I apologize Justin if I offended you. It wasn’t my intent. In my past comments, equally as obnoxious & offensive, you haven’t seemed to be easily offended. I’ll be more careful in the future.

Please don’t ban me from Donklephant. It is my favorite blog to comment on & I even voted for it for best blog of the year.

Listen DP, let me just reiterate that commenting on this site is a privilege, not a right. And if you can’t discuss the issues with a sense of dignity and respect, then go somewhere else. Just because this is a blog doesn’t mean you can treat people like this.

Amazing…

You write:

“I disagree Alan. I look at the fetus as being more than just tissue, but the mother has to carry the child to term. That’s her body. I understand that part of it is of the father’s body too, but this is one of those cases where we can’t go back. And by the way, laws like these are made for the 1%. I understand the arguments against, but if you create a way for a man to even hold the slightest dominion over a woman’s body, their civil rights aren’t equal to those of the man’s.”

Okay, I said that bullshit once when I was trying to get laid by this hippie chick in Lawrence, Kansas. No seriously, almost verbatim - and lets just say I had more than the “slightest dominion over a woman’s body” and it was a full on exercise of both our “civil rights.”

I digress, Alan — many normal people chose not to participate in the femi-Nazi paranoia that Justin is showcasing — these normal people tend understand that marriage is mutual submission and sacrifice for the creation and well-being of a family. This “dominionâ€Â? (apparently created by notification, let alone consent) is a farce.

Justin, this where secular humanism ultimately leaves one — rambling on about “dominions” in the context of marriage. Please, go to fucking church.

That is only true if you view a fetus as equivalent to a gall bladder. If you view the fetus as being more than just tissue inside the mother, then it makes perfect sense that the father should be notified of an abortion. The fetus might not be IN his body, but it is certainly OF his body.

I disagree Alan. I look at the fetus as being more than just tissue, but the mother has to carry the child to term. That’s her body. I understand that part of it is of the father’s body too, but this is one of those cases where we can’t go back. And by the way, laws like these are made for the 1%. I understand the arguments against, but if you create a way for a man to even hold the slightest dominion over a woman’s body, their civil rights aren’t equal to those of the man’s.

Yet I am skeptical that he would approach the case with an honestly open mind. After all, it doesn’t take a mental acrobat to poke a lot of holes in Roe v. Wade. I doubt Alito would much resist, if he truly is pro-life.

I agree, and this is what troubles me. I believe that Scalia said something similar and so did Thomas. And frankly, I don’t even really know what he means by having an open mind. That just sounds like code for “Well, I won’t overturn it RIGHT away.”

As painful as it is for some men, respecting a woman’s right to do what she wants with her body is far more important than notifying the father.

That is only true if you view a fetus as equivalent to a gall bladder. If you view the fetus as being more than just tissue inside the mother, then it makes perfect sense that the father should be notified of an abortion. The fetus might not be IN his body, but it is certainly OF his body.

Much of the abortion debate hinges on perceptions of the fetus. Whether you believe a fetus to be just a collection of cells or whether you believe a fetus to be an individual human being greatly affects what arguments seem reasonable and what arguments seem ridiculous.

Add 30 years of anger to the inherrent disconnect of perception between the two sides, and it’s no wonder that very few people even discuss the constitutional merits of Roe v. Wade.

When Alito says he’ll have an open mind, I assume he means an open mind towards the constitutional merits of the case. We can already be sure that he is personally pro-life and it is highly unlikely that he would suddenly stop viewing the fetus as a full human being. Yet I am skeptical that he would approach the case with an honestly open mind. After all, it doesn’t take a mental acrobat to poke a lot of holes in Roe v. Wade. I doubt Alito would much resist, if he truly is pro-life.