In my last post, I expressed my opinions on the recent disclosure that the Supreme Court is poised to overturn Roe V Wade and return the abortion issue to the states.
In this post I would like to offer comments on what my research has shown in terms of preventing abortion, and why banning it is the least effective method.
But first, the Leaker!
I believe that, in general, those who leak information about how our government acts, or will soon act, is not in the best interest of our country. There are some things, such as information relating to specific instances of our military involvement in the Ukraine war, that is better left secret until it makes sense to release it.
However, I must also state that there is far too much secrecy taking place in the halls of Congress, the White House and other federal agencies that should not be "classified", just because a government official thinks so, as too often this justification is not for overriding security reasons but more to hide some type of nefarious activity. That is why the existence of government watchdog agencies, both within the government such as the GAO, and without, need to be allowed to do their work, without threats or recriminations from those we elect. It is why I was so appalled at the former president's statements regarding former US Army Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman who revealed his astonishment at the attempts to link arms to Ukraine for dirt on a political rival.
In this vein, I truly hope that the Leaker of the abortion opinion has multiple statues dedicated to him or her, especially if it turns out that it is someone from the left who is appalled at both the opinion, its harsh comments for the Supreme Court justices who first created the Roe V Wade guidelines (it was a 7-2 decision, for those who forgot, with 5 of the 7 being Republican nominated judges), and the strong possibility that other non enumerated rights related to the right of privacy may also be "returned" to the states, such as marriage (interracial or gay), and birth control. Not to mention any rights for the trans and LGBTQ community that have been recognized in the last decade.
This is a monumental ruling, the loss of a "right" for the first time in American history, and frankly, if it has been decided, should have been released immediately upon its adjudication. There is no reason, certainly no national security reason, for a decision like this to remain outside public knowledge for more than a few days, let alone months.
Also, just to emphasize how damaging this ruling could be, and using Justice Alito's own words in which he claims that a right must be "deeply rooted in this Nation's history and tradition", it is not hard to imagine any right that is less than 120 years old, a time frame that would certainly not qualify as "deeply rooted", might also be returned to the states. You know, trivial things like a woman's right to vote, civil rights, and even the right to travel, the right to a fair trial and the right to trial by your peers, all not specifically enumerated in the original constitution (if at all), but which we all believe are sacrosanct. In other words, all the rights fought and died for by people not born white men.
Ok, enough of that.
So, let's assume that most Americans, while not necessarily eager to exercise their right to an abortion, understand that such a difficult decision should be left to those involved and their physician, but who also would like to reduce the incidence of abortion. In other words, most of us would like to see abortion continue to be on the decline, as it has been in America since its peak in the 1970's and 80's.
What does the research show?
First, here is a link to a reasonably recent study on when, where and why abortions happen. What I learned from this report and other things I have read, is that abortions do not stop happening just because they become illegal, they just become more dangerous for the mother and fetus. But, once legalized, abortions are not only safer, (we are concerned about the mother, right?), but they tend to decline over time when combined with increased education about birth control, better access to health care services, and other support from the various institutions that are involved in a person's life (political, social, religious, family) which empower woman to take control over their reproductive life. In other words, if we teach women they have the ability to decide for themselves (along with their partners) when, and how not to become pregnant, we reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies, hence the number of abortions. There is no doubt. Sex education (which certainly can and should include abstinence emphasis for those under 18), an understanding of and access to birth control methods, affordable access to health care services for all women, and the understanding that punishing woman for having sex does not prevent abortion, will reduce its incidence. Anything else is ineffective, and dangerous.
To put it simply, we need to devote our energies into strategies that prevent unwanted pregnancies, which means providing all the methods which enable sex to occur without conceiving. Yes, I said it, sex is not just to procreate and any remaining vestige of that concept that still permeates our religions and culture is itself, one of the obstacles to reducing abortion.
Speaking of sex, why is it that so much of the responsibility of these unwanted pregnancies, hence abortions, lie at the feet of the woman. As far as I know, it takes a man's participation also. Where are the accompanying laws banning abortions that require paternity to be determined and for the male to be at least financially responsible for the care and upbringing of this mandated life? Or are the legislators from Texas, Mississippi, Louisiana, etc, setting aside state money to pay for these mandated children? Oh, sorry, I forgot, they only care about the fetus, the baby is not their concern.
Finally, and speaking of Louisiana, I see that there is a law cruising through their house and senate that would declare a fetus a person upon fertilization, thereby placing a woman and her doctor who participate in an abortion subject to a murder charge.
There is just one little thing wrong with that idea; a number of widely used birth control methods (probably used by those very same legislators and their children), prevent a fertilized egg from implanting, such as an IUD. In other words, this method of birth control would immediately become illegal, a grandfather amendment would have to be passed to allow those who have an IUD inside them to retain it (I guess they will have to be issued an IUD passport so they can't be arrested, although I am not sure what kind of search and seizure procedure would be initiated for those without such a permit), and, I guess, any doctor or pharmacist or health care provider who talks about an IUD could be charged with conspiracy to murder. But hey, maybe those good old boys who are pushing this law through their hallowed halls aren't up to date on how IUD's work. Or they just don't care.
Because you see, that is what this is really about; men controlling women. I wrote a story a while back called The Switchback. It is not about abortion, but about an event that causes a whole bunch of people to wake up a different gender and sex, how laws were suddenly altered to reflect the new "face" of those now in charge, and what happened when the effect switched back just as suddenly as it had occurred. You can read it by clicking the link below, if interested.
https://wurdsfromtheburbs.blogspot.com/2018/10/the-switch-back.html
Along those lines, can you imagine how the abortion issue would change if men could become pregnant? I would imagine that not only would abortion be legal and that all health care plans would include this service, but that there would be TV ads for abortion medicines. Kind of like all the ads we see for boner pills for men, but meant to restore a guy's ability to get back in the saddle once that little "problem" is resolved, discreetly and over the phone, arriving in the mail in a brown paper bag.
As I said in my last post, ask all candidates for their stance on abortion and if they do not support a woman's right to choose:
#Against abortion rights, take a hike
No comments:
Post a Comment