Monday, October 31, 2005

Roe v. Wade: Say Goodbye, Gracie

Bubble Boy packs uber-conservative Judge Samuel Alito onto the Supreme Court: Alito was named this morning to fill the seat vacated by Sandra Day O'Connor, changing the makeup of an already right-wing court just enough to overturn Roe v. Wade.

Whether the Dems will filibuster this choice or not is immaterial. One way or another, Bubble Boy will get his anti-Roe justice on the bench.

Remember, Bush is an angry boy these days: under attack on all fronts, having wasted his political capital, backed into a corner and growling like a junkyard dog. Where can he vent his spleen? By thumbing his nose at the American people, doing what the vast majory does not believe in--undermining reproductive freedom and overturning Roe v. Wade, out of spiteful megalomania.

The point is for the American people to wake up and take seriously the matter of protecting reproductive freedom.

Do you really want the government to determine the size and makeup of your family? Do you really want religious determinations about precisely when life begins to apply to you and your family whether or not you subscribe to them?

From AP:

"Abortion emerged as a potential fault line. Democrats pointed to Alito's rulings that sought to restrict a woman's right to abortion. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, a Republican who supports abortion rights, said that Alito's views on the hot-button issue 'will be among one of the first items Judge Alito and I will discuss.'

Alito's mother shed some light. 'Of course, he's against abortion,' 90-year-old Rose Alito said of her son, a Catholic."


Who benefits when women are forced to bear children against their will? The child? Surely not. The woman? Clearly not, and the very fact of pregnancy itself puts a woman's life in danger.

Pregnancy and childbearing are unique experiences; they are life-changing and can be life-threatening. Upholding a woman's right to reproductive freedom--through contraception (with abortion kept safe, legal, and rare) and family planning--means she can choose the size of her family, and choose to bear a child who will be wanted, welcomed, and well-cared-for.

Consider:

In the early 1990s, just as the first cohort of children born after Roe v. Wade was hitting its late teen years-the years during which young men enter their criminal prime-the rate of crime began to fall. What this cohort was missing, of course, were the children who stood the greatest chance of becoming criminals. And the crime rate continued to fall as an entire generation came of age minus the children whose mothers had not wanted to bring a child into the world. Legalized abortion led to less unwantedness; unwantedness leads to high crime; legalized abortion, therefore, led to less crime.

Why should the government, fueled by religious concepts from the Taliban right, dictate to individuals how their lives must proceed, promoting pregnancy as punishment? Is there not already sufficient child abuse, poverty, and criminality in America?

Here is Alito's trail on individual reproductive freedom:

"A dissenting opinion in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 947 F.2d 682 (3d Cir. 1991), arguing that a Pennsylvania that required women seeking abortions to inform their husbands should have been upheld. As Judge Alito reasoned, '[t]he Pennsylvania legislature could have rationally believed that some married women are initially inclined to obtain an abortion without their husbands' knowledge because of perceived problems--such as economic constraints, future plans, or the husbands' previously expressed opposition--that may be obviated by discussion prior to the abortion.'"

Does a man need to be forced by government to discuss with his spouse whether he needs bypass surgery? In the normal order of things, he would, but need he be forced to do so? In the normal order of things, a woman might discuss a decision to terminate pregnancy with her husband, but if she does not wish to, need she be forced by law to do so? Whose physical body is at risk? His?

The Supreme Court struck down spousal notification, rejecting Alito’s view, while voting to reaffirm Roe v. Wade. [Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 1991]

Bubble Boy Bush's Taliban-totalitarian-packed Supreme Court will not vote to reaffirm.

It will strike down Roe v. Wade.

That's the whole point.






3 comments:

enigma4ever said...

This is totally off topic, you had left me a messege over at Watergate Summer about Larry Johnson and the threats to the Wilsons, here is better followup- his blog is Booman Tribune, and the show he was interviewed on was CNN Oct26th,2005 , and the tape of it is on Crooks&Liars...just thought I should follow up on that...
and about your post- you said it all- RoevWade- yup- we're screwed....

Dandy said...

If the court packing is successful, and the expected challenges are brought, the effect will be to turn all the more secular states against the Christianist-dominated states. Their majorities will become more paranoid as the level of hatred their disproportionate influence induces increases.

I think there will be a smallish "brain drain" as the pro-abortion Republican professionals suddenly find the carpetbagging lifestyle, living large in the third world states, has some severe drawbacks.

Anonymous said...

We need to discuss, in very frank and graphic detail (preferably on Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson's TV show), how moral it is to require a girl who has been raped by her abusive father or brother or first cousin, to carry their incestuous offspring to term. We can have the Operation Rescue team crowing in the background that "abortion is murder" and then cut to an interview with a retarded teenager who was raped an impregnated in an institution by some sicko aide and discuss why she should be forced to carry that child to term, even though that child is likely to be severely retarded as well.

These real world examples will allow America to see that there is never any question about whether a woman should be forced, even against her will to carry a child she does not want or cannot care for, to term. There is never any gray - black and white, no questions asked - ever!