In a perfect world, the point in the draft SCOTUS decision that would overturn Roe v. Wade that the decision should not be made by the courts, makes sense. Except, we don't live in a perfect world and legislatures of the United States no longer work under the "originalist" intent because they have been corrupted by money that the Citizens United decision allows. Here you have high and mighty Supreme Court Justices, accountable to nobody and seemingly unwilling to accept the reality they created, wanting to live in a fantasy in which we have an actual functioning Congress and State legislatures that actually govern, but they broke the very process by which they claim decisions like the right of women to have control over their body should use.#

It's the blatant hypocrisy that is destroying the credibility of the Supreme Court, and it is near impossible to have respect for such an institution. #

Further, I have a real problem with Alito's statement that I don't have a right to privacy, specifically meaning the right to decide what happens to my body. To me, personal autonomy/privacy or control over my body is the very definition of liberty. A government that dictates that a woman must not take birth control, must not terminate a fetus even if it is not viable, or compels men to have vasectomies or be circumcised is the very definition of tyranny, it is certainly not freedom! #

The Declaration of Independence states we have certain unalienable Rights, and that among them (and not exclusive to) are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. In the below context, which the "originalists" claim to work from, I don't know how personal autonomy, which we are calling privacy, is NOT an unalienable right. It is absolutely fundamental to Liberty and frankly to most people it is fundamental to the pursuit of Happiness. #

No matter your personal and religious opinion, and let's be honest, you can't make the argument of life beginning at conception without using beliefs and religion, you should have a real problem with how SCOTUS intends to overturn Roe v. Wade. The draft decision if final means that the U.S. government and states can force women carry a fetus to term no matter the circumstances including whether it puts that women's life a risk, and it also means the U.S. government and states can force men and women, you, to be vaccinated, wear masks, have a vasectomy, be circumcised, or any other thing which the government may deem necessary. #

Under Roe v. Wade as it currently stands no women is compelled to have an abortion. If a woman disagrees with abortion, they have every right to carry a baby to term and give birth. Stated differently, as it currently stands, liberty remains. The SCOTUS decision will remove liberty, it forces a woman to do something she may not want to do, and it takes us another step further along in that section of the Declaration of Independence that states: "That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."#

The Roe v. Wade did not create a new law. As I see it, at the time the Supreme Court was asked to determine whether personal autonomy over one's body which they called privacy, was an "unalienable" or "natural" right because the Bill of Rights does not, nor was it ever intended, to enumerate every possible right that a citizen of the United States has. I don't know how any reasonable person can argue that personal autonomy is NOT a natural right because it is the very definition of liberty. As I see it, Roe v. Wade was the right decision based on the original context of the Declaration because it affirms that context. Roe v. Wade didn't create a new right, it affirmed a fundamental, natural right of everybody, no matter gender and race. #