US Supreme Court is inconsistent in applying the "equal protection" principle!

Echo opinion from Fort Myers, published in The News-Press

Other 'rights' may be eroded!

Protect women's health!

The decision by the Supreme Court to purposefully do significant harm to women may portend further decisions that continue to erode other "rights" we have become accustomed too. 

Although the current interpretation of the Second Amendment is under no threat from this court, keep in mind that its members will someday change and that the rights Roe v. Wade conferred on women were in force for longer than the right for an individual to carry an AR-15. 

Obviously, Justice Alito gives more protection to men - where is the "equal protection principle"?

Among the several bizarre reasons Justice Alito gave for his decision is the fact that the Constitution does not specifically contain the word "abortion" (there was no need as abortion was readily available and accepted as a sometimes necessary medical procedure; even Ben Franklin invented and promoted an abortion inducing potion). Well, the Second Amendment says a well regulated militia can bear arms but does not specifically say individual citizens can. A future Supreme Court may point that out.

Wilburn P. Reed, Fort Myers, Florida