[jasonlaramburu]

>When you’re trying to make the argument that privacy is fundamentally important, you can strengthen your argument by respecting other people’s privacy.

Why is the converse not true as well? If one believes the constitution does not protect the right to individual privacy, then don't expect it.

[yucky]

That's not what the ruling was though. And it makes sense. "If" a fetus is a viable human at some point, then claiming privacy when ending its life wouldn't pass muster any more than privately killing someone in your basement would. It's not a matter of privacy. Privacy has nothing to do with it, which was their point.

Roe was always on shaky ground and it's surprising it took 50 years to get overturned. Meanwhile, these issues can and should be solved through legislation, not cutesy legal arguments in front of judges.