Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Freedom

Americans, Especially Women, Feel Less Free. They're Not Wrong.

Unfortunately, the data supports Americans’ take on the state of freedom in the world.

J.D. Tuccille | 5.19.2025 7:00 AM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
Three women sit with their backs to the camera, facing the U.S. Capitol. One woman has an American flag around her shoulders, while another has her hair in an American flag print bandana. | Czuber | Dreamstime.com
(Czuber | Dreamstime.com)

People around the world are, by and large, satisfied with the freedom they enjoy in their everyday lives. The exceptions to this trend are Americans—women, in particular. This could be the set-up for commentary from Euro-pundits and U.N. officials about American political dysfunction or the evils of our culture except for an important complication: By the reckoning of several independent organizations, the world is getting less free, and folks here at home are closer to the truth than are our overseas cousins.

You are reading The Rattler from J.D. Tuccille and Reason. Get more of J.D.'s commentary on government overreach and threats to everyday liberty.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Americans Are Outliers in Feeling Dissatisfied With Their Freedom

"For the third year in a row, Americans are less satisfied with their personal freedom than the rest of the world, including their peers in other wealthy, market-based economies," Gallup's Benedict Vigers and Julie Ray reported of survey data on May 14. "While Americans have been less satisfied in recent years, satisfaction with personal freedom has remained higher and steady worldwide. A median of 81% across 142 countries and territories expressed satisfaction with their freedom in 2024."

Specifically, Americans' satisfaction "with their freedom to choose what they do with their lives" started falling after 2020, when it was 85 percent; this was comparable to the peak 87-percent median recorded in the 38 developed, democratic countries of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and a bit higher than the 80-percent median recorded globally. U.S. satisfaction peaked several times over the past two decades at 87 percent, making 2020 unremarkable.

As of 2024, after a brief and mild pandemic-era dip, OECD residents' satisfaction with their freedom stands at 86 percent and the global median is at 81 percent. Satisfaction with freedom among Americans, by contrast, has plunged to 72 percent.

Americans are rather less satisfied than their peers around the world with the freedom they enjoy in their lives. As it turns out, folks in the U.S. have a better handle on the real-world situation.

Freedom Really Is Declining

"Global freedom declined for the 19th consecutive year in 2024," Freedom House noted in its Freedom in the World 2025 report. The report called out backsliding among almost twice as many nations that slid further into authoritarianism as opposed to those that improved respect for liberty. It highlighted attacks on political dissidents and candidates, pointing out that "in France, Japan, South Korea, the United Kingdom, and the United States, among others, extremism or partisan grievances motivated physical assaults on individuals campaigning for office." And it also noted that "elected leaders in democracies are increasingly seeking to undermine checks on their power, focusing their assaults on the media, anticorruption authorities, and the courts. These attacks endanger both democracy and basic freedoms."

Likewise, the Economist's Democracy Index 2024 warns that "governments and political parties in many democracies have become estranged from citizens." In response to upstart political movements, the establishments in many seemingly stable democracies "do everything in their power to keep the populists out and to present them as illegitimate or even a threat." The biggest declines have been seen in electoral process and pluralism and, especially, civil liberties which, the Economist notes, have not recovered from pandemic responses "when governments responded to the coronavirus threat with national lockdowns and an unprecedented withdrawal of liberties." Political elites are maintaining their forms of democracy, so long as nobody really challenges them or wants to make their own choices.

The Fraser Institute's Human Freedom Index 2024 agrees "freedom deteriorated severely in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic. Most areas of freedom fell, including significant declines through 2022 in freedom of movement, expression, and association and assembly; and in sound money." Fraser sees some small improvements since then but adds that freedom "remained well below its pre-pandemic level." Overall, "87.4 percent of the world's population saw a fall in human freedom from 2019 to 2022."

That's not to say some countries haven't improved—a few have, in dramatic ways. And even in countries that have slid in respect for freedom, the fall isn't across the board. People may see improved safeguards for specific liberties that they value. But if you're comparing where we are now to where we were less than a decade ago, it's fair to say the world is less free, and that includes developed countries with established democratic political systems. Americans are outliers in the Gallup survey because we're right.

American Women Are Especially Dissatisfied With the State of Freedom

Interestingly, American women are particularly less "satisfied with their freedom to choose what they do with their lives."  While men's satisfaction with the state of freedom dropped from 88 percent in 2020 to 73 percent in 2023 and blipped up to 77 percent last year, women's satisfaction steadily declined from 82 percent in 2020 to 66 percent last year.

The drop among women from 2021 to 2022 was especially sharp, and while Gallup didn't ask about the specifics of freedom with which people are satisfied or dissatisfied, the report comments that its "fieldwork in 2022 coincided with the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision on abortion rights, a draft of which was leaked to the press on May 2, 2022." Men's and women's responses to the survey were similar before the leak but diverged afterwards.

Also, "women's satisfaction dropped most among those who approved of then-President Joe Biden," suggesting progressive women who are most inclined to support reproductive rights suffered the biggest drop in satisfaction with freedom right around the time that Dobbs overturned Roe v. Wade's protections for abortion.

Controversial, long-debated, and forever in the news, reproductive rights remain a touchstone by which many Americans—women in particular—assess the degree to which they see themselves as free. The more leeway they have to make their own choices about reproductive issues, the more satisfied they are with the state of their freedom. Curtail their ability to make choices and they become less satisfied. This issue is and will remain a major factor in our politics (consider the weekend bombing of a fertility clinic, apparently by an "anti-natalist" terrorist who opposed bringing more people into the world).

That said, reproductive issues are certainly not the only factor. U.S. men and women alike reported feeling less free before the leak and then release of the Dobbs decision. Dobbs may well have accelerated that decline, especially for women, but Americans already reported feeling substantially less free even before reproductive rights were elevated back to prominence in 2022.

Unfortunately, Americans have it right. Governments around the world have made many of us less free than we were just a few years ago.

The Rattler is a weekly newsletter from J.D. Tuccille. If you care about government overreach and tangible threats to everyday liberty, this is for you.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: When the U.S. Military Gave People Radiation Poisoning

J.D. Tuccille is a contributing editor at Reason.

FreedomReproductive FreedomWomenWomen's RightsGenderPolitical FreedomUnited StatesPollsPolitics
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (193)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. SQRLSY   2 months ago

    "in France, Japan, South Korea, the United Kingdom, and the United States, among others, extremism or partisan grievances motivated physical assaults on individuals campaigning for office."

    And how about threats against those already IN orifice! "Hang Mike Pence" and "Execute General Milley"!

    Dear Orange Leader is CLEARLY (for all who can and will see) part of the problem, and SNOT a part of the solution!

    1. Speaking for normal people   2 months ago

      I was around when Hillary's heinous behavior called Trump in. Many many voters took Trump only only only because of Hillary. As usual you have it completely wrong.

      ALL DETAILED IN THE BOOK by Salena Zito
      The Great Revolt: Inside the Populist Coalition Reshaping American Politics

    2. DesigNate   2 months ago

      Refuted.

  2. Mickey Rat   2 months ago

    If you feel restrictions on killing other humans seriously impinge on your freedom, then you might be seriously misguided on what freedom is.

    1. SQRLSY   2 months ago

      To arms, Cumrades!!! The womb slaves are rebelling!!! How DARE these uppity ones believe that their wombs belong to THEM!?!?!

      1. Speaking for normal people   2 months ago

        Again, late to the news, huh.
        That anti-natalist killer in Florida sounds like you
        You pushed for abortion and now we get "I will kill people because you let me be born" This is your view of freedom 🙂

        1. SQRLSY   2 months ago

          Maybe You could get Your PervFected tin-foil mind-reading hate-hat recalibrated? Shit sure doesn't seem to be working right! Do You ALSO self-righteously use Your PervFected Judgments (driven by Your PervFected tin-foil mind-reading hate-hat) to assign grades to Your students? Not on any sort of objective measure of the quality of their work, butt on twat You THINK that they think?

          Get shit re-calibrated! (Just an humble suggestion.)

          1. GOD OF PENGUIN ISLAND   2 months ago

            The devil speaks through sqrlsy.

          2. Speaking for normal people   2 months ago

            Folks,do you get his premise : He knows what is right and wrong 🙂

            1. SQRLSY   2 months ago

              The OPPOSITE here is SNOT knowing ANYTHING about twat is right and twat is wrong! "Barks and Howls for 'Normal' People" here apparently advocates sheer moral nihilism... Jesus, Gandhi, and MLK were SNOT "better people", in ANY way, than Adolf Shitler, Idi Amin, etc.!

              "Barks and Howls for 'Normal' People" scolds me like a school-marm after reading my mind one second, then accuses me of moral nihilism... Get a load of THAT shit! If there's no right or wrong, how, then, could I be wrong?

              Maybe You could PervFectly try LISTENING to normal people instead of Perfectly Barking and Howling at them, some time? Just a suggestion...

              1. Don't look at me! (I’ll post my list if you post yours)   2 months ago

                Unread

              2. Sevo, 5-30-24, embarrassment   2 months ago

                Fuck off and die, spastic asshole.

                1. SQRLSY   2 months ago

                  Show us how shit is done... Else Ye are a PervFected hypocrite! Do ass I say, snot ass I do!!!

          3. Speaking for normal people   2 months ago

            No, lying fool, I learned from my CMA training that grading was NOT always the way to go

            Deming's argument is that grades (especially forced ranking and grading curves) rob students of their intrinsic motivation to learn (and probably robs teachers of their joy in teaching). Deming recommends: Abolish grades (A, B, C, D) in school

            "I read them. Not to grade them. No, I read them to see how I am doing. Where am I failing? What don’t they understand? Why do they give wrong answers? Why do they have some point of view that I don’t think is right? Where am I failing? Where do I need to build up."

            YOU ARE SUCH A GODDAM BIGOT< YOU DON"T KNOW WHAT I DO ABOUT GRADES

      2. Speaking for normal people   2 months ago

        Maybe God will re-play this at your death and judgment and you can see how extremists like you gave rise to the anti-natalist murderer.

        I was in your womb and you should have killed me so now I will bomb and kill random pro-lifers.
        Yeah, you have one of the blackest souls on here. You just don't see anything

    2. Ersatz   2 months ago

      This sounds like a setup for a Jeff Foxworthy bit:
      If you feel restrictions on killing other humans seriously impinge on your freedom, then you might be a progressive

      1. VULGAR MADMAN   2 months ago

        Democrats are still upset that they lost their slaves.

        1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 months ago

          Given the (D)edication of black women voters, not all of them.

    3. TJJ2000   2 months ago

      If you have to make-up imaginary unicorn creatures in your head to pretend someone else is killing other humans, then you might be seriously misguided on what freedom is.

      If you cannot support ?baby? freedom (i.e. fetal ejection)
      UR supporting Gov-Gun forced reproduction.

      And no matter how many times you wave you BS flag about 'killing' anything; unless there's an actual act of violence in the process you're just pretending NOT forcing reproduction = murder.

      1. Ersatz   2 months ago

        human life begins at conception - beyond that i don't think it likely we'll agree on issues downstream from that fact.

        You have to admit, though, that the construction of that sentence was reminiscent of the Foxworthy bit ????

        ...also I think we can also agree the following is a good thing
        Javier Milei's party comes first in Buenos Aires election upset

        1. TJJ2000   2 months ago

          Conception isn't a life. Life is an inherent attribute/function.

          All you've got is 100% proven FALSE assertions/beliefs you want to wave a faulty 'fact' flag on so Gov-Guns will force everyone to abide by your beliefs/religion.

          If it has inherent life there is ZERO excuse not to set it free (i.e. fetal ejection).
          Which is perfectly ensured by the fact you have to enslave the Woman as well.
          Net-Summing in nothing but Gov-Gun enslaving both of them for *your-own* self-righteous beliefs.
          As a completely non-invested 3rd party just Gov-Gun Power-mad for your own self-importance.

        2. Nelson   2 months ago

          “ human life begins at conception”

          No, it doesn’t. Development begins at conception, but life begins at viability. Until viability there is a 0% chance of a fetus surviving alone. 21 weeks is the first point that chance becomes non-zero. That is the first point where any reasonable definition of an independent life starts.

          If you want to believe that potential equals actual, that’s your choice. But your irrationality should only apply to your behavior. You should never be able to force your faith-based beliefs on anyone else.

          1. Junkmailfolder   2 months ago

            There is a 0% chance of a fetus surviving alone until long after birth occurs. Just because you can assign that responsibility to someone else doesn't negate the fact that "surviving alone" is as irrational and arbitrary a definition of life as is conception.

            1. Nelson   2 months ago

              “ There is a 0% chance of a fetus surviving alone until long after birth occurs”

              Dishonest much? You know that viability is about being able to sustain existence, not being able to feed, clothe, and house itself. This is why anti-abortionists are, by and large, completely dishonest people. They pretend that the other side is saying something that no honest person in their right mind would believe.

              Before viability, a fetus that was removed from the womb could not sustain its own life. That’s what viable means. That’s a standard that makes sense, not the “it doesn’t have a heart, but it has a heartbeat” idiocy of anti-abortionists.

              1. Junkmailfolder   2 months ago

                Your definition is as nonsensical as any other proposed definition. If you take from, or do not give, the necessary elements of life to a baby, it dies. Just like an 18-week old fetus.

                The only difference is that a fetus has a more specialized delivery system.

        3. Lester75   2 months ago

          Living cells with human DNA begin at conception. People do not begin at conception. Zygotes are flushed down the toilet without anyone knowing about it all the time. Multi-celled petri-dish type zygotes are constantly dying and no one misses them.

          It's always the same slavers that want forced births who want to make birth control illegal, saying IUDs and reliable hormonal birth control 'kills the baybees'. And then right wing incels get really mad that young women don't want to risk pregnancy by having sex with them.

        4. n00bdragon   2 months ago

          human life begins at conception

          I'm not entirely opposed to this argument in principle, but I have yet to meet one person who can hold it alongside the understanding that normal human reproduction involves a staggering amount of death. The entire human reproductive cycle is a bloody meatgrinder with a positively vicious disregard for anything resembling the "sanctity" of human life. It is simply not possible to understand human reproduction on any basic level without understanding this. Biologically, life is not sacred. Biologically, life isn't even valuable. Any value or sentiment that is attached to human life is done by humans, specifically by ones who generally don't know how making tiny people works. If you choose to believe that a god made human anatomy, then that god likes killing children... lots of children. Lots and lots and lots of children.

          1. Ben of Houston   2 months ago

            I can see your thoughts, but you fail to make a point.

            However, let's say you were in a World War 1 trench. The guy next to you is almost certain to die. So you shoot him in the head. Would you not be called up for murder? After all he was almost certain to die anyway. That thread of logic is nonsensical.

            100% of people who live will eventually die. That does not mean the crime of murder does not exist. We aren't judging a creator being. We are judging whether this act is ending a human life.

        5. Ben of Houston   2 months ago

          Look, y'all.

          Life is continuous. There is an unbroken string of life from all of us to the first reproducing molecule. Debating about when life begins is nonsensical and anti-scientific.

          The proper question is: "When does a fetus become a separate being with rights".

          Now, while it might not change much, it does stop some of the nonsensical wording and properly puts this in philosophy rather than biology (and trust me, pro-choicers, you cannot win if you focus on biology, because the twists to say that a fetus isn't alive are absurd)

          1. Nelson   2 months ago

            “ The proper question is: "When does a fetus become a separate being with rights".”

            Exactly. And the earliest point that makes sense is 21 weeks, the earliest point that a fetus has been delivered and survived.

      2. Speaking for normal people   2 months ago

        Some here will know professionally what I am saying
        You write like you are on the cusp of a mental event

      3. Speaking for normal people   2 months ago

        A really lousy writer you are. As God is my witness I have no idea what you are saying.
        Reproduction = murder, so you are an anti-natalist ? why not just say that

    4. Nelson   2 months ago

      “ If you feel restrictions on killing other humans seriously impinge on your freedom, then you might be seriously misguided on what freedom is.”

      Not killing. Not a person. Not a conflict of rights. After viability that changes, but none of the restrictions imposed by anti-liberty states start at or after viability.

      Your opinion is only justified in shaping your behavior. It isn’t valid to shape anyone else’s.

  3. GOD OF PENGUIN ISLAND   2 months ago

    I wonder if being forced to go to the bathroom, shower, and play sports with mentally ill men had any effect on women’s perception of their freedom?

    1. Roberta   2 months ago

      Who's being forced to go to the bathroom, shower, and play sports?

      1. BYODB   2 months ago

        Well, if you don't go to the bathroom you will probably die so there is that.

      2. Social Justice is neither   2 months ago

        Why should there be 2 men's leagues? Nothing hates women like another woman.

  4. Nobartium   2 months ago

    folks here at home are closer to the truth than are our overseas cousins.

    There is, of course, an alternative explanation.

    A median of 81% across 142 countries and territories expressed satisfaction with their freedom in 2024.

    And that alternative is that most people, the world over, simply reject freedom, as libertarians define it.

    That isn't surprising to me, as I also reject that freedom is at the hearts of everyone. But if you favor open borders, this should make you rethink exactly what kind of people you let in.

    1. GOD OF PENGUIN ISLAND   2 months ago

      I remember making a joke on social media towards an Australian during covid lockdowns about their concentration camps. He didn’t get the joke and supported his government’s actions.

      1. Sun Wukong   2 months ago

        Self proclaimed "libertarian" and editor of the Australian magazine Quillet Claire Lehman loved the lockdowns and swore up and down that locking the unvaccinated in camps was totally acceptable.

        1. Wizzle Bizzle   2 months ago

          My buddy who relocated to Australia has been insufferable about the superiority of socialism over the last decade. Ignoring that they plunder the resources of a landmass the size of the US to enrich a monochromatic population the size of greater L.A., they do have their shit together in a way we absolutely do not. So it was a little hard to fully discount... until 2020.

          Since I pointed out that his feel-good socialist government rounded up the dirty, slapped an armband on them and shoved them into concentration camps, he doesn't make those proclamations anymore. (At least not to his American friends.)

          1. Speaking for normal people   2 months ago

            YOu and your friend need to watch the super-popular Rita Panahi on Sky News for a complete informed takedown of the economic and political nightmare of Australia.

  5. Set Us Up The Chipper   2 months ago

    This article has zero substance except to say that during the Covid lockdown/censorship regimes freedom took a hit. The rest is just do you feel free...all about the fee-fees.

    1. SIV   2 months ago

      2Chili phoning it in.

    2. Ersatz   2 months ago

      Not only that, what struck me is the framing. The way its presented people are not feeling free when they don't think they can have what they want... which is not freedom. Its the freedom to pursue what you want that is freedom. The idea in the minds of these respondents is that if I pursue something I will acquire it - and if I don't get my outcome I'm not free. That's the underlying interpretation of freedom that is being investigated in the article (at least that I'm seeing) and its just wrong right off the bat.

      1. Neutral not Neutered   2 months ago

        Well said

      2. BYODB   2 months ago

        Bingo.

      3. Speaking for normal people   2 months ago

        FOunders UTTELY rejected this : Its the freedom to pursue what you want that is freedom.

        An almost overwhelmingly positive reception to this study
        The Pursuit of Happiness in the Founding Era: An Intellectual History (Studies in Constitutional Democracy) 2019
        by Carli N. Conklin
        5.0 out of 5 stars (7)
        "For the founders, the pursuit of happiness was the individual right to pursue a life lived in harmony with the law of nature and a public duty to govern in accordance with that law."

  6. Rev Arthur L kuckland (5-30-24 banana republic day)   2 months ago

    So the story boils down to the only demographic that favored Biden is most unhappy with trump

    1. mad.casual   2 months ago

      Inasmuch as that demographic exists.

      It should also be noted, once again, that this is the demographic that was parking abortion vans out in front of rally/campaign centers.

      If the pro-MAID demographic, setting up MAID vans outside campaign centers, were butthurt about their "loss of freedoms", I would expect a normal, functional person to have at least some schadenfreude on the matter.

      1. Michael Ejercito   2 months ago

        I wonder how much overlap there is between the pro-MAID demographic and the pro-"ban public establishments from serving customers who lack proof of taking one vaccine" demographic.

        1. DesigNate   2 months ago

          It’s a perfect circle

          1. Social Justice is neither   2 months ago

            Maynard has nothing to do with this.

      2. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 months ago

        That demographic is college-educated and/or black women (or "women").

    2. Speaking for normal people   2 months ago

      But they weren't happy with Biden or Harris either

      how Donald Trump twice won the US presidency over accomplished, well-qualified women. While more women than men voted for Kamala Harris, Donald Trump still appeals to female voters, particularly over the age of 45.

      Perhaps surprisingly, fewer women voted for Harris in 2024 as voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016. This is despite issues of abortion rights, Trump’s liability for sexual abuse, and patriarchal overtones at Trump rallies.

      HARRIS IS PELLUCIDLY A STUPID HUMAN BEING. CLINTON IS A HATE-FILLED HUMAN BEING but as has been said ad nauseam Trump says what he will do and then he does it.

      I have to point out that when Kamala stupidly said she would change nothing from what Biden did, at that time Biden went volte face on immigration. Was she sleeping on the forest floor

      smarties, said "aaaah, a complete fool here"

      "The Biden administration is quickly invoking an authority to shut off access to asylum for migrants who cross the US-Mexico border illegally, a significant attempt by President Joe Biden to address head on one of his biggest political vulnerabilities.

      Biden unveiled the sweeping executive action Tuesday afternoon at the White House, attempting to use executive action to affect the situation on the border after a bipartisan measure failed earlier this year. The action marks the administration’s most dramatic move on the US southern border as Biden tries to gain the upper hand on immigration =====> just weeks from the first presidential debate – by using the same authority former President Donald Trump tried to use in office."

  7. Bipedal Humanoid   2 months ago

    Imagine being a fully grown adult and still believing that your overall freedom level hinges on your ability to terminate a fetus or not.

    1. Speaking for normal people   2 months ago

      NO, now it's that the non-person's fetal rights to the personal right be killed is what the pro-aborts have gliven to the world.

      1. Michael Ejercito   2 months ago

        The Dem leadership abandoned "My Body, My Choice".

      2. MasterThief   2 months ago

        I don't understand those types. If you're really that upset about being born then stfu and take bath with a toaster.

      3. Speaking for normal people   2 months ago

        Now the anti-natalist movement takes abortion to its predictable end. I can murder anyone that I think is pro-life because I was not killed in the womb as was my right (!!) So now the fetus has one right, to be killed.
        When it meets the gay perversion we will see , you should have killed me because I am gay and don't want to be alive if I have to be gay. !!!

    2. Neutral not Neutered   2 months ago

      And calling it reproductive rights

      1. Nelson   2 months ago

        Because it is.

    3. Nelson   2 months ago

      “ Imagine being a fully grown adult and still believing that your overall freedom level hinges on your ability to terminate a fetus or not.”

      You mean being able to decide what to do with your own body? Yeah, that’s so unreasonable.

      If you choose to believe that a fetus is a person, that’s your foolish choice. But don’t force your idiocy on anyone else. That’s infringing on the rights and freedoms of someone else. If you support individual liberty and individual rights, you should support that.

      1. Bipedal Humanoid   2 months ago

        Nelson;dr

      2. Speaking for normal people   2 months ago

        You are willfully a fool. A fetus is human is what the law said, you added 'person' just be the lying asshole you always are

        The preborn are members of the human species from
        the moment of fertilization.

        . The scientific and medical answer as to whether a prenatal life qualifies as a
        distinct human being had been available for over a century at the time of Roe. See
        infra notes 77–81 and accompanying text. Dr. Patten of Michigan Medical School
        writes in his 1964 Foundations of Embryology, “The union of two such sex cells to
        form a zygote constitutes the process of fertilization and initiates the life of a new
        individual.” BRADLEY M. PATTEN, FOUNDATIONS OF EMBRYOLOGY 3 (1964). Drs.
        Greenhill and Friedman write in their 1974 obstetrical textbook, “The term conception refers to the union of the male and female pronuclear elements of procreation
        from which a new living being develops . . . [T]he zygote thus formed represents
        the beginning of a new life.” J.P. GREENHILL & EMANUEL A. FRIEDMAN, BIOLOGICAL PRINCIPLES AND MODERN PRACTICE OF OBSTETRICS 17, 23 (1974). As Dr.
        Mathews-Roth of Harvard University Medical School later said, “[I]t is incorrect
        to say that biological data cannot be decisive . . . it is scientifically correct to say
        that an individual human life begins at conception . . . and that this developing
        human always is a member of our species in all stages of its life.” The Human Life
        Bill: Hearing on S. 158 Before the Subcomm. on Separation of Powers of the S. Comm. on
        the Judiciary, 97th Cong. 17 (1981) (testimony of Dr. Micheline Mathews-Roth)

  8. sarcasmic   2 months ago

    Overturning RvW did not "take away the right to abortion" as the stupids on the left claim. It made it a state matter, not a federal matter. People who make that claim are as stupid and dishonest as the Jesses, MLs and other retards on the right.

    1. JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)   2 months ago

      Even when you try to criticize the left, you're so deranged you have to try to attack the right lol.

      This is why it is called derangement syndrome buddy.

      Even when you finally cavity agree the repubs dud a good thing, reducing federal power, you have to attack to signal to your allies on the left. So weird.

      Now if only youd recognize that reducing regulations, federal agencies, etc was a good thing instead of defending lower court leftist judges.

    2. Bertram Guilfoyle   2 months ago

      stupid and dishonest

      Remember when you told us Joe Biden was spared from prosecution for holding secret documents because he "cooperated"?

      1. JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)   2 months ago

        The cooperation clause of the law. Still waiting for saec to show us that clause.

        Of course by cooperation he means hold onto it for a decade and use it to publish a book, exposing the information to his ghost writer.

        1. Bertram Guilfoyle   2 months ago

          "I hate both teams equally"

          sarc

          1. JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)   2 months ago

            Meanwhile he praises democrats as advocating freedom lol.

        2. Michael Ejercito   2 months ago

          By his logic, all Brian Mitchell had to do was return Elizabeth Smart to her family on March 11, 2003 and no harm, no foul.

          1. sarcasmic   2 months ago

            That's really dumb. Let's see the name behind the grey box you're responding to. Ah, that explains it.

            1. JesseAz (Prime Meanster of Sarcasia)   2 months ago

              Yes. Your use od the give back clause to defend Joe was really stupid.

              Finally you're getting more honest.

            2. Bertram Guilfoyle   2 months ago

              It's funny how you dropped that line of argument after the Hur report came out, and now just respond to posts about it with "dur, grey box, you're a moron, etc"

    3. Speaking for normal people   2 months ago

      And you too are wrong.

      The states position we would be returning too would be 'abortion is taking a human life" Even before 14th Amendment

      Hall v. Hancock,88
      Mass. 255 (1834).

      e Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court unanimously held in 1834, as a “fixed principle,” that “a child will be considered in being, from conception to the time of its birth, in all cases where it will be for the benefit of such child to be so considered.”

      Ironically, Sarah Weddington, Jane Roe’s attorney, acknowledged the same point during the Roe re-argument. She agreed that, if human beings before and after birth were similarly Fourteenth Amendment persons, abortion would be “the equivalent after the child was born if the mother thought it bothered her health having the child around, she could have it killed.”

      The medical and scientific consensus that, as Texas argued in its Roe brief, “human life is a continuum, which commences in the womb…. The child is as much a child in those several days before birth as he is in those several days after;”

      FINALLY
      A study involving 5,502 biologists found a strong consensus that human life begins at fertilization, a view supported by previous surveys and polls. This research, conducted by Steven Andrew Jacobs, explored the biological perspective on when life begins in the context of the abortion debate.

  9. Quo Usque Tandem   2 months ago

    A representative democracy with constitutional safeguards places limits upon your ability to force others to do as you wish, presumably (per the propaganda) “for the good of all.”

    That should be the case regardless of what team is in power.

    1. sarcasmic   2 months ago

      You're kidding, right? The entire point of getting your team into power is to punish the other by forcing them into things that you support and that they oppose. For you it's no big deal, while to them it's authoritarianism. And when they scream and cry, you laugh, not caring that when they regain power you'll be the one screaming and crying. That's what politics has become now that so much power has been delegated to the executive that the president is basically an elected king.

      1. Don't look at me! (I’ll post my list if you post yours)   2 months ago

        Poor sarc.

    2. JohnZ   2 months ago

      Well, we see how see "democracy worked the past four years under the Biden/Fauci administration and the females were quite happy with it.

      1. sarcasmic   2 months ago

        Democrats did it first so whatever Republicans do is ok?

    3. Speaking for normal people   2 months ago

      Wow, the Founders would run from you.
      THe rights are inalienable , and the force is with the government.
      Right there in the Declaration.
      Common Good can override not even one unalienable right.
      IF 300 million want to violate one person's say Freedom of Religion constitution says no. THat is tyranny of the majority cf MADISON

    4. Speaking for normal people   2 months ago

      No,that was rejected with no qualifiactions at the Founding.
      We have unalienable rights and if 300 miilion want you to not have it, the Constitution says the 300 million LOSE

  10. STMitchell   2 months ago

    Progressive women led pandemic-era totalitarianism. Now that their influence is curtailed, I'm sure they feel picked-on. Their loss of freedom increased freedom for the rest of us.

  11. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 months ago

    'Specifically, Americans' satisfaction "with their freedom to choose what they do with their lives" started falling after 2020, when it was 85 percent'

    WTF is "freedom to choose what to do with your life"? Is this some childish-leftist (to be redundant) wish for a life without responsibility, especially paying your own bills?

    1. DesigNate   2 months ago

      I want to know who in America is not free “to choose what to do with your life”.

      1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 months ago

        What if doing what you want requires others to support you?

        1. DesigNate   2 months ago

          I can see how not being able to do that might dampen their feelings of freedom.

        2. Speaking for normal people   2 months ago

          Then you should be supporting family, one-man one-woman marriage.
          ARe you ??

      2. Nelson   2 months ago

        Anyone who wants a pre-viability abortion in pretty much every red state whose Constitution didn’t stop the “magic fetus” liberty-hating Republicans, to start with.

        Your morals should never apply to anyone else but you. Morals are arbitrary and individual, so they have no place as a basis for laws.

        1. DesigNate   2 months ago

          Somehow I knew it was going to come down to abortion

        2. Speaking for normal people   2 months ago

          Then as many atheists-turned-Christian have said "Then moral have no bearing or right to exist" Here is a famous Yale atheist on how utterly stupid you are
          Well they took the video down
          But here she explainis

          What I mean by thinking morality is objective. The fastest preview of that answer is, “You’re in the same situation with reference to morality that we were with sight before we knew the mechanism of how it worked. We thought we were in fact seeing real objects. It’s not clear why two fleshy things in the front of your head caused that to happen, but it was clear that they did. And you were able to deal with the fact that some people were colorblind without thinking that meant there weren’t colors. And we have a sort of “sense perception” of morality. Many of the objections I hear raised against objective morality could have been raised against seeing things.

        3. Speaking for normal people   2 months ago

          Nelson, by this point I think you hate yourself for what you have done to yourself

          A study involving 5,502 biologists found a strong consensus that human life begins at fertilization, a view supported by previous surveys and polls. This research, conducted by Steven Andrew Jacobs, explored the biological perspective on when life begins in the context of the abortion debate. The study revealed that the vast majority (96%) of participating biologists affirmed that human life begins at fertilization, the point where sperm and egg fuse to form a zygote.

    2. Nelson   2 months ago

      It’s the freedom to make choices for yourself, based on your individual rights, without the government interfering. Which is how it should be. It doesn’t mean that only good things should come from that freedom. There is no implication of a lack of responsibility anywhere in that premise.

      “ especially paying your own bills”

      What does paying bills have to do with it? You’re bringing in the most irrelevant and unstated claims to make some sort of point, but they aren’t actually about the issue at hand.

      1. Jefferson Paul   2 months ago

        I've encountered people spouting the Marxian position that "being a wage-slave" is the antithesis of freedom, so therefore socialism or communism is the most free society can be. It's an illogical position premised on twisting the definition of freedom to something that serves the leftist ideology.

        Paying your own bills is considered an infringement on freedom to at least some on the left.

        1. Speaking for normal people   2 months ago

          From a long-time Marxist and present Harvard-trained economist

          “Despite the massive intellectual feat that Marx's Capital represents, the Marxian contribution to economics can be readily summarized as virtually zero. Professional economics as it exists today reflects no indication that Karl Marx ever existed. This neither denies nor denigrates Capital as an intellectual achievement, and perhaps in its way the culmination of classical economics. But the development of modern economics had simply ignored Marx. Even economists who are Marxists typically utilize a set of analytical tools to which Marx contributed nothing, and have recourse to Marx only for ideological, political, or historical purposes.

          In professional economics, Capital was a detour into a blind alley, however historic it may be as the centerpiece of a worldwide political movement. What is said and done in its name is said and done largely by people who have never read through it, much less followed its labyrinthine reasoning from its arbitrary postulates to its empirically false conclusions. Instead, the massive volumes of Capital have become a quasi-magic touchstone—a source of assurance that somewhere and somehow a genius "proved" capitalism to be wrong and doomed, even if the specifics of this proof are unknown to those who take their certitude from it.”
          ― Thomas Sowell, Marxism: Philosophy and Economics

          1. Nelson   2 months ago

            I think you’re thinking of someone else if you are calling Sowell a “long-time Marxist. This is who you are quoting: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Sowell

            1. Speaking for normal people   2 months ago

              Sowell wrote the most quoted book agains Marxism and he was a Marxist for quite awhile

              Here he is in an 8-minute video from the Hoover Instution saying just that
              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D8lzi3t-GTE

        2. Nelson   2 months ago

          “ I've encountered people spouting the Marxian position that "being a wage-slave" is the antithesis of freedom, so therefore socialism or communism is the most free society can be.”

          Those people are commonly referred to as “delusional”. Socialism and Communism, like supply-side economics, have failed every time they’ve been tried, in every permutation that has been implemented, everywhere in the world.

  12. mad.casual   2 months ago

    The drop among women from 2021 to 2022 was especially sharp, and while Gallup didn't ask about the specifics of freedom with which people are satisfied or dissatisfied, the report comments that its "fieldwork in 2022 coincided with the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision on abortion rights, a draft of which was leaked to the press on May 2, 2022."
    ...
    Also, "women's satisfaction dropped most among those who approved of then-President Joe Biden," suggesting progressive women who are most inclined to support reproductive rights suffered the biggest drop in satisfaction with freedom right around the time that Dobbs overturned Roe v. Wade's protections for abortion.

    "Women who were surprised to learn that Joe Biden was both senile and a politician whose lips were moving were upset when the Dobbs decision was leaked."

    At this point, I'm going to need to see evidence that these women exist. Because the only women I know that are this stupid write for Reason Magazine.

    1. Wizzle Bizzle   2 months ago

      Splendid.

  13. Vernon Depner   2 months ago

    Freedom has never enjoyed popular support anywhere. To the extent that we have it, it's because it's been imposed by elites.

    1. mad.casual   2 months ago

      Not to mention that, for a long time, libertarians used to be strong on active freedom (e.g. turn your pasture into a field) vs. passive freedom (e.g. let your field turn to pasture) vs. positive freedom (e.g. free to grow your own crops) vs. negative freedom (e.g. freedom to trample through other peoples' fields) and have completely liquidated themselves on the issue with fanatical open borders and pro-abortion and pro-lockdown/MOAR TESTING positions.

      The article isn't lamenting the loss of freedoms. It's lamenting the loss of having infinitely successive privilege subsidized by others.

      1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 months ago

        Plus the "freedom" to control people with wrong ideas.

        1. Nelson   2 months ago

          Cultural conservatives have always been on board with that. Now more than ever.

          1. Speaking for normal people   2 months ago

            Nelson, Logic tears at your asss once again...Readers, WHO is defining 'cultural conservative" here. WHy it's stupid arch-bigot Nelson. "I don't give a sht what you say or think I am branding you a 'cultural conservative'

            So Nelson , I think, loves to bring Orwell into this but little does Nelson know that his biographer said that he was a cultural conservative.

            https://jacobin.com/2023/10/george-orwell-class-britain-spanish-civil-war-nineteen-eighty-four

            1. Nelson   2 months ago

              A cultural conservative is someone who, through legislation and government force, tries to impose social conservatives values on the rest of the nation. If you want me to use a different phrase, let me know what it would be.

              Cultural conservatism is what happens when people, who have chosen a conservative code by which to live, attempt to force it on others.

              1. Speaking for normal people   2 months ago

                More bullshit abuse of words from that error dumptruck that goes by the name Nelson
                and what is imposing values if it is not by government force opposing social conservative values.
                Are you just dumb

                Your abortion stance is social conservative, my abortion stance is you know 'it's just right'

      2. sarcasmic   2 months ago

        I think you're talking about negative vs positive liberty.

        Negative liberty requires nothing from others (e.g. the right to move freely, the right to speak your mind without retaliation, the right to seek employment).

        Positive liberty puts an obligation on others (e.g. the right to healthcare, the right to education, the right to not be offended).

        As a general rule, libertarianism and classical liberalism embrace negative liberty and view positive liberty with great skepticism.

        Republicans used to promote negative liberty, but not anymore. They hate that shit.

        Democrats have always been all about positive liberty, though now that Trump's GOP has become hostile to negative liberty they appear to be giving it a try.

        1. Neutral not Neutered   2 months ago

          Did you go to school with Kamala Harris in Montreal? Or was it your overpriced post secondary education that gave you the ability to speak word salads of nonsense so effectively?

          Do you actually think you have the "right to not be offended", or should?

          1. sarcasmic   2 months ago

            Do you actually think you have the "right to not be offended", or should?

            No. I said it was an example of a positive liberty that puts an obligation on others. In this case the obligation is to not say things that offend whiney progressive trash.

            I consider myself to be a classical liberal.

            Now re-read what I wrote. But this time engage your brain first.

            1. Speaking for normal people   2 months ago

              Sorry, he is right and you are wrong.

              There can be no right to not be offended if the nature of a violation can only be adjudicated after the fact.

          2. LIBtranslator   2 months ago

            The Gee Ooh Pee hired ANOTHER neutered idjit to shout at sarc? They are taking those Solomon Asch social pressure experiment results to heart and throwing good payola after bad.

  14. Sevo, 5-30-24, embarrassment   2 months ago

    "women's satisfaction dropped most among those who approved of NON-President Joe Biden,"

    Fixed.

  15. Wizzle Bizzle   2 months ago

    *Also, "women's satisfaction dropped most among those who approved of then-President Joe Biden," suggesting progressive women who are most inclined to support reproductive rights suffered the biggest drop in satisfaction with freedom*

    I really don't know how to say this without coming off as the comments section dude-bro, but the number of women who can't get past their feels in the voting booth has become something of a crisis. I can't tell you how many spoiled white women I'm surrounded by who hate the crime, graffiti, homeless camps, etc that their chosen party has inflicted on our metro area. But they pretend to embrace it all, parroting the party line of the day, purely because of abortion and maybe a dollop of homophelia. Dead babies uber alles.

    1. Michael Ejercito   2 months ago

      How many of those women were aware FJb abandoned "My Body, My Choice" for the Dems?

      (He himself never stood for "My Body, My Choice" as he voted for the Human Life Federalism Amendment in 1982)

    2. JohnZ   2 months ago

      White liberal suburbanite females. otherwise known as dumb c****
      The same ones who take their children to watch naked men dance in the streets.

      1. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 months ago

        And to sit on the laps of near-naked "men" to hear stories at the libraries.

    3. Speaking for normal people   2 months ago

      Well now they have to pray they aren't in the area when the next anti-natalist goes on a killing spree . Now abortion has produced" I will kill you because you didn't abort me"

  16. mad.casual   2 months ago

    This issue is and will remain a major factor in our politics (consider the weekend bombing of a fertility clinic, apparently by an "anti-natalist" terrorist who opposed bringing more people into the world).

    Interesting that the women lamenting abortion rights and the manifesto-carrying anti-natalist who blows up a fertility clinic get paragraphs between them despite their acts to destroy embryos and women's reproductive health while the Republicans who oppose destroying of life in either situation get shoved in the same sentence.

    Almost like you were more fanatically manipulative, dishonest, and inhuman about this as ENB.

    1. JohnZ   2 months ago

      The bombing was not done by a woman. It was a mentally ill male individual over come with self hate and nihilism. He was psychotic.

      1. BYODB   2 months ago

        Obviously. Sane people don't do suicide bombings.

        1. LIBtranslator   2 months ago

          According to gov't-licensed US doctors, and that includes psychiatrists, groveling in fear of devils and talking to invisible "friends" before meals and beddie-bye are NOT, repeat NOT symptoms of mental illness. So Jesus really did tell Republicans to enslave women just as Allah really told ragamuffins to fly planes into buildings and wear C4 vests studded with ball bearings. This sort of misdiagnosis goes a long way toward explaining howcum there are so many opiate addicts Stateside when tests have shown sane people dislike opiates.

          1. Speaking for normal people   2 months ago

            You sound demented.
            The leading atheist woman in the world Aayan Hirsi Ali has become a Christian and now you turn on her as being mentally ill.
            Richard Dawkins right hand man is now Christian and you can't get enough of Dawkins.

            LESS THAN 2 MINUTES
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YiVinfPjJPY

      2. Speaking for normal people   2 months ago

        John, 3 LOGIC ERRORS in your statement

        1) He might be mentallly ill because of his views on life and abortion and the lack of worth of other lives. Ideas have consequences.

        2) That is not what 'psychotic' means You are using the cocktail party 'definition' If he did lose contact with reality that would not have made him think he had a right to be aborted. Far more likely, if you think about it, that he first wrongly thought it good to have been aborted and then the derangement followed

        3) YOu certainly don't want to claim that all bombers are like him !@!! We know that he held a belief that it is morally wrong for people to bring children into the world. Now, let's not privilege beliefs as in if you believe that it is not morally wrong to bring children into the world you will not have self-hate or be nihilistic or contrariwise that if you do you will assembe a bomb and kill people

  17. Michael Ejercito   2 months ago

    Hannah Dugan has a legal defense fund.

    https://civicmedia.us/news/2025/05/19/dugan-says-she-will-not-accept-contributions-from-milwaukee-county-residents-local-attorneys-lobbyists-judges-county-employees-or-anyone-with-pending-cases-before-milwaukee-county-judges

    I must wonder though. What would happen to regular people who helped Nikolas Cruz, Dylann Roof, John Mohammed, or Timothy McVeigh evade arrest?

    1. Nelson   2 months ago

      So you’re equating horrific murderers to a random, nonviolent illegal and somehow don’t think that’s dishonest? And pretending hiding a violent murderer and letting someone use the back door are equivalent?

      Why don’t you just say, “I’m a rage-filled hatemonger and can’t even pretend to be honest.”?

      1. DesigNate   2 months ago

        Pretty sure he was actually a violent random illegal anlien and that’s why he was in her courtroom to begin with. I’ll check the archives.

        1. Nelson   2 months ago

          Did you check? It seems like maybe you did, but didn’t like what you found.

      2. Speaking for normal people   2 months ago

        You do divide the world into black and white while yelling at people for being black and white, Must be a name for that crazy disorder.

        Morally, if you are interested, the judge would be much more evil. If you are interested. Even by your own view of it.

        1. Nelson   2 months ago

          How, exactly, did I separate people into “black and white”?

          “ Morally, if you are interested, the judge would be much more evil. If you are interested”

          How? Are illegal immigrants worse than mass murderers in your moral beliefs?

      3. Speaking for normal people   2 months ago

        Okay I will say it YOU ARE A RAGE-FILLED HATEMONGER AND CANT" EVEN PRETEND TO BE HONEST

        Did Nelson have a conversion while I was having breakfast ?

    2. Social Justice is neither   2 months ago

      Good of her to save the public some money by pretending she'll be a judge afterward.

  18. JohnZ   2 months ago

    Oh, please....spare me the whining and nonsense. Women in America gave the freedom to do as they please, even murder their unborn children if they so desire without guilt. They run major corporations, fly airliners, are now placed in infantry/front line positions...ain't it nice ?
    Women in this country are so brainwashed and of course they suffer from white liberal suburban female guilt over something happened 160 years ago. So much so they can sway elections.
    So spare me the "woe is me" rubbish. You get what you vote for and besides, if you vote, you have no right to complain.

    1. Michael Ejercito   2 months ago

      How did they become brainwashed?

      1. JohnZ   2 months ago

        Feminist college courses, certain televised programs ie: The View.
        By the way, the entire feminist movement was created by the CIA. Gloria Steinham was CIA.

      2. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 months ago

        12 years of public ed, and, increasingly, 4 more years of higher ed. All leftist tripe.

      3. BYODB   2 months ago

        Most college students are women, and we've seen what colleges are up to.

        Curious that the women complaining about the gender pay gap haven't noticed that most college students are...women. Gosh, what are they studying?

      4. Speaking for normal people   2 months ago

        Other women.. .HIllary, Germaine Greer, Gloria Steinem

        Remember, Every time Bill was caught in adultery Hillary went after the women !!!!
        No-fault divorce is a great start and homosexual "marriage"

        we must bring some semblance of justice back to divorce law. But how can we do this, while legalizing homosexual “marriage”? Again, the principle for the legalization is simply that people have a right to “fulfill” themselves sexually. But some marriages are unhappy– or some people who are married come to think that it would be more “fulfilling” to leap over the fence. How can we deny them this? Or how can we blame them for it? How can we penalize the breaker of a family, when his or her motives are exactly the same as those we have blessed in the case of the homosexual?

  19. Liberty_Belle   2 months ago

    https://www.fox5atlanta.com/news/brain-dead-georgia-woman-kept-life-support-due-states-abortion-law

    A Georgia mother declared brain-dead at two months pregnant remains on life support due to the state’s heartbeat law, leaving her family without medical decision-making rights.

    1. Vernon Depner   2 months ago

      She's gone. Nothing more can happen to her.

      1. Liberty_Belle   2 months ago

        Having the government issue decree over what happens to her body despite her, or her family's wishes should be a red flag to any freedom conscious person. If not for compassion, at least for principle.

        Second, who is going to get the medical bill for this potential seven-month travesty of full life support in an ICU ? The state of Georgia isn't going to want to pay for it, so who is going to foot the bill ?

        1. TJJ2000   2 months ago

          I propose again... Those who vote for it can pay for it...
          Why that would almost be like ensuring Justice or something.

        2. BYODB   2 months ago


          Having the government issue decree over what happens to her body despite her, or her family's wishes should be a red flag to any freedom conscious person.

          Notably, natural rights can be in conflict. In this case, it's a conflict between the still-living fetus and the brain-dead mother. One of them is basically already dead, the other has a chance at life.

          Well, the mothers rights can't really be said to be violated by anything going forward. She's a vegetable. Being an incubator for a tiny human for a few more months causes her...no measurable harm. No doubt she'll be taken off life support and die immediately after the birth.

          The fetus, however, is still alive and requires her to be alive to not die at this very moment.

          I get it, this is an emotive issue for some people and logic or reason need not apply. That doesn't mean I'm going to turn off my rational brain just because someone tells me to.

          Perhaps the most bizarre thing is this is a case where you are advocating for someone other than the mother to decide to abort her baby. Yeah, I get that she can't make that decision anymore but why exactly should someone else get to make the decision to kill it? What natural rights are you basing that view on?

          The rights of the family not to be burdened? Fuck, they don't need to keep the baby they are literally able to give it up.

          1. TJJ2000   2 months ago

            That day my 'sperm' had 'rights' beyond my own! /s

          2. Social Justice is neither   2 months ago

            So is she actually brain dead or just a progressive like Liberty_Belke and TJJ?

            1. TJJ2000   2 months ago

              Do you think progressives wrote Roe v Wade?
              Do you think Christian Republicans started the Pro-Life movement?

              Which stance do you think is "progressive"-ing the Gov-Gun Forces here anyways?
              You think the State forcing the people to reproduce is about Individual Liberty?

              No. It was Catholic Democrats that Started the Pro-Life movement.
              It was Republicans who wrote Roe v Wade.

              But more importantly; Roe v Wade referenced the US Constitution. It didn't make-up BS about 'moral standards', 'drugs' and 'prostitution' to VOID the US Constitution. Yes, those are direct quotes and the only reason Alito gave in the Dobbs ruling.

    2. BYODB   2 months ago

      Obviously they should kill the baby too, right? Some fucking family she has.

      1. Lester75   2 months ago

        The fetus is very damaged. It's possible quality of life is doubtful. The family shouldn't be impoverished by paying for the poor woman's body's support.

        1. BYODB   2 months ago

          According to the article they don't know that.

      2. Nelson   2 months ago

        “ Obviously they should kill the baby too, right?”

        Not a baby. Can’t be killed.

        1. TJJ2000   2 months ago

          "Ya but not Gov-Gun FORCING it to grow is killing!" /s Pro-Life.

          ... Or in leftarded terms ...
          "NOT Gov-Gun FORCING others to supply grandma healthcare is pushing her off a cliff!"
          "Murder! Killing!" /s

          It's actually humorous how perfectly aligned Pro-Life is with Pro-Universal Healthcare.
          Only difference is Individual-Slavery versus [WE]-Masses Slavery.

        2. DesigNate   2 months ago

          How do you figure it can’t be killed?

          1. TJJ2000   2 months ago

            Take a Woman off of life-support = an act of killing?
            I guess every person who's ever been on life-support was murdered! /s

            1. DesigNate   2 months ago

              A few things:

              1. The “it” I was referring to was the fetus, not the woman.

              2. Hardcore Pro-Life people would say that turning off life support == killing. Not saying I agree with that, just pointing out their position.

              3. Everything that is alive can be killed. Killing =/= Murder.

              1. TJJ2000   2 months ago

                If the fetus isn't on life-support set if free!
                Give it its Individual Liberty.

                There's a contradiction going on here. Pro-Life keeps insisting it's a separate person but their very legislation is entirely based on making it illegal to BE a separate person. It truly is a 'unicorn' of imagination (i.e. Religious) based.

        3. Rick James   2 months ago

          And her brain is dead, so she isn't being "kept alive" or suffering any trauma whatsoever... or is even capable of making the decision herself-- or is even self-aware of her condition. That's literally the definition of brain-dead. Scientism is a funny thing.

      3. Liberty_Belle   2 months ago

        The family hasn't decided anything one way or the other. The only thing the family contends is this should be their decision and theirs alone. The state shouldn't be forcing them to do anything ; and I agree.

        And who pays the medical bills hasn't been put out there yet, either. But given how authoritarians love to coerce their views on everybody, but skip out when the 'responsibility' part comes up ... I have zero hopes of them making it right to those involved.

        1. BYODB   2 months ago

          Who pays the bill is going to end up in court, as it probably should. In all probability the hospital will eat the cost to avoid even more bad press and lawsuits, but if they don't I guarantee they'll be sued for millions. If it goes to jury I wouldn't bet on the hospital. In fact, after reading the article, a malpractice lawsuit is already a certainty on the two providers she saw before her episode.

          Fact is, a life could be salvaged out of this. You are literally taking the position that the baby should be thrown out with the bathwater.

          1. TJJ2000   2 months ago

            I refused to fertilize a female the other day...
            "Fact is, a life could be salvaged out of this."

            Your premise doesn't hold any water.

            1. DesigNate   2 months ago

              That doesn’t even make sense.

              1. TJJ2000   2 months ago

                Makes perfect sense by Pro-Life argument standards.
                I'm killing little babies because I'm refusing to reproduce.

                "Fact is, a life could be salvaged out of this."

                1. DesigNate   2 months ago

                  Any pro-life person that equates not creating a zygote with killing a fetus is fucking retarded.

                  You can’t kill something that hasn’t come into existence yet.

                  Edit: in this particular case, a fetus does actually exist, the family and the doctors have acknowledged that, so these aren’t the same.

                  1. TJJ2000   2 months ago

                    You don't think my sperm has any living cells in it or what?
                    It is just as much 'potential life' as any batch of both an egg+sperm.

          2. Liberty_Belle   2 months ago

            Wrong. The position I'm taking is this in none of your business, this is none of my business, and this is certainly none of the State's business and we should all have no say in the matter.

            This is the business of the father and families of the pair who will bear the burden of a lifetime of upkeep for the fetus who already as liquid on the brain and several health issues and who are responsible for the upkeep of the mother and their administration of her preferred wishes before she became too ill to speak for herself.

            Nobody else should have a say in it; certainly not the government.

            1. TJJ2000   2 months ago

              4A, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons"
              ...against gov-gun power-mad moral busy-bodies.

              Mark 12:17 “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.”

              U are 100% correct. Reproduction is PERSONAL not an arena for Gov-Gun packing Wanna-be Gods.

        2. Rick James   2 months ago

          The family hasn't decided anything one way or the other. The only thing the family contends is this should be their decision and theirs alone.

          At least we're agreed this isn't a my-body-my-choice situation. It's more of a her-body-their-choice situation.

      4. TJJ2000   2 months ago

        Enter the reality of the State-Owned Test-Tube baby-maker made from the remains of a human carcass.

        What's the family thinking? That's not their property. The State owns all human carcasses! /s
        Dead or Alive... If you've been fertilized you're now property of the State.

    3. Speaking for normal people   2 months ago

      and you are not related, don't live in Georgia, wouldn't lift a finger to help a woman with child that was being herded into abortion.
      I do get the point, but not the one you think you are making

  20. TJJ2000   2 months ago

    The more Gov-Guns make plans for your labors and life the less free you'll fill.
    As-if 'obvious' reality has somehow gotten lost on the people.

    Put another way. How free are you suppose to feel while leftard-criminals hold a Gov-Gun threat over your head and demand their ?free? ponies?

  21. LIBtranslator   2 months ago

    Women have Tuccille Junior to thank. Throwing away a leveraged, law-changing spoiler vote and helping Orange Hitler/Jesus Caucus declare pregnant women Siamese twins or slaves stripped of individual rights takes a special kind of cowardice. Jerome would die all over again again at the sight of it.

    1. TJJ2000   2 months ago

      Right.. /s Because Trump banned abortion not State Legislatures. /s

      Trump is more Pro-Choice than not.
      Republicans wrote Roe v Wade.
      Republican voters are majority Pro-Choice in Roe v Wade terms.
      Catholic Democrats literally created the Pro-Life lobby.

      You're just megaphoning hypocrisy.

  22. Earth-based Human Skeptic   2 months ago

    What the fuck kind of libertarianism (or ever libertinism or liberal-tariansim) judges freedom on the basis of lack of responsibility? IMO that is a irrefutable sign of a progressive/socialist.

    1. TJJ2000   2 months ago

      Especially the lack of responsibility as citizens to honoring and defending the US Constitution (their own supreme law over their government).

  23. BYODB   2 months ago

    If women are just now noticing, they deserve a good hard slap since this has been going on literally their entire lives without a squeak.

    How many women thought the TSA would be a bad thing, for example?

    Obviously this isn't limited to just women, but the author chose to frame it that way so why the hell not.

  24. LIBtranslator   2 months ago

    J.D. mistakes protection of individual rights for "protection for abortion." The 1972 LP plank that reversed the court ruling on Comstockism was a meek yet realistic offer to enforce individual rights and stop branding women as non-individuals and sacrificial slaves. America has outgrown Teedy Roosevelt's race-suicide ravings declaring females chattel for cannon fodder.

    1. Speaking for normal people   2 months ago

      Have no idea what you are saying BUT to think all women think one way means you are NA to the debate (Or even that because you are a woman that trumps your family, your religious beliefs, etc)
      Bet my asss you support the all-black redistrticting efforts because "If you are Black everything is subservient to that"

  25. AT   2 months ago

    progressive women who are most inclined to support reproductive rights suffered the biggest drop in satisfaction with freedom right around the time that Dobbs overturned Roe v. Wade's protections for abortion.

    Yea, I remember when white Democrats got really mad about being less free back into 1864.

    We just told them to shut up and stop being horrible. I don't know why we just don't do the same thing here today.

    The more leeway they have to make their own choices about reproductive issues, the more satisfied they are with the state of their freedom. Curtail their ability to make choices and they become less satisfied.

    I hear you. I'm more satisfied when I can make my own choices about illegal aliens I encounter. The more leeway I have, the more satisfied I'll be with the state of my freedom. Curtail my ability to murder humans I don't want around make choices and I'll become less satisfied.

  26. VendicarD   2 months ago

    Less freedom is always the result of Libertarian ideology.

  27. Incunabulum   2 months ago

    >Americans, Especially Women, Feel Less Free. They're Not Wrong.

    Really? Because I do not feel less free. How are these people feeling less free?

    > "in France, Japan, South Korea, the United Kingdom, and the United States, among others, extremism or partisan grievances motivated physical assaults on individuals campaigning for office." And it also noted that "elected leaders in democracies are increasingly seeking to undermine checks on their power, focusing their assaults on the media, anticorruption authorities, and the courts. These attacks endanger both democracy and basic freedoms."

    Oh, the Left, again. Which is conspicuously not mentioned.

    But, of course, its all *Trump* trying to evade checks on power - despite the courts continually saying his actions are actually within his granted authority - and totally not mr 'pen and a phone' or mr 'autopen' who openly bragged about getting a foreign prosecutor fired to protect his son and that he was gonna keep up with the student loan crap even though he was told by the USSC on more than one occassion that he doesn't actually have that authority.

    Also - who partnered with Facebook, Twitter, et al, in order to run a disinformation op on the American people? Who tried to lock the country in their homes?

    But sure, totally not the Left at fault here.

    1. AT   2 months ago

      Really? Because I do not feel less free. How are these people feeling less free?

      Marxists train all their kind at an early age to be perpetual victims. They'll never NOT feel "less free."

      That might wind them up in the "oppressor" category by accident.

  28. Incunabulum   2 months ago

    >Controversial, long-debated, and forever in the news, reproductive rights remain a touchstone by which many Americans—women in particular—assess the degree to which they see themselves as free.

    Most Americans don't think about abortion at all - until either the insane Left pushes it in their face by claiming that abortions should be legal up to (and after) birth or they fuck up and don't use birth control and get pregnant.

    1. Liberty_Belle   2 months ago

      There is more to reproductive rights than just abortion. Birth control access, maternity leave, bonding period, whether your job is still going to be there once you're out of the hospital and healed up, maternity discrimination, biases, FMLA, etc. Just to name a few.

    2. Speaking for normal people   2 months ago

      So that would include you, right?
      Anyway, that is illogical in the extreme.

      The third category is the imporant one

      Study Shows 60% of Women Regret Their Decision To AbortConducted by David C. Reardon of the Elliot Institute in St Peters, Missouri; Katherine A. Rafferty of the University of Iowa at Ames; and Tessa Longbons of the Charlotte Lozier Institute in Arlington, Virginia; the study found that 60% of women who had abortions would have preferred not to have aborted, and that these women experienced negative emotional and mental sequela connected with the abortion.

      “Sixty percent reported they would have preferred to give birth if they had received more support from others or had more financial security,” researchers found.

      BUT HERE IS WHAT YOU CONSISTENTLY IGNORE and makes me follow you around on here

      Study: 96% of women who couldn't access abortion don't regret that after 5 years
      https://thelifeinstitute.net/blog/2021/study-96-of-women-who-couldnt-access-abortion-dont-regret-that-after-5-years

      I ASK ONLY ONE THING FROM YOU ...IF IF IF that is true about the 96% then what do you say ??? I know you deny that it is true I am asking you lawyer-like to stipulate that if it were true...

  29. Sam M   2 months ago

    About twice a week libertarians, me included, get a good chuckle out of people getting the vapors over rock and roll, or transgenders, or whatever else people are mad about. This kind of strikes me as the shoe being on the other foot? Drugs are widely available and increasingly legal. You can sleep with whoever you want without worrying about getting arrested for it. It's nearly impossible to ban books or anything else. People from around the world still line up to live here.

    No, there was no golden age of teenage decorum or political civility to which we should pine to return.

    And no, there was not golden era of liberty, whether you think it was 1000, 100 or 10 years ago.

    1. Speaking for normal people   2 months ago

      Chuckling is of course an ugly reaction but I let that go

      Transgenders are kids with their whole life destroyed, worth more than a chuckle

      Sleeping around has us with an outrageous STD problem : Major health consequences, such as infertility, certain cancers, and other chronic diseases, occur years after the initial infection.

      Finally banning books shows a certain blindness you have.
      It is not so much that sht perverted books are bought , it is that the Great Books, the enduring books, the books that perdure are NOT bought. First rule of economics, since things are limited if you do X you can't do Y

      My young adult kids don't even know the 2nd most influential book let alone the first but they have read Armistead Maupin

      2nd most is THE CITY OF GOD by Augustine

      1. Nelson   2 months ago

        I think you’re equating most-purchased and most-influential. I have a Bible. I find it completely useless as a basis for life. Too many contradictions and outright evil behavior is lionized. Call me crazy, but slavery and genocide (just two of the things that are just fine, according to the Bible) are morally repugnant to almost everyone.

  30. Brett Bellmore   2 months ago

    So, if I've got this straight, this is mostly about women in pro-abortion states like California feeling unfree because they can't get a late term elective abortion in Mississippi?

  31. Speaking for normal people   2 months ago

    Well all you pro-abortion fanatics can see now the advent of the anti-natalist. Someone mad enough to kill pro-lifers because someone didn't abort them. yes,Abortion leads there, I saw it decades ago.Now life is so cheap and abortion so trivial to women that the enemy now is someone who dares give birth
    It will come for you

  32. JohnZ   2 months ago

    Let's see all these wimin complaining about "freedom" move to Saudi Arabia or Afghanistan and then complain about freedom in America.
    Dumbass c****.

    1. Speaking for normal people   2 months ago

      Yet Biden and Pelosi (for about 7 minutes) complained after the Afghan pullout about the cruel subjugation of women that ensued.
      THEY CAUSED IT

      "If Nancy Pelosi thinks Joe Biden has done such a great job, I have a suggestion – why doesn't she trade places with any woman in Afghanistan – and maybe then see if she thinks Biden did such a great job" as Afghan women have been almost instantaneously forced into oppressive conditions by the radical Islamist group that now controls the country.

      1. Nelson   2 months ago

        Apparently you have forgotten who negotiated and signed the pullout agreement with the Taliban.

        Hint: he’s President now.

  33. Rick James   2 months ago

    Specifically, Americans' satisfaction "with their freedom to choose what they do with their lives" started falling after 2020

    I remember this time. This was when masks weren't just talismans and Rand Paul was getting too freedomey and uppity during a time of national unity!

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

How Trump's Travel Crackdown Is Hurting Americans at Home and Abroad

Matt Welch | From the August/September 2025 issue

Superman Is About the Anti-War Vibe Shift

Matthew Petti | 7.18.2025 5:23 PM

Why Are Students Using AI To Cheat? Maybe Because They Shouldn't Be In College At All

Emma Camp | 7.18.2025 4:00 PM

Although Meth Is Irresistible, The New York Times Says, Addicts Often Prefer Small Cash Rewards

Jacob Sullum | 7.18.2025 1:45 PM

ICE Is Shipping Detainees to Hawaii as Bed Space on the U.S. Mainland Fills Up

Autumn Billings | 7.18.2025 1:24 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!