Thursday, April 19, 2007
(9:38 AM) | Stephen:
Restricting Our Freedoms
Partial-birth abortion is not a procedure that is done for convenience. It is not a procedure that is done only at the end of fetal development - it can be used as early as 12 weeks, way before a fetus is viable. Partial-birth abortion is done only when it is medically necessary, only when something terribly wrong is happening with the pregnancy, only when it's necessary for the safety and continued life of the mother.
So the Supreme Court just banned a procedure. They didn't lay down a new time limit, they didn't make a decision about viability. Nine lawyers took it upon themselves to make a decision about a medical procedure. And there will be women, now denied this procedure, who will find themselves unable to bear any more children - yes, it's true, people who get abortions do not hate children, are not murderers, and often are trying to have a family. Is it the woman's fault if she delivers a deformed, stillborn baby? Should this woman who wants to have a family not have access to a procedure that could preserve her ability to conceive and bear future children?
Five lawyers on the Supreme Court, acting in concert with Congress and the President, have decided that forcing women to sacrifice their ability to conceive again and even causing the death of some women is a fine price to pay to satisfy religious conservatives. And there will not be even one child born as a result of this ban.
That's why I don't like to call the anti-choice crowd "pro-life." They aren't. They're anti-choice. They want to make abortion illegal. They want to get rid of contraceptives. They want to use abstinence "education" to lie about condom failure rates, about STD's and issues like depression in teen girls. The last thing that people who support abstinence "education" want is for teenagers to be able to make choices.
Let me also tie this in to the most recent fuss over what Kos has said. He's been taken to task, even accused of some sort of weird conspiracy to remove pro-choice Democrats and even Republicans from office and replace them with anti-choicers. He supported Bob Casey! He criticized NARAL for their support of Lincoln Chafee and Lieberman!
Well, yeah. Because Lieberman held in his hands the ability to stop the Alito nomination in its tracks. But he didn't. He sent Alito's name to the full Senate knowing that he would be approved, knowing what his presence on the Supreme Court would mean. And if another Supreme dies or retires while Bush is in office, if we had a Lieberman-proof majority, there'd be nothing to worry about. Democrats could block every rightwing judicial thug Bush sends their way. But as it is, it would take difficult and politically damaging maneuvering on Reid's part to try and keep the Supreme Court from being able to completely destroy any semblance of reproductive choice in this country.
So the Supreme Court just banned a procedure. They didn't lay down a new time limit, they didn't make a decision about viability. Nine lawyers took it upon themselves to make a decision about a medical procedure. And there will be women, now denied this procedure, who will find themselves unable to bear any more children - yes, it's true, people who get abortions do not hate children, are not murderers, and often are trying to have a family. Is it the woman's fault if she delivers a deformed, stillborn baby? Should this woman who wants to have a family not have access to a procedure that could preserve her ability to conceive and bear future children?
Five lawyers on the Supreme Court, acting in concert with Congress and the President, have decided that forcing women to sacrifice their ability to conceive again and even causing the death of some women is a fine price to pay to satisfy religious conservatives. And there will not be even one child born as a result of this ban.
That's why I don't like to call the anti-choice crowd "pro-life." They aren't. They're anti-choice. They want to make abortion illegal. They want to get rid of contraceptives. They want to use abstinence "education" to lie about condom failure rates, about STD's and issues like depression in teen girls. The last thing that people who support abstinence "education" want is for teenagers to be able to make choices.
Let me also tie this in to the most recent fuss over what Kos has said. He's been taken to task, even accused of some sort of weird conspiracy to remove pro-choice Democrats and even Republicans from office and replace them with anti-choicers. He supported Bob Casey! He criticized NARAL for their support of Lincoln Chafee and Lieberman!
Well, yeah. Because Lieberman held in his hands the ability to stop the Alito nomination in its tracks. But he didn't. He sent Alito's name to the full Senate knowing that he would be approved, knowing what his presence on the Supreme Court would mean. And if another Supreme dies or retires while Bush is in office, if we had a Lieberman-proof majority, there'd be nothing to worry about. Democrats could block every rightwing judicial thug Bush sends their way. But as it is, it would take difficult and politically damaging maneuvering on Reid's part to try and keep the Supreme Court from being able to completely destroy any semblance of reproductive choice in this country.
Site feed
