SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: TimF who wrote (784424)5/12/2014 12:54:20 PM
From: tejek  Read Replies (1) of 1576845
 
Roe vs Wade has nothing to do with this controversy.

There is no right to privacy in the constitution, much less a right to abortion as privacy, but if such a right is to be asserted and enforced as the Supreme Court said it should be, it would be to strike down laws banning or strictly limiting abortion, not to require or even support the idea of forcing third parties to pay for it out of their own pocket. If anything Roe vs Wade (at least in spirit if not literally in the text) is against the policy in question. If the person who wants an abortion has such a strong right to private decision making in this area, then people who object to abortion should also have a right to make their own decisions about it and not be compelled to participate in or fund abortion.

That's not what Eric was arguing. He claimed that the ACA was forcing religious org to do things they did not want to do.

And yes, Roe vs Wade is at the bottom of this disagreement as well.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News