8 hours ago, GroveHillWanderer said:

That figure is actually from a survey done in Australia (see @ozimoron's link).

 

So it would actually represent a little over 4 million women.

No, the small survey was carried out on sex workers and people attending sexual health clinics .

  That would be like going to an alcoholics anonymous meeting and asking the people there whether they have a drinking problem and than saying that 85 % of the population has a drinking problem because 85 % of the people asked said they did 

5 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

No, the small survey was carried out on sex workers and people attending sexual health clinics .

  That would be like going to an alcoholics anonymous meeting and asking the people there whether they have a drinking problem and than saying that 85 % of the population has a drinking problem because 85 % of the people asked said they did 

where does it say that the US survey was carried out on sex workers. Where does the CNN article state that the problem is specific to sex workers? For that matter, where does the Australian survey state that it was conducted among sex workers. Stating that sex workers are more likely to be victimised isn't stating what you claim.

Again this court is radical not conservative. This is s total disaster.

 

 

3 hours ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

No, the small survey was carried out on sex workers and people attending sexual health clinics .

  That would be like going to an alcoholics anonymous meeting and asking the people there whether they have a drinking problem and than saying that 85 % of the population has a drinking problem because 85 % of the people asked said they did 

Is your position that men are more likely to engage in stealthing, the removal of the condom without the woman's knowledge or consent, when they are engaged in sex with prostitutes who are at high risk of having an STD? 

 

Why do you think are much less likely to engage in stealthing when having sex with women who are not sex workers and are less likely to have an STD?  Do you have any evidence of this?

The thing about the "promises" made by Gorsuch and Kavanaugh is that they technically weren't promises. They were meant to sound like promises, but, both being good lawyers, couched their words in such a way as to encourage the belief that they wouldn't overturn Roe v. Wade. In other words, they gaslighted. The thing is, now members of the court are doing the same thing in regards to the right for gays to marry and the right to contraception. The same exact reasoning that they applied to overturning Roe v. Wade would also apply to gay marriage and contraception, even though they deny that their decision in Dobbs will necessarily lead to that.  It seems almost inevitable that they will nullify the claim to a constitutional right for gays to marry. If that's the case, the law of the land will allow states not only to refuse to marry gay people but also to give legal recognition to gay marriages performed and recognized in other states.