HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Overturning Griswold VS C...

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 05:08 PM

Overturning Griswold VS Connecticut Would Make Possession Of Condoms Illegal Even If You Are Married

The GOP is so extreme right now that we would not recognize this country if they got the kind of power they had when Bush was president. Why is this election even close. We have an extreme Opus Dei Catholic and a cult Mormon on the ticket. They both believe that faith should shape their decisions. I cannot believe the country is that damned stupid.

18 replies, 1852 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 18 replies Author Time Post
Reply Overturning Griswold VS Connecticut Would Make Possession Of Condoms Illegal Even If You Are Married (Original post)
TheMastersNemesis Oct 2012 OP
yardwork Oct 2012 #1
DURHAM D Oct 2012 #6
Sekhmets Daughter Oct 2012 #8
ashling Oct 2012 #15
KansDem Oct 2012 #2
Warren DeMontague Oct 2012 #3
Butterbean Oct 2012 #4
Freddie Oct 2012 #5
StarryNite Oct 2012 #7
Kber Oct 2012 #14
NutmegYankee Oct 2012 #9
onenote Oct 2012 #10
Nye Bevan Oct 2012 #11
hifiguy Oct 2012 #12
RomneyLies Oct 2012 #13
randome Oct 2012 #16
upi402 Oct 2012 #17
OmahaBlueDog Oct 2012 #18

Response to TheMastersNemesis (Original post)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 05:10 PM

1. That is correct and it would be a simple matter for the Supreme Court to overturn it.

If Roe v Wade goes, then Griswold probably goes too, because they are based on the same premise.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yardwork (Reply #1)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 05:25 PM

6. True on both but

we must be a little practical. They will carve out an exception for condoms because men need to be protected from diseased lady parts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DURHAM D (Reply #6)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 05:29 PM

8. I shouldn't laugh

but you are sooooo correct.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yardwork (Reply #1)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 09:42 PM

15. Not actually

It would allow states to outlaw those items.

Roe is based upon Griswold, so that would fall as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheMastersNemesis (Original post)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 05:12 PM

2. The private prison industry must be salivating!

Imagine: In addition to nonviolent pot smokers, now they're cells can be filled with condom users.

I can see the public service ads if condoms are outlawed:

Use a Condom?
Go to Jail!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheMastersNemesis (Original post)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 05:15 PM

3. Thats the goal. Outlawing contraception.

The so called "pro life" groups in this country are unanimous in advocating that all women who take oral contraceptives should be put in prison, if not get the death penalty.

That IS the agenda.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheMastersNemesis (Original post)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 05:17 PM

4. Anti-choice, anti-birth control fanatics should just call themselves

what they really, truly are at their core: ANTI-SEX. That's what it comes down to. They don't want anyone engaging in that filthy, nasty, dirty, disgusting activity of SEX and actually ENJOYING it. Nope.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Butterbean (Reply #4)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 05:23 PM

5. It's more about controlling women than sex

A woman who is constantly pregnant and/or caring for young children cannot get an education or a good job; she will be eternally dependent on her Lord and Master husband. A woman who has control of her fertility can choose HER future. It's all about keeping women in their place, as the Bible says.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Freddie (Reply #5)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 05:27 PM

7. I agree

To those fanatics, women are chattel to be owned by men. We have seen in the past couple of days that they even believe in raping for the lord. As if rapists are doing something good. These are not people against sex, they are people who feel threatened by women and want to control us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Freddie (Reply #5)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 07:08 PM

14. Correct!

Reproductive freedom is the foundation of all other women's rights.

It's everything. They know it and so do we. That's why it's such a big deal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheMastersNemesis (Original post)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 05:34 PM

9. Forget Griswold, Eisenstadt v. Baird is far more in danger.

Eisenstadt v. Baird, 405 U.S. 438 (1972), is an important United States Supreme Court case that established the right of unmarried people to possess contraception on the same basis as married couples and, by implication, the right of unmarried couples to engage in potentially nonprocreative sexual intercourse (though not the right of unmarried people to engage in any type of sexual intercourse).

The Court struck down a Massachusetts law prohibiting the distribution of contraceptives to unmarried people, ruling that it violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution.


Lets not forget many states still have fornication laws on the books. Overturning this (through a Roe reversal) would outlaw the relationships of almost 100 Million Americans.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheMastersNemesis (Original post)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 05:40 PM

10. It would allow states to make contraception illegal.

How many states would actually enact such a law? I seriously doubt any would. Rather, some states might impose various rules on contraception (require a presecription for all forms of contraception, including condoms, impose limitations and/or parental notice requirements, restrict sale to married persons). The main target would probably be prescription birth control. Even if condoms were regulated, enforcement would be nearly impossible since people would simply start purchasing them over the Internet to be delivered by mail or express carrier, etc).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheMastersNemesis (Original post)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 05:44 PM

11. No it wouldn't. (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheMastersNemesis (Original post)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 05:45 PM

12. Technically, it would allow states to enact such laws.

Griswold raised a constitutional barrier to such enactments by invalidating the one in force in Connecticut. Overturning it would not enact such laws in the states.

However, the prospect is enough to freeze one's blood nonetheless, as there would undoubtedly be such laws promptly passed in the more benighted and backwards parts of the country.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheMastersNemesis (Original post)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 05:46 PM

13. Roe v. Wade is entirely predicated on Griswold v. CT

 

FACT: The only route to overturning Roe is to overturn Griswold.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheMastersNemesis (Original post)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 09:45 PM

16. That's okay.

Women's bodies have ways of stopping unwanted semen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheMastersNemesis (Original post)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 09:45 PM

17. well there's always the butt!

c'mon, think like a Republican... lol

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheMastersNemesis (Original post)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 09:50 PM

18. Yes...however

If that were to happen (and it likely would not) the GOP would have a new, exceptionally well funded enemy - Big Pharma.

28 pills every menstrual cycle x 13 cycles per year x tens of millions of women = billions of dollars -- even at generic prices. It's a cash cow. The GOP stands in front of that money train at their own great peril.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread