4 ms·

Should states also be allowed to legislate contraceptives, premarital sex, sex between same sex couples, ...? After all, none of those are guaranteed by the con

Should states also be allowed to legislate contraceptives, premarital sex, sex between same sex couples, ...? After all, none of those are guaranteed by the constitution either. What "rights" do you enjoy that aren't expressly guaranteed in the constitution that others might want to let states legislate away from you?

autoexec 4y ago
This is all I can imagine we'll end up with. Some states are going to force religious laws on their population and others will not. People will flee to states that don't oppress them and those states under religious law will continue to decline. The same way states that push abstinence only sex-ed see higher rates of teenage pregnancy those states that push fundamentalist religious law on the people will see more suffering and death, higher rates of poverty and violence, etc.
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  > People will flee to states that don't oppress them and those states will continue to decline. People with resources will be able to evade the bans relatively easily or flee if they can't Those with fewer resources will be less able to leave. > those states that push fundamentalist religious law on the people will see more suffering and death, higher rates of poverty and violence, etc. And they'll continue to be overrepresented in Congress and maintain federal funding formulas that extract money from successful states to subsidize themselves on account of their failure.
  - autoexec 4y ago
    > And they'll continue to be overrepresented in Congress and maintain federal funding formulas that extract money from successful states to subsidize themselves on account of their failure. Maybe this is something that will have to change. It all does risk bringing us closer to going back to when we were "these untied states" instead of "the untied states" though.
- spoils19 4y ago
  > those states under religious law will continue to decline. Is there any evidence for this? I've met many people on this very site who live in "states under religious law" and the state is prosperous, with the added benefits of freedom and liberty compared to other states.
hotpotamus 4y ago
> Should states also be allowed to legislate contraceptives, premarital sex, sex between same sex couples That's up to the supreme court and unwinding Roe is part of the process of rolling those back as well. They didn't go to all that trouble to pack the court with right wing ideologues for nothing.
dragonwriter 4y ago
> Should states also be allowed to legislate contraceptives, premarital sex, sex between same sex couples, ...? The people that have been pushing against Roe have pushed for all of those on the same basis, and the decisions on all of those were the underpinnings of Roe. So, yes, and soon. The current Court seems to really want to distinguish closely-marriage-related rights from it's attack on Roe, so I’d see contraceptive rights of unmarried individuals and pre- and extra-marital sex as the most likely next successful targets from the list.
usrn 4y ago
Yes? That's how states work. Murder, age of consent etc. are all state level legislation.

autoexec 4y ago

This is all I can imagine we'll end up with. Some states are going to force religious laws on their population and others will not. People will flee to states that don't oppress them and those states under religious law will continue to decline. The same way states that push abstinence only sex-ed see higher rates of teenage pregnancy those states that push fundamentalist religious law on the people will see more suffering and death, higher rates of poverty and violence, etc.

dragonwriter 4y ago
> People will flee to states that don't oppress them and those states will continue to decline. People with resources will be able to evade the bans relatively easily or flee if they can't Those with fewer resources will be less able to leave. > those states that push fundamentalist religious law on the people will see more suffering and death, higher rates of poverty and violence, etc. And they'll continue to be overrepresented in Congress and maintain federal funding formulas that extract money from successful states to subsidize themselves on account of their failure.
- autoexec 4y ago
  > And they'll continue to be overrepresented in Congress and maintain federal funding formulas that extract money from successful states to subsidize themselves on account of their failure. Maybe this is something that will have to change. It all does risk bringing us closer to going back to when we were "these untied states" instead of "the untied states" though.
spoils19 4y ago
> those states under religious law will continue to decline. Is there any evidence for this? I've met many people on this very site who live in "states under religious law" and the state is prosperous, with the added benefits of freedom and liberty compared to other states.

hotpotamus 4y ago

> Should states also be allowed to legislate contraceptives, premarital sex, sex between same sex couples That's up to the supreme court and unwinding Roe is part of the process of rolling those back as well. They didn't go to all that trouble to pack the court with right wing ideologues for nothing.

dragonwriter 4y ago

> Should states also be allowed to legislate contraceptives, premarital sex, sex between same sex couples, ...? The people that have been pushing against Roe have pushed for all of those on the same basis, and the decisions on all of those were the underpinnings of Roe. So, yes, and soon. The current Court seems to really want to distinguish closely-marriage-related rights from it's attack on Roe, so I’d see contraceptive rights of unmarried individuals and pre- and extra-marital sex as the most likely next successful targets from the list.

usrn 4y ago

Yes? That's how states work. Murder, age of consent etc. are all state level legislation.