This item was rejected by a terse letter, at the Sixth Cir., and correctly so.
But the actual brief is. . . (unintentionally) illuminating, in that it explains why so many hard right evangelicals feel it is their "right" to exercise control over other peoples' genitals and bodies, more broadly.
It is both odiously sad, and massively confused -- representing no coherent set of legal principles whatsoever.
Y A W N.
But just as we must read mass shooters' manifestos, in an attempt to avoid future mental breakdowns of that sort. . . I think we ought to read this -- to understand why at least some low education Tennessee legislators think they better understand medicine than doctors with decades of training in the sciences.
Even so, do read it, at your considerable. . . peril. The "thinking" there is. . . polluted and illogical.
नमस्ते
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment