Home | About | Donate

43 Years After Roe: We’ve Come a Long Way, Maybe?


#1

43 Years After Roe: We’ve Come a Long Way, Maybe?

Jennifer Dalven

Forty-three years after Roe v. Wade legalized a woman’s right to abortion, the Supreme Court is again considering another abortion case — one that will have serious implications for what Roe actually guaranteed.


#2

One of the great taboos of our times is the reluctance of journalists to mention the unholy marriage between right wing business moguls like the Koch Brothers/ALEC, and the nation's huge Fundamentalist Christian base.

By throwing THAT base the "abortion bone," right wing business interests advance their agenda which is hardly a friend to life for any... apart from their own ilk.

Missing from the article are 2 other important components.

First, this matter is hardly just about abortion. Ultimately, the right wing interests want women to have ZERO sovereignty over their own bodies when it comes to reproductive choices. They also work diligently to ban the morning-after pill and are using expensive lawyers to come up with legal jujitsu that bars any funding of birth control, itself!

Second, this idea of the clinic being tied to a hospital for the woman's purported health & safety concerns leaves out the fact that a growing number of U.S. hospitals are run by the Catholic Church. And since, apart from the Taliban, there is no more patriarchal and misogynistic entity in the world... that Catholic Church has remained bound and determined to limit women's capacity to govern their own bodies for centuries. And it's still at it... with a vengeance.

Third, the day when all these persons of conscience so committed to the so-called rights of unborn fetuses show that same passionate concern for all the bodies of DEAD BABIES and bombed, droned, or gunned down would-be mothers across a growing sector of the Middle East, then they can "cast the first stone."

The hypocrisy stinks to high heaven.

The more these morons push to protect fetuses, the more they advocate for bombing LIVE citizens.

Like I said in another comment thread, the times are UGLY and they are being run by those who are soulless and proponents of unmitigated evil.

In the same way that the army is so anal retentive in insisting that soldiers have perfectly folded beds, and shined shoes, and pressed uniforms to HIDE the nature of its "guns for hire" mission, the protection of the unborn serves as a similar façade to the lethal fields of spreading empire.


#3

For women, abortion has been in existence since time began. What these "pro-life " mostly men want is to ensure there is no safe, legal abortion when needed. If men made sure they never impregnated a woman who did not want to be a mother at this time, perhaps they would take part in the debate. Women do NOT generally want abortions, but need them for their private reasons which do NOT concern interfering busybodies who want to rule another person's life.


#4

I think the emerging strategy of women who have undergone abortion procedures coming out with their stories is potentially a powerful move for women as the coming out of gay people in the population has furthered gay rights--it seems to me that it could work in much the same way--people began to realize their neighbors, friends, close relatives, even, were gay--in terms of the abortion issue, those (including men being involved in this!) who have had abortions coming out and speaking out, could begin to break down the big silence on the issue which only supports the anti-abortion movement--I would bet that as this picks up steam we'll find the anti-abortion movement start to fragment and lose what support it has through the imposition of silence.


#5

Establishment-Are their people on both sides of this issue who profit by keeping it where it is?