Thursday, April 19, 2007

On the abortion shift

Elections have consequences, as if we didn't already know from the past seven sorry years in this country's history. (Not that George Bush was actually elected in 2000, of course, but that's another story). The latest demonstration of the old axiom is yesterday's Supreme Court ruling that, for the first time, outlaws a specific abortion procedure.

As a Washington Post editorial said, the ruling, prohibiting the procedure called “intact dilation and extraction” by medical professionals, and “partial birth abortion” by the pro-lifers, “is not apt to prevent any abortions: Most likely, the tiny percentage of women who would have undergone this admittedly gruesome procedure will instead opt to terminate their pregnancies by another procedure, equally, if not more, gruesome. But the 5 to 4 ruling...will certainly prevent some women from choosing the abortion procedure that their doctors believe would be safest in their individual cases.”

The new make-up of the Court, coming after Bush got John Roberts and Samuel Alito on the bench, is what led to the decision. Alito replaced Sanda Day O'Connor, a Reagan appointee and certainly not a liberal by any stretch of the imagination - but who voted against the ban last time it came before the Court - and now these old men are telling doctors how to do their job. And telling women what they can do with their body and the most personal and agonizing medical decisions they can make.

And it's the sheer cynicism of the pro-lifers that is astounding. Yes, the procedure sounds gruesome – especially when it's described in loving detail by the anti-choice crowd as it often is – but pregnant women don't wake up one day, eight months along, and say, “Hey, I think I'll swing down to the clinic today and get that abortion. I've been meaning to do it for the last six months, just never had the time.”

Chances are if a woman is having the procedure, something went wrong and her doctor believes it's the only way to intervene. Doctors often decide it's the best way to give the woman a better chance to have a successful future pregnancy.

And of course, this is only the beginning. The anti-choicers realize the American public doesn't want to ban abortion, no matter how uncomfortable the subject makes them, so they are chipping away at the right bit by bit. This is just the first step.

Yesterday, the Republican candidates – even the allegedly pro-choice Rudy – were tripping over themselves praising this ruling.

The next president will no doubt get to appoint one or two more justices. It's just one more thing to consider when you step into the voting booth next November.

20 comments:

Anonymous said...

Elections have consequences not just in who they appoint to the Supreme Court - don't forget Bill Clinton actually vetoed this ban a couple times when he was preident. It didn't even get to the court.

Anonymous said...

It's the height of arrogance for them to say a woman would casually get ANY abortion on a whim, never mind a late term abortion.

Anonymous said...

I heard one of the Republican Congressmen from (I think) Georgia saying the vote was the "hand of god." They are moving us to a religious thocracy. And that's working out so well in the middle east isn't it!

Anonymous said...

Maybe this will scare enough people who never really pay attention to politics to actually get out and vote in 2008!

Anonymous said...

Sarah ANY abortion is murder whether its on a whim or not. PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTION is a holocaust! Thanks to the 5 judges on the SUPREME Court now at least this type of murder of the innocence will end. And yes jbk it is just the beginning. The prolife cause got a major boost and are more enthusiastic about voting for president now than they have ever been. Now we seen what happens when the right man was elected in 2000 and 2004. Its called democracy.

Anonymous said...

Nice use of caps Bally 107, it really makes your argument so powerful. I'm just curious though. If your side in this issue believes abortion is murder or even a HOLOCAUST!!!! why don't you advocate the jailing of the pregnant woman instead of just the doctor? That's like jailing a hitman but not the person who hired them to murder. Or do you realize that that would strip away what support you have. But if it's murder in your eyes, shouldn't you put aside political concerns and just worry about the "crime"?

Anonymous said...

I'm generally in favor of abortion but partial birth just seems too much. Sorry.

Anonymous said...

Bally the "right man" wasn't elected in 2000 - he stole the election. And don't throw out words like "Holocaust" to try to score cheap political points. That's more indicitive of your holier-than-thou mindset than anything else. Sarah, even though I just did, try not to get riled up at Bally 107. She comes on here whenever it's a discussion about abortion and just throws out the most ridiculous arguments as if everyone who disagrees with her side is evil. And Marcus, sorry but if you "generally" believe in abortion rights then why do you choose to not mind if this one is removed? As the original post said, women don't get this procedure done for shits and giggles. It's not common for one thing, and when it is done it's overhwelmingly for medical emergencies. They went after this because people in the middle like you will say, well yes, I don't mind if they ban this procedure. Then they start on all the rest.

Anonymous said...

Women of America start putting on your Burkas. It's just beginning.

Anonymous said...

sarah we believe the pregnant mother of the baby is confused and being taken advantage of, she doesn't deserve jail she deserves sympathy and counseling. A doctor who surely knows better as he kills hundreds every year deserves punishment. velma a holocaust is the planned murder of innocence. What else can you call abortion? And thomas falls if you think those on the prolife side are comparable to those who did 9/11 then I think that tells us all we have to know about you.

Not a hipster said...

Right, bally, because pregnant women are too emotional and confused to make decisions for themselves, so it MUST be the doctor taking advantage of her. So now, thanks to you, we know it's the doctors who want to randomly perform abortions, even if it's not necessary! Yeah, that's it. Whew, I'm so glad you came along and showed me the light.

Seriously, I don't know what I'd do without you, bally. Why, you must have saved countless innocent lives from holocausts just by typing your thoughts here. WOW!!!!!

Not a hipster said...

Oh, and bally, I am really confused about some things now that I'm pregnant. Can you make my decisions for me, since I'm obviously going to be taken advantage of now that I'm pregnant? I just trust you SO much more than I trust my doctor.

Thanks!

Anonymous said...

Why does this issue always bring out the worst in people? Bally 107 I'm sorry but I doubt you have any real clue about why women get abortions. You've been taught by your church or Pat Robertson! that it is an unmitigated evil. You don't seem to accept that except for a very few rare cases anyone who gets an abortion is not doing it casually. They have agonized and either believed they can't have a baby at that time in their life or the baby would not be healthy. No woman does it for fun! That's what gets me so pissed about your side - the way the thought is just tossed out that anyone who gets an abortion is an unfeeling baby killer. Grow up. Lose your I'm more moral than you crap.

Anonymous said...

Bally 107 I really don't want to seem mean but have you ever had sex? I don't think you have a clue what an unwanted pregnancy would be like if youre alone, poor and scared. Or been told you have a baby that's going to be born deformed or in pain. Then I wonder if you would be so absolute in believing abortion is a holocaust. Not a Hipster I remember you saying a while ago you were pregnant and I was thrilled to see you contribute your thoughts here. You're ready for it and will be (I can tell) an amazing mother, but there are women who are not in the lucky circumstances you are with a great partner. These are the people Bally 107 condemns as somehow creating a holocaust.

Anonymous said...

jill the obvious HATE here from your "side" is somehow ok but Im the immoral one? I really dont know why women get abortions so often (millions a year) although I can imagine. But that's up to them and their G-d. Most times they just dont want to be INCONVENIENCED. not a hipster I have done more than just type words to save INNOCENCE! And I dont know how confused you are but from what I read in the past from your typings I can only imagine. memphis red its none of your business about my personal life and thats as obscene a question as I expedct from the PRO ABORTION people and oh if women somehow don't have a "great partner" guess what - there are plenty of couples who cant get pregnant who would love to ADOPT a baby. Why is it so hard to put a baby up for ADOPTION. Somehow I never hear an answer to that from your "side." But I know my thoughts here are not as valid as all yours right?

Not a hipster said...

Bally, if you admit you don't know why women get abortions, maybe you could take some time to educate yourself before you spout off that she's wrong when you don't even know why she's doing it.

And by the way, my confusion...did you not sense my sarcasm?

And adoption is not always an option. You act like the pregnancy merely being an "inconvenience" is the only reason why someone might seek an abortion. Do you honestly think adoption is an option for someone whose life is in danger if she were to attempt to carry the pregnancy to term? No, it's not. So sorry, but your adoption answer is not always a viable option.

What's your solution for the woman that will die if she attempts to carry the pregnancy to term?

I am lucky in the sense that I very much wanted this pregnancy, as did my husband, and we are able to support a child at this point in our life. But if you looked through my blog a bit, you will see all the problems I've had since the beginning. Luckily, my problems are not a life threatening issue at this point, but it was close to becoming that in the beginning. I am lucky enough to have excellent insurance that covered absolutely everything I needed to do to ensure that I can carry this pregnancy to term. Not everyone is that lucky.

Thankfully I did not have to make that decision, and I cannot imagine the heartache someone would face in that situation. How dare you point fingers when you have no clue what it's like to even be pregnant, let alone pregnant with health issues.

Bally, go do some research and teach yourself some things that you admit you don't even know. Then we'll chat some more, ok?

Anonymous said...

Bally 107 like I said wasn't trying to be mean. My point is that not every woman is ready to have a baby, either emotionally or financially or maybe the fetus isn't ready to be born. You just can't cast everyone who has had to have an abortion as being part of a "holocaust"

J said...

Bally who ever said your thoughts aren't as valid as anyone else's? They're totally wrong in my view, but you have as much right to voice them as anyone else and have never been denied that right so don't pull the martyr crap around here. Thanks.

Anonymous said...

The justices who are pretty old and could retire or die are Democrats too so it would really put the votes on the Republican side.

Anonymous said...

Does the rest of the Western world also have the abortion battle constantly or is it settled? Why does it always seem to get so emotional and angry here??

Blog Archive