I think you'll find the leftist position on marijuana is fairly similar to the leftist position on abortion, though.
I think that's true directionally, but not quantitatively. I haven't seen riots about marijuana, or claims that SCOTUS is corrupt.
And although I can't say this about any particular individual, I think that statistically, the left position regarding covid-19 vaccinations seems to be contrary to the "bodily autonomy" philosophy. Admittedly, there may be differences in scale of risk that lead to this difference. But the rhetoric we're hearing today seems to frame abortion rights as an absolute with no room for such finesse. And I think it is on them to explain how to draw that line.
So? "You can only say it's a right if you riot about it" is a weird position to take.
> And although I can't say this about any particular individual, I think that statistically, the left position regarding covid-19 vaccinations seems to be contrary to the "bodily autonomy" philosophy.
I don't know what you think the leftist position is on this, but no state nor the Federal government has even hinted at the idea of a universal vaccination requirement for COVID-19.
Virtually all states require quite a few vaccinations - measles, mumps, rubella, etc. - in public schools. Once again, Roe doesn't rely on "bodily autonomy", and any such right is very clearly not absolute (as Roe itself makes clear about privacy). My autonomy to swing a knife around ends when it hits your face.
Thought experiment: Do we have a right to poop? Can Congress forbid me from pooping? How would SCOTUS rule on a law banning bowel movements?
> "You can only say it's a right if you riot about it" is a weird position to take.
A month ago, governmental violations of bodily autonomy were ignored, or grumbled about at most. If you want me to believe that this change is qualitatively different, you need to explain that, or else I'm going to put both violations in the same bucket.
> no state nor the Federal government has even hinted at the idea of a universal vaccination requirement for COVID-19
First, regardless of what they've actually tried to do, there has been a lot of talk about how they should. Such talk comes pretty much exclusively from the same group of people who think that overturning Roe is an apocalypse.
Second, they most certainly have tried to force vaccination as much as they could get away with. That wasn't by a law saying "get vaccinated or go to jail". That was a backdoor coercive thing where the gov't tried to say "if you want to do business with the gov't then all your employees must be vaccinated (leading to employees getting fired)", in conjunction with the fact that the government is already so damned big that they can be the 800lb gorilla in purchasing as a backdoor alternative to legislation. And while this was going on, people who I'm very sure support Roe were nodding their heads saying it's the right thing to do. Again, there may be a principled argument for treating this differently. But I think it's incumbent on the Roe protesters to explain what that principle is, or they appear to be unprincipled hypocrites.
> But I think it's incumbent on the Roe protesters to explain what that principle is, or they appear to be unprincipled hypocrites.
I'll take a stab at one potential explanation.
Pregnancy isn't infectious; you will not get pregnant by sitting next to a pregnant woman on the bus. Rights become more complicated when they impact others.
I think that's true directionally, but not quantitatively. I haven't seen riots about marijuana, or claims that SCOTUS is corrupt.
And although I can't say this about any particular individual, I think that statistically, the left position regarding covid-19 vaccinations seems to be contrary to the "bodily autonomy" philosophy. Admittedly, there may be differences in scale of risk that lead to this difference. But the rhetoric we're hearing today seems to frame abortion rights as an absolute with no room for such finesse. And I think it is on them to explain how to draw that line.