Dear Justice Alito, when the Founders wrote the Constitution, many of them had slaves, black men like Clarence Thomas. Black men were seen as not a person but 3/5 of a person to increase the count for the South.
In the 1780’s women weren’t even in the Constitution. Women were not considered a person but chattel of their fathers and then …
Dear Justice Alito, when the Founders wrote the Constitution, many of them had slaves, black men like Clarence Thomas. Black men were seen as not a person but 3/5 of a person to increase the count for the South.
In the 1780’s women weren’t even in the Constitution. Women were not considered a person but chattel of their fathers and then their husbands, no rights. How can we consider Amy Coney Barrett as a person since the Founders wouldn’t, strict constructionists.
To argue that abortion isn’t in the Constitution and that a strict constructionist would find that the right to an abortion isn’t a protected liberty interest in the Constitution because it’s not rooted in the country’s history and tradition, should also assume that Clarence Thomas is 3/5 of a human being and
Amy Coney Barrett belongs to her husband and no say in any legal matter. In the 1780’s Justice Thomas would most likely be a slave, rooted in our history firmly.
And the word ‘woman’ is still not in the Constitution. It used to puzzle me as a Catholic child when my teacher told us that the word ‘men’ meant ‘men and women’. I asked why, if that was true, that women couldn’t be priests. (They had told us that Jesus picked only men to be his apostles). My teacher called my mom and told her I asked too many questions. ( And the books of the almighty bible itself were cherry picked from among many other ancient writings, then translated over and over, so why anyone takes any part of it literally is astonishing to me,)
By Alito's reasoning that means women have no rights. In the movie "On the basis of sex" RBF's biography I loved the part where her opposition compiled and presented as evidence all the laws in the land that claimed women were not a man's equal. I especially liked the one's that said women were poor at math so couldn't be executors of wills and such.
“:...so why anyone takes any part of it literally is astonishing to me,)” yes, it’s puzzling that faith depends on where and when and how you got here. A random delivery in one state or another or one country or another. But a “believer” would say it’s not random. It’s divine. There is no argument. Debate club would be interesting.
“…in the 1990s, when power shifted to leaders who believed that the country worked best when businessmen could organize the economy without meddling from government bureaucrats.”
Perception:
Too many Boomers feel that they are dealing with Ike. That somehow in that cesspool of insanity, aka Republicans,there are reasonable minds that can come to compromise and consensus that is overall good for the nation.
Meanwhile according to reports from Harper’s Magazine This Week:
“the former head of the Oklahoma Republican Party called for the execution of Anthony Fauci by firing squad, and the Oklahoma Election Board ruled that a lawmaker cannot use the moniker “The Patriot” on the ballot.7 8 9 Madison Cawthorn, a congressman from North Carolina, was stopped at an airport in possession of a loaded gun for the second time.”
Centrist Democrats, and especially so called Independents, are going to sell the nation down the river to Fascist rule.
You read it here first: My solution to ending abortions:
You macho studs out there who want to have careless sex; a great, you can pay the societal price and for the externalities of crime and inhumanity that result.
By my proposed Law - Any woman who is impregnated can call for a DNA test of the man she cites as the father of the fetus/child.
If there is a positive match, then that man will be required to provide the necessary financial support for the child until age 20.
Marriage will not end this requirement.
Just watch the abortion issue fade to next to nothing and the stock prices in male contraceptives go through the roof.
I love your solution to the abortion issue by making the father’s financially responsible for 20 years, however, that still doesn’t keep the outrageous possible law off a Women’s own body & right to choose!
Maybe she doesn’t want the fkr’s baby or the constant reminder of being raped or the victim of incest. Adding your point would definitely make it better as another law though, so thanks for that!
No, it is far from a 100% remedy and in fact I just found out from Citizen60 that as I confirmed there are laws on the books in FL pursuant to paternity and support by the natural father….
Apparently not well enough, because one would think that part of one’s HS education this would be common knowledge… I have to read the statute and dig in deeper, which is wading through lots of legal jargon….
I would add that the father who "seeded" the child needs to raise it if the woman wants to have a life of her own to pursue her goals, education and career.
Agreed. Custody, as well as all financial and physical responsibilities, of the baby should automatically revert to the father, even before adoption. That would include the hospital and medical costs for the infant, of course.
Agreed Fred - it would be both great for crime and to provide a database that would make the process much faster.
I was rather stunned to find that even here in a fascist state like Florida that there are pretty clear cut laws for paternal responsibility including court mandated testing.
Every student at age 13 should be made aware that this law exists and will be enforced.
But are these laws enforced? There should be It-Takes-Two-to-Tango laws so men can see what how one's life is impacted to be FORCED to be barefoot in the kitchen with a babe.
That is the part that is weirding me out. If the Florida 742 Determination of Parentage Law was simply enforced it would seem to to be an excellent deterrent and a lot of unwanted pregnancy might be averted.
Apparently a lot of pregnant women out of wedlock are simply in the dark or fearful of filing w/ the clerk of the court.
Instead of life insurance, every 15 year old male should be required to carry Liability Insurance to cover accidental pregnancy. Suggest there be a high deductible and that the premium pool be accessible to pregnant women not otherwise covered for medically necessary abortions and childcare for 25 years. Rate setting may consider all the extracosts women bare in their lifetime or until menopause is over. And I would suggest there be no gay-guy exclusion to ward off mother-fakers and have a built in support group to monitor the scrum and violators of this fair-share post Roe decision.
That is already the law in almost every state. Collection is another issue.
I’m for male hormonal birth control and reversible vasectomies to end abortion. Both exist. Never mentioned by “Evangelicals/Catholics/Mormons/Muslims (big 4 behind this movement).
Wow! I looked at FL statute and “ In order to preserve the right to notice and consent to the adoption of the child, an unmarried biological father must, as the “registrant,” file a notarized claim of paternity form with the Florida Putative Father Registry maintained by the Office of Vital Statistics of the Department of Health which includes confirmation of his willingness and intent to support the child for whom paternity is claimed in accordance with state law.”
So, this makes me wonder why this is NOT clearly enforced. My son spent 3 days in jail for simply falling behind on payments. So, why is this statute not made clear to every male in a state where these laws prevail?
I don’t blame you for wanting “hormonal birth control” or reversible vasectomies
Why are the support laws enforced at all/uniformly? Why was Viagra approved by Medicare and every insurance company in America on Day 1 and birth control bills weren't until the ACA in 2014 (available in the 60's)? Why did women get the vote nearly 70 years after freed slaved? Why could Black men (fill in your color/ethnic) purchase a car or get a credit card with a "responsible male" signing for her until 3 years after Roe? What is not mentioned at all in the Constitution? Women. Even slaves (Blacks) were mentioned since they were to be counted as 3/5 of a human in the census.
Look at the dominant religion that settled this nation -- Catholics. Far more than Christians (West/Southwest; Florida/Louisiana Purchase. Except for the Quakers, the Christian "sects" among early settlers were Puritans, orthodox Lutheran (now called Missouri Synod). Later came the Anti-Baptists (originally an anti-Catholic political party, but guess which part of the movement "stuck" during the Great Revival?) and the Mormons--whose Dessert Territory once encompassed what are now 4 other states besides Utah. What is the role--and value--of women in those religions?
And that's why child support that men are supposed to pay is unevenly enforced. Let's talk about enforcement when women are required to pay child support....
I agree completely. While much of the Alito draft is deserving of opprobrium, I am most deeply troubled by one section of that odious document, wherein Alito, citing Washington v. Glucksberg, 1997 opines that "the Due Process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment . . . has been held to guarantee some rights that are not mentioned in the Constitution, but any such rights must be “deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition” and “implicit in the concept of ordered liberty.”
Let us set aside for the moment the fact that James Madison - ultimately the primary architect of the Bill of Rights - was initially opposed to it as being unnecessary, for he believed that any rights and liberties not specifically reserved to the government were retained by individuals. Madison feared that some might interpret the enumeration of specific liberties as a denial of any others. It would seem he was prescient.
If Alito is correct that only rights and liberties that are "deeply rooted in this Nation's history" can be considered to be protected by the Constitution, does that not guarantee stagnation of our society? If the Constitution bars the nation from embracing new liberties as it adapts to evolving scientific knowledge, culture and mores, does that not condemn us to a society where progress is outlawed?
I can’t believe Madison and his coauthors expected the future Americans to do nothing to form a more perfect union. It is silly and complete nonsense to expect people in the future to make no changes to this living document to meet the needs of their times. Perhaps Alito would be more comfortable if we were hunters and gatherers.
Ooo, Molly. New quotes in my quiver. You are so smart. A+ for critical thinking skills (only “critical”thing I’ve seen taught in my decades of public education.) Salud!
Dear Justice Alito, when the Founders wrote the Constitution, many of them had slaves, black men like Clarence Thomas. Black men were seen as not a person but 3/5 of a person to increase the count for the South.
In the 1780’s women weren’t even in the Constitution. Women were not considered a person but chattel of their fathers and then their husbands, no rights. How can we consider Amy Coney Barrett as a person since the Founders wouldn’t, strict constructionists.
To argue that abortion isn’t in the Constitution and that a strict constructionist would find that the right to an abortion isn’t a protected liberty interest in the Constitution because it’s not rooted in the country’s history and tradition, should also assume that Clarence Thomas is 3/5 of a human being and
Amy Coney Barrett belongs to her husband and no say in any legal matter. In the 1780’s Justice Thomas would most likely be a slave, rooted in our history firmly.
You can’t pick and choose your history.
And the word ‘woman’ is still not in the Constitution. It used to puzzle me as a Catholic child when my teacher told us that the word ‘men’ meant ‘men and women’. I asked why, if that was true, that women couldn’t be priests. (They had told us that Jesus picked only men to be his apostles). My teacher called my mom and told her I asked too many questions. ( And the books of the almighty bible itself were cherry picked from among many other ancient writings, then translated over and over, so why anyone takes any part of it literally is astonishing to me,)
By Alito's reasoning that means women have no rights. In the movie "On the basis of sex" RBF's biography I loved the part where her opposition compiled and presented as evidence all the laws in the land that claimed women were not a man's equal. I especially liked the one's that said women were poor at math so couldn't be executors of wills and such.
Ha! RBG. What a human.
Salud, Cathy!
“:...so why anyone takes any part of it literally is astonishing to me,)” yes, it’s puzzling that faith depends on where and when and how you got here. A random delivery in one state or another or one country or another. But a “believer” would say it’s not random. It’s divine. There is no argument. Debate club would be interesting.
Excellent points! And the Supreme Court cannot pick and choose in the constitution.
And yet, here we are, with Originalists creating a new history by proclamation
Originalism is made up legal bs.
The Myth that keeps on giving
Indeed!
Excellent points, Molly!
“…in the 1990s, when power shifted to leaders who believed that the country worked best when businessmen could organize the economy without meddling from government bureaucrats.”
Perception:
Too many Boomers feel that they are dealing with Ike. That somehow in that cesspool of insanity, aka Republicans,there are reasonable minds that can come to compromise and consensus that is overall good for the nation.
Meanwhile according to reports from Harper’s Magazine This Week:
“the former head of the Oklahoma Republican Party called for the execution of Anthony Fauci by firing squad, and the Oklahoma Election Board ruled that a lawmaker cannot use the moniker “The Patriot” on the ballot.7 8 9 Madison Cawthorn, a congressman from North Carolina, was stopped at an airport in possession of a loaded gun for the second time.”
Centrist Democrats, and especially so called Independents, are going to sell the nation down the river to Fascist rule.
You read it here first: My solution to ending abortions:
You macho studs out there who want to have careless sex; a great, you can pay the societal price and for the externalities of crime and inhumanity that result.
By my proposed Law - Any woman who is impregnated can call for a DNA test of the man she cites as the father of the fetus/child.
If there is a positive match, then that man will be required to provide the necessary financial support for the child until age 20.
Marriage will not end this requirement.
Just watch the abortion issue fade to next to nothing and the stock prices in male contraceptives go through the roof.
I love your solution to the abortion issue by making the father’s financially responsible for 20 years, however, that still doesn’t keep the outrageous possible law off a Women’s own body & right to choose!
Maybe she doesn’t want the fkr’s baby or the constant reminder of being raped or the victim of incest. Adding your point would definitely make it better as another law though, so thanks for that!
No, it is far from a 100% remedy and in fact I just found out from Citizen60 that as I confirmed there are laws on the books in FL pursuant to paternity and support by the natural father….
Ok, but is it enforced? Maybe there has to be a steeper penalty than money, like Jail or Mandatory Community Service!
Apparently not well enough, because one would think that part of one’s HS education this would be common knowledge… I have to read the statute and dig in deeper, which is wading through lots of legal jargon….
I would add that the father who "seeded" the child needs to raise it if the woman wants to have a life of her own to pursue her goals, education and career.
Agreed. Custody, as well as all financial and physical responsibilities, of the baby should automatically revert to the father, even before adoption. That would include the hospital and medical costs for the infant, of course.
❤️!
Let's just register their DNA so we can quickly match and track the errant little studs. 🤪 Getting carried away I am.
Agreed Fred - it would be both great for crime and to provide a database that would make the process much faster.
I was rather stunned to find that even here in a fascist state like Florida that there are pretty clear cut laws for paternal responsibility including court mandated testing.
Every student at age 13 should be made aware that this law exists and will be enforced.
But are these laws enforced? There should be It-Takes-Two-to-Tango laws so men can see what how one's life is impacted to be FORCED to be barefoot in the kitchen with a babe.
That is the part that is weirding me out. If the Florida 742 Determination of Parentage Law was simply enforced it would seem to to be an excellent deterrent and a lot of unwanted pregnancy might be averted.
Apparently a lot of pregnant women out of wedlock are simply in the dark or fearful of filing w/ the clerk of the court.
That would save a LOT of time Fred! Perhaps Elon could put the DNA and tracking devices in those male brainchips at birth!
A great idea!
Instead of life insurance, every 15 year old male should be required to carry Liability Insurance to cover accidental pregnancy. Suggest there be a high deductible and that the premium pool be accessible to pregnant women not otherwise covered for medically necessary abortions and childcare for 25 years. Rate setting may consider all the extracosts women bare in their lifetime or until menopause is over. And I would suggest there be no gay-guy exclusion to ward off mother-fakers and have a built in support group to monitor the scrum and violators of this fair-share post Roe decision.
That is already the law in almost every state. Collection is another issue.
I’m for male hormonal birth control and reversible vasectomies to end abortion. Both exist. Never mentioned by “Evangelicals/Catholics/Mormons/Muslims (big 4 behind this movement).
Wow! I looked at FL statute and “ In order to preserve the right to notice and consent to the adoption of the child, an unmarried biological father must, as the “registrant,” file a notarized claim of paternity form with the Florida Putative Father Registry maintained by the Office of Vital Statistics of the Department of Health which includes confirmation of his willingness and intent to support the child for whom paternity is claimed in accordance with state law.”
So, this makes me wonder why this is NOT clearly enforced. My son spent 3 days in jail for simply falling behind on payments. So, why is this statute not made clear to every male in a state where these laws prevail?
I don’t blame you for wanting “hormonal birth control” or reversible vasectomies
Why are the support laws enforced at all/uniformly? Why was Viagra approved by Medicare and every insurance company in America on Day 1 and birth control bills weren't until the ACA in 2014 (available in the 60's)? Why did women get the vote nearly 70 years after freed slaved? Why could Black men (fill in your color/ethnic) purchase a car or get a credit card with a "responsible male" signing for her until 3 years after Roe? What is not mentioned at all in the Constitution? Women. Even slaves (Blacks) were mentioned since they were to be counted as 3/5 of a human in the census.
Look at the dominant religion that settled this nation -- Catholics. Far more than Christians (West/Southwest; Florida/Louisiana Purchase. Except for the Quakers, the Christian "sects" among early settlers were Puritans, orthodox Lutheran (now called Missouri Synod). Later came the Anti-Baptists (originally an anti-Catholic political party, but guess which part of the movement "stuck" during the Great Revival?) and the Mormons--whose Dessert Territory once encompassed what are now 4 other states besides Utah. What is the role--and value--of women in those religions?
And that's why child support that men are supposed to pay is unevenly enforced. Let's talk about enforcement when women are required to pay child support....
I agree completely. While much of the Alito draft is deserving of opprobrium, I am most deeply troubled by one section of that odious document, wherein Alito, citing Washington v. Glucksberg, 1997 opines that "the Due Process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment . . . has been held to guarantee some rights that are not mentioned in the Constitution, but any such rights must be “deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition” and “implicit in the concept of ordered liberty.”
Let us set aside for the moment the fact that James Madison - ultimately the primary architect of the Bill of Rights - was initially opposed to it as being unnecessary, for he believed that any rights and liberties not specifically reserved to the government were retained by individuals. Madison feared that some might interpret the enumeration of specific liberties as a denial of any others. It would seem he was prescient.
If Alito is correct that only rights and liberties that are "deeply rooted in this Nation's history" can be considered to be protected by the Constitution, does that not guarantee stagnation of our society? If the Constitution bars the nation from embracing new liberties as it adapts to evolving scientific knowledge, culture and mores, does that not condemn us to a society where progress is outlawed?
I can’t believe Madison and his coauthors expected the future Americans to do nothing to form a more perfect union. It is silly and complete nonsense to expect people in the future to make no changes to this living document to meet the needs of their times. Perhaps Alito would be more comfortable if we were hunters and gatherers.
I can’t believe it either. Maybe Alito is becoming demented. It just doesn’t seem right. Deep anger can do that to a man.
How is it that 9 Justice’s can overrule 57% of the American Public anyway?
Selective facts ignore history
Therefore, Coney Barrett must be removed from the Supreme Court. 1 down, 5 to go.
Doesn't that then include Clarence as well? 2 down, 4 to go?
!!
Molly Ciliberti, Please hit 'send' on this one! TY!
How do I do that?
Put it in an envelope addressed to Justice Alito, United States Supreme Court with a stamp on it and put it in a US Mailbox ~ please ~
Ooo, Molly. New quotes in my quiver. You are so smart. A+ for critical thinking skills (only “critical”thing I’ve seen taught in my decades of public education.) Salud!
Fabulous!! Print and send to every sitting member of SCOTUS! And to your newspaper!