5 ms·

Which is the tolerated here? Allowing abortions or not allowing abortions? Because obviously this phrase can be applied to both making it rather useless as a ra

• throwawayacc2 4y ago
  For what is worth, I think you are making a correct observation. Another correct observation would be this. Aimed at the people saying this is breaking with precedent and it’s settled law that shouldn’t be changed. The prohibition, which was written into the constitution, was repealed. Nothing is set in stone.
  • sofixa 4y ago
    Isn't there a difference between repealing a law by the legislature and the judiciary changing the meaning of existing laws?
• fragmede 4y ago
  What’s intolerable is being against abortions while simulatenously making use of that service. There's something just too hypocritical about being against medical procedures while personally benefiting from them, be it anti-vaxxers who are fully vaccinated, or anti-abortion activists who want to prevent others from having access to abortions while quietly going a state over and having one for themselves or their wife/girlfriend/mistress/daughter. If you're against something, fine, but practice what you preach. This is especially true for those preaching very loudly.
  • ryandrake 4y ago
    Hypocrisy never bothers politicians. For every activity X, the staunchest opponents of X will loudly defend their own X actions. Both sides are guilty of this. Laws are meant to bind one's opponents only.