"In one lifetime, Roe had pushed women so fully into the paid labor market that it was normal for high school seniors to be asked to answer a genderless prompt about their economic aspirations. Flipping through that book today feels like reading a fairy tale, the old Grimm ones and not the new Disney ones.

I grew up choosing where and how I work because Roe v. Wade gave me many of the same basic rights of personhood as men, for example. Millions of women have, to different degrees, been able to do the same.

With Roe v. Wade toppled, we do not have the same rights in all labor markets. In a global market, an empowered worker is one who can migrate. With Dobbs, women cannot assume that we can safely work in Idaho the same way that we can in Oregon or Washington. I cannot negotiate wages or time off with an employer with the same risk profile as those who cannot become pregnant. An employer who offers lower pay in a state with abortion care indirectly benefits from women’s inability to take our labor on the open market across the nation. Thanks to a rogue court, women’s lives are now more determined by the accidents of our birth than they were a week ago.
....
For only 58 years of the nation’s 246-year-old economy, women have been able to avail themselves — thanks to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act — of the full citizenship that we effectively purchase through our jobs.

Today we pay a greater price for that freedom than do men. And it is a price that our children will inherit. Many of the people who celebrate the Dobbs decision are nostalgic for a pre-World War II American economy. That economy kept women from competing with men in the paid labor market."

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/28/opinion/citizens-no-more.html

On Wednesday, June 29, 2022 at 6:34:07 PM UTC+8, ltlee1 wrote:
> "In one lifetime, Roe had pushed women so fully into the paid labor market that it was normal for high school seniors to be asked to answer a genderless prompt about their economic aspirations. Flipping through that book today feels like reading a fairy tale, the old Grimm ones and not the new Disney ones.
>
> I grew up choosing where and how I work because Roe v. Wade gave me many of the same basic rights of personhood as men, for example. Millions of women have, to different degrees, been able to do the same.
>
> With Roe v. Wade toppled, we do not have the same rights in all labor markets. In a global market, an empowered worker is one who can migrate. With Dobbs, women cannot assume that we can safely work in Idaho the same way that we can in Oregon or Washington. I cannot negotiate wages or time off with an employer with the same risk profile as those who cannot become pregnant. An employer who offers lower pay in a state with abortion care indirectly benefits from women’s inability to take our labor on the open market across the nation. Thanks to a rogue court, women’s lives are now more determined by the accidents of our birth than they were a week ago.
> ...
> For only 58 years of the nation’s 246-year-old economy, women have been able to avail themselves — thanks to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act — of the full citizenship that we effectively purchase through our jobs.
>
> Today we pay a greater price for that freedom than do men. And it is a price that our children will inherit. Many of the people who celebrate the Dobbs decision are nostalgic for a pre-World War II American economy. That economy kept women from competing with men in the paid labor market."
>
> https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/28/opinion/citizens-no-more.html

All these pointes are good points but they do not help at all if the decision is made by the conservative judges of the supreme court. Sometimes, the country has to go back 200 years because the decision is taken based on 200 years ago. As the law the judges enshrined, there is nothing to concern by anymore except that woman must know in advance of where to help. Otherwise, one has to be careful not to get it.

On Thursday, June 30, 2022 at 12:39:12 PM UTC-4, stoney wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 29, 2022 at 6:34:07 PM UTC+8, ltlee1 wrote:
> > "In one lifetime, Roe had pushed women so fully into the paid labor market that it was normal for high school seniors to be asked to answer a genderless prompt about their economic aspirations. Flipping through that book today feels like reading a fairy tale, the old Grimm ones and not the new Disney ones.
> >
> > I grew up choosing where and how I work because Roe v. Wade gave me many of the same basic rights of personhood as men, for example. Millions of women have, to different degrees, been able to do the same.
> >
> > With Roe v. Wade toppled, we do not have the same rights in all labor markets. In a global market, an empowered worker is one who can migrate. With Dobbs, women cannot assume that we can safely work in Idaho the same way that we can in Oregon or Washington. I cannot negotiate wages or time off with an employer with the same risk profile as those who cannot become pregnant. An employer who offers lower pay in a state with abortion care indirectly benefits from women’s inability to take our labor on the open market across the nation. Thanks to a rogue court, women’s lives are now more determined by the accidents of our birth than they were a week ago.
> > ...
> > For only 58 years of the nation’s 246-year-old economy, women have been able to avail themselves — thanks to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act — of the full citizenship that we effectively purchase through our jobs.
> >
> > Today we pay a greater price for that freedom than do men. And it is a price that our children will inherit. Many of the people who celebrate the Dobbs decision are nostalgic for a pre-World War II American economy. That economy kept women from competing with men in the paid labor market."
> >
> > https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/28/opinion/citizens-no-more.html
> All these pointes are good points but they do not help at all if the decision is made by the conservative judges of the supreme court. Sometimes, the country has to go back 200 years because the decision is taken based on 200 years ago. As the law the judges enshrined, there is nothing to concern by anymore except that woman must know in advance of where to help. Otherwise, one has to be careful not to get it.

Does "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" not presume every human being with individual dreams?
For women, dreams without the impediment of untimely pregnancy. According to the Christian Bible
Genesis 2:7, "And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils
the breath of life; and man became a living soul."

What is a living soul in the absence of dream? Women could dream of being a mother. But a better
dream is a good and prepared mother at the right time.

American elites love to throw Liberty at other nations as a political tool. But many don't really
understand its meaning?

On Friday, July 1, 2022 at 1:30:54 PM UTC-4, ltlee1 wrote:
> On Thursday, June 30, 2022 at 12:39:12 PM UTC-4, stoney wrote:
> > On Wednesday, June 29, 2022 at 6:34:07 PM UTC+8, ltlee1 wrote:
> > > "In one lifetime, Roe had pushed women so fully into the paid labor market that it was normal for high school seniors to be asked to answer a genderless prompt about their economic aspirations. Flipping through that book today feels like reading a fairy tale, the old Grimm ones and not the new Disney ones.
> > >
> > > I grew up choosing where and how I work because Roe v. Wade gave me many of the same basic rights of personhood as men, for example. Millions of women have, to different degrees, been able to do the same.
> > >
> > > With Roe v. Wade toppled, we do not have the same rights in all labor markets. In a global market, an empowered worker is one who can migrate. With Dobbs, women cannot assume that we can safely work in Idaho the same way that we can in Oregon or Washington. I cannot negotiate wages or time off with an employer with the same risk profile as those who cannot become pregnant. An employer who offers lower pay in a state with abortion care indirectly benefits from women’s inability to take our labor on the open market across the nation. Thanks to a rogue court, women’s lives are now more determined by the accidents of our birth than they were a week ago.
> > > ...
> > > For only 58 years of the nation’s 246-year-old economy, women have been able to avail themselves — thanks to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act — of the full citizenship that we effectively purchase through our jobs.
> > >
> > > Today we pay a greater price for that freedom than do men. And it is a price that our children will inherit. Many of the people who celebrate the Dobbs decision are nostalgic for a pre-World War II American economy. That economy kept women from competing with men in the paid labor market."
> > >
> > > https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/28/opinion/citizens-no-more.html
> > All these pointes are good points but they do not help at all if the decision is made by the conservative judges of the supreme court. Sometimes, the country has to go back 200 years because the decision is taken based on 200 years ago. As the law the judges enshrined, there is nothing to concern by anymore except that woman must know in advance of where to help. Otherwise, one has to be careful not to get it.
> Does "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" not presume every human being with individual dreams?
> For women, dreams without the impediment of untimely pregnancy. According to the Christian Bible
> Genesis 2:7, "And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils
> the breath of life; and man became a living soul."
>
> What is a living soul in the absence of dream? Women could dream of being a mother. But a better
> dream is a good and prepared mother at the right time.
>
> American elites love to throw Liberty at other nations as a political tool. But many don't really
> understand its meaning?

Could such lack of understanding lead to another civil war?

"While there were many tailwinds on our inevitable journey toward Civil War, perhaps no event accelerated
its start more than the Supreme Court’s infamous and unconstitutional Dred Scott v. Sanford decision in
1857. The 7-2 decision, which ruled that no black could be considered a U.S.. citizen, undermined the efforts
of abolitionists and the then-nascent Republican Party to limit the expansion of slavery.
....
Just as the seven pro-slavery Supreme Court justices issued their Dred Scott decision based on an activist
slaveholders’ interpretation of the Constitution, the seven pro-abortion justices issued their Roe v. Wade decision
based on their activist interpretation of the Constitution.

Abortion, like slavery, is nowhere to be found in the Constitution. And the Roe decision, like the Dred Scott decision,
effectively ended the debate about abortion.

The Supreme Court’s latest decision to overturn Roe v. Wade is presently viewed by pro-abortion activists as an
attack on so-called ‘women’s rights,’ akin to the pro-slavery activists’ view of Lincoln’s election as an attack on so-
called slaveowners’ and slave states’ rights.

While the issue of slavery pitted the slave states against the free states, the issue of abortion has pitted the red
states against the blue states. And just as the pro-slave states were unwilling to tolerate an association with anti-
slave states, the pro-abortion activists and states are unwilling to tolerate an association with the pro-life activists
and states."
https://www.bizpacreview.com/2022/06/28/is-abortion-the-issue-that-could-lead-to-our-next-civil-war-1255452/