Abortion rights equals personal freedom

I'm not a legal scholar, but here is my understanding: Alito's draft decision says Roe must be overturned because it is not valid under the Constitutions's right to due process. Previous decisions affirming the right to same-sex marriage, inter-racial marriange, access to contraception, have been decided based on the same right to due process. Also it strongly implies that no precedent will necessarily be respected, our laws can be upended entirely based on the religious beliefs of the Justices.

Respect of precedent is necessary to create stability of the law and enhance the credibility of the court. Sometimes Supreme Court overturns precedent, but it "demands a significant justification beyond the preferences of 5 justices" (Justice Stevens). There is no such justification in this case. Furthermore 70% of the American public supports the rights of people with uteruses to control their own body.

Toro! Where in the leaked draft do you find abortion banned?

One placard at yesterday's protests in DC read, "Abortion is a Human Right." Well, I guess that makes sense to progressives as long as they hold fast to their belief that an unborn child is not human. The party of science... yeah, right.

Westy

I'm not a legal scholar, but here is my understanding: Alito's draft decision says Roe must be overturned because Due Process Clause protections under the Constitution protects rights that are “deeply rooted in this nation’s history and tradition” and abortion does not fall into that category. His draft does not affect previous decisions like same-sex marriage, inter-racial marriage or access to contraception. Plus, reversing Roe at the federal level does not prevent the sovereign states from providing abortions.

With respect to precedent, you are implying the Roe decision cannot be overturned because its now on the books. Does that mean you believe the Dred Scott, Plessy and Korematsu decisions should still be the law of the land? BTW… Democratic Party appointees dominated the majority opinion in those cases.

While 70% of Americans might agree that women should control their own bodies, when asked if abortions should be illegal during the third trimester of pregnancy… 80% of Americans will say, “Yes.”

Westy... are you saying 15 states have banned abortion or are you saying 15 states have restricted when abortions may be performed? Which states have banned abortion such that an abortion could not be performed to save the mother's life?

How has abortion helped poor women... particularly African-American women? Blacks make up nearly 14% of the US population yet about 40% of babies aborted in America are Black. 35% of the 60+ million children aborted since Roe V. Wade was decided have been black. Black women are five times more likely to have abortions than white women. Abortion is health care? If we read numbers like these from anywhere else in the world, we would call it genocide.

You wrote, "Roe was originally decided by a conservative court." As there were more justices affiliated with the Democratic Party than the Republican Party on the court in 1973, it hardly looks like it was a conservative court.

Jorg... I've said it before... you are a treasure!

Yeah... there is a mask to help protect from contracting highly contagious COVID... and if you didn't know it... there is a "mask" to help protect from needing abortions. That other "mask" can also help protect users from contracting highly contagious diseases. FYI

Jorg, I don’t get it and nobody else will either. Let’s take the second half of your “explanation.” You’re saying a mask is required in order to protect the one affected. But the ones affected are already affected – what do they need protection from? Let’s assume you’re not making yourself clear (yet, again) and let’s take your first assertion – that a mask is required to protect others. Then why are Dems not wearing masks while Dems tell you to wear masks? Just think of the recent White House super-spreader dinner. If Dems don’t think a mask is required to protect others, why should we? Or are you saying Dems are not interested in protecting others? No need to answer, we know – look at the rising crime rate and influx of invaders. Get it? BTW, what I want to get is more than two exclamation points.

Seriously, Ray, - that’s the best you can come up with to de-confuse Terence?

Since you’re way out there, what “mask” protects baby boys so they can grow up intact, the way nature obviously intended, instead of being mutilated against their will? The only protection I can think of, is common sense, which according to George Carlin isn’t all that common.

Jorg... I don't want to come between you and Terence.

Let's just skip further discussion about the other "mask." It looks like you have already done so...

Oups... Voltaire pas Carlin.

How would you know anything about the true abortion rates in states with limits?

And who should be blamed, or even punished, for spontaneous, natural abortions, which do happen? The evangelicals’ made-up fantasy figure way up in the sky?

Jorg

While religion may inform pro-life advocates' opposition to abortion, if the leaked draft is accurate, religion was not part of the SCOTUS decision making process. The decision does not ban abortion... it refers the issue back to the states.

We have debated different aspects of religion in the past. I'm curious. What does your belief in humanism teach you about the morality of killing unborn children?

The subject of how states currently handle abortions... there are eight states where elective abortions are permitted up to the moment of birth: Alaska, Colorado, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, and Vermont. Where else will you find elective abortions allowed without regard for gestational periods? China and North Korea.

Funny thing, Dirk and friends... during Clinton and Obama's eight year terms abortions plummeted by double digits. Some equate those drops to the focus on social safety net programs (helping would be parents be able to better afford raising children), increased focus on sex education in schools (and right now you have Texas and Florida removing age-appropriate sex education books from schools), and increases in the availability and promotion of contraceptives (a reminder that many of those who oppose abortion also oppose contraceptives).

Hello, Craig

Let's deal with what you call plummeting rates of abortion that must be attributed to Democratic Party presidents. The CDC reported a 28.8% drop in abortions... there's your double-digit number... from 1998 through 2019. The reduction was sustained over that time period. The Democratic Party and the Republican Party split the Oval Office... eleven years each during that time. So, your suggestion that Democratic Party presidents uniquely deserve credit for the drop in the number of abortions... especially in the last couple of decades is inaccurate and misleading.

Ray: I don’t want to judge someone's “personal responsibility” without knowing their individual story, which is none of my business. But, where do rape and incest fit into your scheme?

Wow... Jorg. No comment on the public's overwhelming opposition to late term abortions? I'm not surprised.

There is a huge difference between an elective procedure and the necessity for medical intervention. Like most Americans, I believe abortion should be available to protect the health of the mother. There is a significant portion of Americans who would also make abortion available when an unborn child would come into this world with birth defects. Jorg... I have no "scheme." Rape and incest should be reasons to make abortion available... those could be dangers to a woman's mental health.

Fair enough, Ray! We basically agree, but the religious nut cases on the right won't allow any exceptions!

Hey, Jorg... we can agree once in a while. You're correct. Some extreme views from the right do want to ban all abortions... no doubt. And it is just as correct to say some extreme views from the left want abortion available upon demand at any time during a pregnancy... including termination of life after a viable child is removed from the womb.

Nine Supreme Court justices appear ready to turn over the issue of abortion to the states... those nine will not decide whether abortion is legal or illegal for 335 million Americans. Do you think 22 million registered voters in California should decide what to do about abortion in our state or should it be left up to 89 Democratic Party legislators in Sacramento?

Ray, really? You think progressives are fighting against these abortion laws because we "know the general public does not support abortion during the final three months of pregnancy." NO! I'll speak for myself. I think the decision should be left to the mother, her doctor, and if she is of a certain faith whatever people or texts can help her decided. I am not opposed to some limits and until now the courts have allowed certain limits. One of my biggest concerns are the 32,000 women who become pregnant due to rape each year. The laws being passed in some of these states prohibit even a "morning after pill" for these rape victims.

Hello again, Craig

Do I think progressives are being deceptive in promoting their agenda? Absolutely. They are fond of trotting out statistics that suggest a majority of Americans support abortion, but those statistics swing wildly to 80% of Americans agreeing that abortion in the third trimester should be illegal. You won't hear that from progressives. Then there’s the progressive caterwauling about… what’s next? Again, they conveniently hide the facts. 60% of Americans support same-sex marriage. 90% of Americans support inter-racial marriage. Nearly 90% of Catholics say contraception is acceptable or not morally wrong. The court decisions supporting same-sex marriage, inter-racial marriage and contraception are not in jeopardy of being reversed as progressives have suggested.

I’m guessing we are alike... away from the DJ... in one significant way. We both discuss important issues with those who may not agree with us. I wrote to a liberal friend today… “Here's my take... I don't like the idea of abortion especially as it has become a substitute for birth control. In my view, abortions should be made available in cases where the mother's health in is danger, rape, incest, and when prenatal conditions seriously compromise an unborn child. While I don't like the idea of abortion, I feel early in a pregnancy... that is the expectant mother's decision. Late term abortion? No. It's that simple. 80% of Americans agree with that position… If progressive protestors would watch one late term abortion, they would drop their signs and placards, then start a long walk home."

Ray: What about a woman who suffers an unwanted, unintended, instant abortion? What if she is reported to the police by an over-zealous, religious neighbor? Will she have to defend herself in court, - after what to her may be the most tragic and devastating tragedy of her life? Jail time if she doesn’t succeed in defending herself?

Slow down, Jorg...

I think you meant to say... what happens to a woman who has an unwanted and unintended pregnancy which is followed by... in your words... an "instant abortion." Could you explain how you are using the term "instant abortion"?

Look back over the past week's dialog re: abortion. Where has anyone... on the left or right... advocated for a ban on abortion? Right leaning readers... including me... have come down on the side of returning the decision about abortion policy to the people. In my view, that would be allowing a woman to decide whether she wants to legally terminate a pregnancy up to the point when the unborn child is viable outside the womb. Such a restriction would not apply to situations involving rape, incest, the mother's health, and medical risks to the unborn. Jorg... as you may or may not recall... I have already articulated these thoughts in a direct response to one of your posts.

Progressives on the left are fond of saying that most Americans... 70% or so... support abortion, and that is true under the circumstances described above. However, opinion shifts dramatically when Americans are asked about late term abortions... 80% of Americans believe elective abortions so late in a pregnancy should be made illegal.

Try as you may, you cannot sustain your position that abortion policies will be made on the basis of religion. Actually, that's not entirely true, and I will explain near the end of this post. If a state adopts a policy that restricts late term abortion, that state is not full of religious zealots. On the other hand, the eight states that permit abortion up to the moment of birth are not populated strictly by atheists.

You wrote to me that abortion "should be legal and available... except questionable once the fetus begins to look and move like a little being..." I asked you when does that happen during a pregnancy. Your answer? Crickets.

My position on this issue has been challenged by left leaning readers several times over the past week. That's totally OK, but I am growing weary of responding to challenges with substantive argument and supporting evidence only to have those readers disappear.

Abortion is a religious matter but not in the way you might think. The progressives fervent commitment to abortion upon demand has become their religion. I still maintain that a lot of those progressives... maybe not the ones threatening SCOTUS justices... but a lot of them... if they had an opportunity to actually observe a partial birth abortion, would lay down their signs and placards, then start a long, slow walk home.

Reuters reported a while ago that the greatest number of phone calls during a single day are placed on... Mother's Day. How many? Estimates put the number at about 122 million. That's every year... that estimate is about double the number of abortions that have been performed since Roe v Wade was decided in 1973.

Ray: You didn't understand what is meant by "unwanted, unprepared, or unplanned instant abortion"? Never heard about women losing a child they wanted to carry to terms? Try again.

One more time, Jorg...

You wrote earlier today about unwanted, unintended and "instant" abortion. Most everyone understands what unwanted and unintended means especially as those terms relate to pregnancy. I asked you to clarify what you meant by using the term "instant" abortion. Are you talking about a miscarriage? Are you talking about a self-induced "morning after" pill abortion? Jorg... what are you talking about? Now, you've added unprepared and unplanned to the mix. Does your use of those terms apply to pregnancy or abortion? It kinda makes a difference.

There are several other issues on this topic that you have sidestepped and left us with the sound of feet scurrying away. In response to your statement that abortion "should be legal and available... except questionable once the fetus begins to look and move like a little being..." I asked you (twice) when do you believe the fetus begins to look like a little being. One more time, Jorg... at what point during a pregnancy... absent some health risk or other codified exception... do you believe an abortion should not be performed? If you're not going to respond, then don't bother with your interpretation re: what an "instant" abortion may or may not be.

Aren't you glad your mother carried you to term?

Ray: Why on earth would I be "talking about a self-induced "morning after" pill abortion" when I clearly meant unwanted, un-intended abortion, or miscarriage if you prefer? Do you misunderstand me on purpose, or what? The way things are going, some zealous, religious abortion denier might be delighted to report a neighbor who suddenly seems not to be pregnant anymore, and thus force an unfortunate, distraught woman to defend herself, perhaps even in court. Do you understand now, or not?

Jorg...

Now, we're clear. When you say "instant" abortion, you are referring to a miscarriage. (I'm wondering why you just didn't use the term "miscarriage" as use of that word is much more common and it would make your posts less confusing.) You will find some of the literature on this topic describing "instant" abortions as something that is self-induced, e.g. use of a morning after pill. Instant or self-induced is a whole lot different than miscarriage. N'est-ce pas?

I'm not a trained medical professional but I'm confident that doctors would be able to tell a miscarriage from an instant abortion. If that's not the case, then every woman who used a morning after pill could claim that she had a miscarriage. Case closed. Your worries about a religious zealot reporting a miscarriage AND the woman suffering the miscarriage being exposed to prosecution sounds like your imagination running wild... again. I guess it should not surprise anyone... you do have a propensity for posting fiction in these pages.

Jorg... fourth time... when do you believe an unborn child begins to look like... in your words... "a little being"?

Ray: “Miscarriage” is not necessarily the right term for what I mean by unwanted, involuntary, unintended, spontaneous abortion. A miscarriage can be a result of carelessness, smoking, alcohol, medical conditions, and not necessarily unwanted. That’s a huge difference. Get my point now?

And, don’t go out on a tangent again, and please refrain from any improper, disrespectful speculation, about my mother.

Bosh

And here I go correcting myself again.... Idaho lawmakers are scheduling hearings on banning contraception, morning after pills!