretty clearly not. We should pretend abortion is in the constitution, but not bearing arms? Again, your side would be much better served by reading the document and working to change it or pass legislation (the actual process for creating new law and rights) rather than denying obvious reality.