Griswold may be the case used for RvW, but that doesn't make Griswold wrong. It only makes it's application in RvW wrong and the SC can certainly rehear the case based on the latest scientific information. Contraception is before the fact, not after, so it is a bad case to base RvW on.
Not always. Many birth control pills cause the uterous to form a hostile environment and won't allow a fertilized egg to attach. Certain IUD devices do the same thing.
Contraception is not always about denying a willing sperm meeting a willing egg. It's about denying a fertileized egg a place to nest and continue development.
If pro lifers were honest, any Roe decision would also affect Griswold.
"Griswold may be the case used for RvW, but that doesn't make Griswold wrong"
I disagree. Connecticut had a law and the SCOTUS struck it down usurping power reserved to the state. Don't confuse results with how they were achieved.