Re:Supreme Court Overturns Roe vs. Wade
by HideousKojima on Friday June 24, 2022 @11:05AM
(#31863302)
>books like the bible even instruct you on how to perform one
Not really, that depends on which translation of Numbers 5 you're looking at. It's not clear at all that the "Ordeal of Bitter Water" was supposed to induce a miscarriage.
If GP is in fact referring to the sotah, then it would contradict their argument even more because it is explicitly the husband having power over the woman's body without needing her consent or even any justifying evidence.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordeal_of_the_bitter_water
Re:Supreme Court Overturns Roe vs. Wade
by enragedcacti on Friday June 24, 2022 @06:23PM
(#31870253)
> then it would contradict their argument
to be clear, its pretty irrelevant to the argument because the bible is just one such example of the history of abortion. There are hundreds more and if it would help you can pretend I mentioned one of those instead.
> Interracial marriage has existed for pretty much all of human history
is not the answer to the question originalism is asking. It asks whether there is a historical precedence for protecting that action as a right.
You don't need to look any farther than this very ruling! Abortion has been practiced since the beginning recorded history (and likely much longer) and books like the bible even instruct you on how to perform one. That history has no bearing on Alito or Thomas.