dontmeantobepoliticalbut:

turtleduck-inc:

liberalsarecool:

Republicans are doing everything they can to make people not want to have kids.

how exactly is birth control at risk? are condoms getting banned? or the pill or something? am i missing something here?

They’re already talking about it:

Blackburn says SCOTUS ruling to protect birth control for couples "unsound"

A Republican member of the Senate Judiciary Committee said a Supreme Court ruling allowing married couples access to birth control has cause

Newsweek

A landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling that protects married couples’ ability to obtain and use birth control is “constitutionally unsound,” according to Republican Senator Marsha Blackburn.

Blackburn made the remarks in a video posted to Twitter on Sunday, as the Tennessee Republican prepared for Senate Judiciary Committee hearings on the nomination of Ketanji Brown Jackson to the Supreme Court. Committee member Blackburn is among other Republicans who have said it is time to reconsider landmark court rulings with an ascendant conservative majority on the Court.

In her video, Blackburn called out the Supreme Court’s 1965 Griswold v. Connecticut decision that struck down a state law banning the use of “any drug, medicinal article or instrument for the purpose of preventing conception.” The Court ruled the law violated the constitutional right to privacy, which later served as the basis for the right to receive access to abortion care in the U.S.

“Constitutionally unsound rulings like Griswold v. Connecticut…confused Tennesseans and left Congress wondering who gave the court permission to bypass our system of checks and balances,” said Blackburn.

[…]

With Roe potentially on the chopping block, some Republicans are hoping the Court will go even further.

Three Republican candidates for Michigan Attorney General said in February that Griswold was wrongly decided, according to a report in left-leaning Mother Jones. Two candidates later told The Detroit News they didn’t want a ban on birth control.

Dana Nessel, Michigan’s current Democratic attorney general, reacted with a tweet calling the opposition to the ruling “terrifying.”

In a 2012 Republican presidential debate, candidates Rick Santorum and Mitt Romney (now a senator from Utah) also said they opposed Griswold.

Arizona GOP Senate candidate Blake Masters campaigning against birth control

Blake Masters pledged to vote for judges who believe Griswold v. Connecticut, Roe v. Wade, and Planned Parenthood v. Casey were wrongly deci

Business Insider

Blake Masters, a GOP Senate candidate running on an anti-abortion platform in Arizona, is also taking aim at the case that established the right to access birth control on his campaign website.

“I am 100% pro-life. Roe v. Wade was a horrible decision. It was wrong the day it was decided in 1973, it’s wrong today, and it must be reversed. But the fight doesn’t stop there,” Master’s campaign website reads. It goes on to pledge the candidate will “vote only for federal judges who understand that Roe and Griswold and Casey were wrongly decided, and that there is no constitutional right to abortion.”

Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey established and protected the right to an abortion in 1973 and 1992, respectively. But the Griswold case, decided in 1965, overturned a statewide ban on birth control and protected citizen’s rights to privacy against state restrictions on contraceptives.

Masters identifies himself as a Catholic father of three on his campaign site. The Catholic Church has had an official ban on any “artificial” birth control methods, including condoms and diaphragms, since 1930. Since birth control pills were invented in 1960, the church has maintained its stance that the medication should only be used for non-contraceptive reasons.

“I don’t support a state law or federal law that would ban or restrict contraception — period,” Masters said in a statement emailed to Insider. “And Griswold was wrongly decided. Both are true.”

In a Twitter thread criticizing reporting that argued he has conflicting campaign positions, Masters stated that his problem with the Griswold case was that the Supreme Court justices “wholesale made up a constitutional right to achieve a political outcome.”

After Roe decision, Idaho lawmakers may consider restricting some contraception

As Idahoans plan for a future without abortion rights, a leading Republican in the Idaho House would support holding hearings on legislation banning abortion pills and morning-after pills.

House State Affairs Committee Chairman Brent Crane, R-Nampa, said he would hold hearings on legislation banning emergency contraception and abortion pills during a Friday interview with Idaho Public Television.

“IUDs, I’m not for certain yet on where I would be on that particular issue,” he said, referring to intrauterine devices, which are a long-lasting form of contraception.

In a Saturday interview, Crane clarified that he supports contraception, including IUDs, and would not support hearings banning contraception generally. Instead, he said that he has heard of safety concerns with emergency contraceptives, like Plan B, and abortion pills, and would therefore be willing to hold hearings about them.

Crane said that there have been reports of “complications” caused by morning-after pills and of abortion pills causing “health concerns for the mom,” despite years of research showing the safety of both medications.