Alito Lost In Space.
Justice Samuel Alito’s 98-page opinion on reversing Roe v Wade proves one thing and one thing only: Alito is lost in space.
Specifically, the space between 1235 and 2022, a virtual millennium.
He reaches back a thousand years for “moral clarity” and succeeds in misreading history and building his argument on quicksand. Rape, during the 13th century, was considered a “romantic adventure” that was a prelude, even requisite, to a happy marriage. Rape was how a man gained dominion over a woman and secured his claim to her body.
Women during Medieval times were legally dependent on their husbands; prohibited from borrowing money, signing contracts and being a witness in court. Apparently this is the sub-text of his opinion which helps explain his devotion to obliterating a woman’s inalienable right to control her body.
He then jumps forward five hundred years to quote from Jurist Sir Matthew Hale who exonerates husbands from committing rape claiming a wife surrenders this claim when she submits to the marital contract. Hale was also a notorious witch hunter known for sending two to the gallows for their deviant beliefs. Most rational people, especially jurists, would never rely on Hale as a source for inspiration or thought modeling.
Mr. Sam, you could have exercised intellectual economy and limited your opinion to a single page.
“Precedent is the foundation of all rational thought. It has been true throughout history, with some minor modern deviations, that women are inferior to men. “Ask anyone.
“Men are the natural heirs to God given rights and it is man who decides what is right for a woman to do or not do.
“Everyone knows it.
“If a man chooses to have sex with a woman, whether by force, opportunity or by marital contract, she is obliged to comply. She is also obliged to take responsibility for the consequences of any and all of her sexual acts.
“Pregnancy is never considered unwanted or medically malefic. The woman, therefore, is to bear the child and accept whatever consequences ensue.
“Aborting the child is unlawful, immoral and historically baseless.
“Just ask anyone.
“The man, whether he’s a rapist, stranger or husband, is absolved from any responsibility for the general health and welfare of the child unless he chooses to accept said responsibility.
“Sex is for the pleasure of both the man and the woman. The consequences of sex are solely the responsibility of the woman.
Ask any man.”
### 30 ###