Read Sady Doyle’s diatribe against “nice guy” Brett Kavanaugh: because he is anti-abortion, that means he’s anti-women, right? Wrong!
Brett Kavanaugh Is Nice. That Doesn’t Mean He’s Not Sexist.
We’ve confused “sexism” with meanness — and sexists routinely benefit from our confusion
A “woman’s right to choose” was never intended to extend to the right to end another human’s life, but that is exactly what the Pro-Choice movement took from Roe v. Wade. In a staggering over-reach of Judicial power the Supreme Court extended the constitutional right to privacy to allow a woman to have an abortion. “The court declared that a woman’s right to an abortion was implicit in the right to privacy protected by the 14th Amendment.” The 14th Amendment was intended to guarantee citizenship to former slaves: specifically “all persons born or naturalized in the United States…are citizens of the United States and of the state in which they reside.” It appears that the legalists of the Supreme Court took the view that because the baby hadn’t been born yet, it is not yet a citizen and therefore has no rights, not even the right to life, so there is nothing to stop its own mother having it murdered. That ruling should have been over-turned by the Federal Government: it goes way beyond interpreting existing Law and crosses well into the Law-making that rightfully belongs with the US Congress and Senate.
Norma McCorvey the woman who was the Jane Roe in Roe v. Wade is now herself a Pro-Life advocate: By Sady Doyle’s twisted logic that makes her “Sexist” too! The language used by the Pro-Choice movement is slippery stuff: “A woman’s right to choose” sounds so obviously right: Only a sexist would deny a woman’s right to control her own body, right? That means she has the right to not get pregnant, either through chastity or through the use of contraceptives. So far so good: denying a woman the right to control her own fertility, once the technology exists to do so would be sexist.