If a Jury told me that "Freedom" means "Abortion", I would tell them they are full of sh*t. Again, if it doesn't say "abortion" , then it doesn't mean abortion. That interpretation is ridiculous. It's like claiming a "transgender" male is a female. No he isn't, and accepting an opinion, no matter how many people make up that opinion, is just wrong.
Why don't you get started on that now, since you don't have anything new to say about this.
As the topic of Judicial overreach is seemingly with us forever, it seems to me it will get discussed whether there is anything new to add or not.
I think the idea of interpreting words to mean something that isn't clearly articulated is incorrect, and I am at a loss to understand how you can see it differently.
Does anyone else on this forum believe we should read things into legal verbiage that isn't clearly articulated to mean what someone is forcing it to mean?
Anybody else okay with getting a right to abortion out of language meant to recognize freedom?
What I am trying to communicate to you is that I don't think this discussion is going anywhere so I'm not going to continue, but I guess you really are on the spectrum, because you don't seem to be picking up on that.