April 19, 2007
Women's Right to Abortion Significantly Undermined
Yesterday, the Supreme Court ruled that so-called "partial birth abortion" is illegal in a 5-4 decision. The newest Justice, Samuel Alito provided the swing vote in the decision. Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, John Paul Stevens, David Souter and Stephen Breyer were the four votes in dissent of the ruling (NewsMax, 4/18/17).
Justice Ginsburg summed up the impact of the result succinctly:
"In candor, the Partial Birth Abortion Act and the court's defense of it cannot be understood as anything other than an effort to chip away at a right declared again and again by this court - and with increasing comprehension of its centrality to women's lives."
The Supreme Court decision is significant in that there is no consideration of the health or life of the woman in the law that the Court upheld. This is a seismic shift and clearly places the life of the fetus ahead of the life of the mother. In 2000, the Court had ruled a similar law was unconstitutional.
I cannot help but feel a tremendous sense of loss and violation with this decision - both as a long time supporter of a woman's right to choose, and as a woman. It is a damning blow when the Supreme Court decides that a women are subordinate to a fetus. It sends the clear message about the status and purpose of women. Clearly, five of the Justices were willing to make Constitutional an ideology that states that women are nothing more than incubators with no rights or protections in relationship to a fetus.
Posted by rowan at April 19, 2007 7:36 AM | [eMail this article!] |I overheard part of a comment accidentally from my TV this morning (I think sometimes what I take to be God talking to me might be what I hear in my sleep from my TV, but be that as it may...). The voice said something along the lines of, "Now the rights of a woman over her own body and life, after Bush and the people who don't want to pay taxes or fund Democracy, as well as a lot of old white guys who just want to run everything, finishes emptying the treasury, will cost a woman her life in order that a necessary law suit can be filed that can test the Court's insidiously stupid decision to condemn women to death in order to save fetuses that can't be saved and limp sister 'Christians' from the hell they imagine will engulf them if they let the rest of us run our own lives, or didn't the word get out what the condition of a fetus eligible for such a medical procedure is?" I think I heard, "now a woman must make her decisions not just between her and her God, but allow some white male politician or Pope or Southern Gentleman to hold veto power, who needs to be slapped in his orchid greenhouse by "MR. Tibbs," to remind him God isn't White or male and is certainly NOT owned by anyone!" I'm pretty sure it wasn't Imus...!
Posted by: Ed at April 19, 2007 9:50 AMFirst I want to applaud Ruth Bader Ginsberg, she is one of my heroes.
This decision has been one of my chief concerns with the appointment of Roberts and Alito, and it has come to pass.
I clearly remember how the rich were able to take "vacations" or visit a relative in "Europe" while others died of infection as result of coat hanger abortions.
Last but not least "men don't have wombs"
Posted by: bill at April 19, 2007 11:11 AMWhat is Justice? When the next old guy drops, I nominate Anita Hill to replace him! Angela Davis is a terrific alternate!
Posted by: Ed at April 19, 2007 9:10 PMAfter that, Lenora Fallani...I start getting pissy around midnight...
Posted by: Ed at April 19, 2007 9:12 PM(Lenora, about that sticking with Parot thing, though you knew he was betraying you and was only a maverick idiot out to undermine the Bush machine anyway he could and create somekind of memorial to his own supposed "leadership genius" to put on his mantle no matter who he hurt, come home! All is forgiven!)
Posted by: Ed at April 19, 2007 9:24 PMVery good site, thank you!
Bookmarked :)
Very good site, thank you!
Bookmarked :)