Abortion Rights are in Jeopardy

[blackangrydem]

A combination of events will lead to a challenge of Roe v Wade, I'm afraid, over the next couple of years.

Re-election of the Shrub

Appointment of an Ultra-Conservative AG

Upcoming appointments of Ultra-Conservative Justices

Empowered and motivated fundies

Events like the Peterson case (Connor's law) and now this:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6727845/

which will no doubt be manipulated to influence public opinion on abortion and abortion rights.

Someone please tell me I'm wrong.

[NMDemDist2]

1. wish I could, but I won't lie to you

altho Bush has had 4 years and hasn't done much yet, but with the new majority in congress it looks bad for reproductive rights

[cali]

20. What I don't think people get is that

a woman's right to choose has already been seriously undermined by twenty plus years of effective anti-choice activism. Fewer docs are performing abortions in fewer clinics. In some states there is already very little access to abortion. Although the bogus partial birth abortion law has been stalled by the courts, the true impact of the law can be seen in the court of public opinion. The right wing has been successful in directing the spot light to the fetus and away from the woman. The fetus has been babyized. Coming next? The Unborn Child Pain Awareness Act which will require that a woman having an abortion after 20 weeks be told that "there is substantial evidence that the process of being killed in an abortion will cause the unborn child pain." The purpose of this bill, like the pb abortion act before it, is not to stop any abortions, but to reframe the issue by making abortion so morally repugnant that the public turns away from supporting it.

Sure, overturning Roe is possible. I think the 'thugs are aware of what a double edged sword this is at this point in time. My guess is that the real plan is to sway Americans enough to make overturning Roe, politically viable. If they succeed in this, they won't stop there. Welcome to the Republic of Gilead.

[JI7]

2. what has that current story got to do with abortion rights issue ?

[blackangrydem]

3. Like I said, it will be manipulated to influence public opinion on

abortion.

The woman was 8 mos pregnant when the baby was stolen from her womb after she was murdered.

The baby survived. Will the assailant be charged with murder? Kidnapping? If kidnapping is charged, who is the victim? The unborn?

Stay with me on this one. It doesn't take a great deal of imagination to see how this could be manipulated to influence the nation's abortion policy.

[Leilani]

4. Now that Bush has 4 more years

there's a lot more than abortion in jeopardy, like:

Social Security
Stem Cell research banned; sick people not getting the cures they need
Conservative judges on the court will last many, many years
More Free Trade Treaties
More Outsourcing
More American jobs lost
Rapidly shrinking middle class
Health care crisis growing
Endangered species on the chopping block
Environmental progress set back

I could go on...this truly was THE most critical election of my lifetime, & I am unbelievably depressed.

[loathesomeshrub]

5. I hate that supporting abortion rights means that holding a killer

accountable for taking the life of a fetus is incompatible. They killed the mother and tore out a viable baby. Abortion is not allowed after the first trimester correct? The killing of an 8 or 9 month old fetus, is the same as the killing of a baby. No one could be a bigger advocate of abortion rights than me, but i don't think that anyone other than the fundies could use laws to prosecute people for a crime against 2 separate people as a way to undermine abortion rights. Same thing with the Peterson case. A just about full grown baby was killed along with his mother. The murderer should pay for both deaths.

[Walt Starr]

7. YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY FUCKING WRONG!!!!!!!

Read Roe. Holding the killer of a third trimester fetus accountable, even with charges of murder, is 100% consistent with Roe v Wade.

Read the fucking decision before spouting off bullshit propoganda straight from rightwingnuts that have no clue what is actually in the decision.

[LizMoonstar]

17. I probably shouldn't get involved here, but

couldn't the issue of a Laci Peterson-style incident be covered under some sort of law that specifies murderous intent (so that say, an incompetent abortion provider is medically liable but not a 'murderer', but someone who deliberately kills both a pregnant woman and her fetus would be criminally liable)?

I feel like there's a way to define it down so that killing a woman's fetus against her will (this being the crucial part of the definition) is not protected by Roe. I wouldn't know if it's more trouble than it's worth, but I'd think it could be done without undermining abortion rights.

[Walt Starr]

19. THAT'S HOW THE LAW ALREADY READS!

Damn, I'm sick of explaining this time and time again. The Rightwingnuts have so muddies this issue nobody knows how the law reads!

[LizMoonstar]

21. sorry-

I'm not a law person, and not familiar with the specific text. As long as it's covered somewhere, that's good enough for me.

[Walt Starr]

23. IT is, but the fundies sure don't want that information getting out

They want it to appear "fuzzy", but Roe vs. Wade is a very clear decision which states that the state has a compelling interest in regulating abortion based upon viability. Third trimester pregnancies are almost always viable, although there are exceptions. This gives the states the ability to prosecute murders of fetuses in the third trimester.

[Radical Activist]

6. Republicans will limit abortion rights

but Roe v. Wade will not be overturned. GOP leaders know the backlash against them would be huge if it ever happened. Their main agenda is serving corporate America and that would be compromised if they acted on their abortion grandstanding.

[Walt Starr]

8. The backlash against them if they don't would be even worse

They would lose between 50 and 75% of their supporters is Roe is not overturned within the next four years.

The fundagelical talibornagains are frothing at the mouth and won't accept anything other than completely overturning Roe.

[Radical Activist]

9. There's always someone else to blame

They can always blame the liberals or satan for Roe v Wade still being there. It benefits them to keep it in place. It allows them to keep raising more money and keep people worked up and voting.
Its kind of like how pro-choice groups have to keep people convinced that there's a good chance Roe will be overturned so they can raise money and mobilize people.

[blackangrydem]

10. Well in that case pro-choice groups should raise record numbers

over the next few years.

[Radical Activist]

11. They do

Of course it's unlikely that any justice with a strong or obvious anti-choice record will get 60 votes in the Senate. It will have to be someone with a mixed or unknown record on abortion, so we won't know what we're getting until a case comes up.

[blackangrydem]

12. I think you're dreaming.

I don't see any "David Souters" coming up. I expect to see justices "in the mold of Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia", to paraphrase what Bush made clear during the election.

[Radical Activist]

14. Who is going to retire?

The Clinton appointees are still young. If one of the current anti-choice justices retires and another anti-choice justice replaces him then it won't change the 5-4 vote balance on abortion issues. The justices I've heard that are most likely to retire are already pro-life, so if Bush replaces them with another pro-lifer it will make no difference whatsoever.

Is there a pro-choice justice likely to retire that I don't know about?

[Walt Starr]

15. Sandra Day O'Connor

She wanted to retire right after the 2000 election but didn't because of the decision she helped pen to put Bush in the White House. She will retire by the end of the 2006 session.

[Radical Activist]

16. Is she against Roe v Wade?

would replacing her with a pro-life justice represent a real change?

[Walt Starr]

18. She has consistently voted to uphold Roe vs. Wade

and Bush replacing her would shift the balance from 5-4 upholding to 4-5 reversing.

[blackangrydem]

24. No. But as you said, I think a right-winger will be replaced by

a right-winger. O'Connor is the least conservative (relatively speaking) likely to possibly retire over the next 4 years. She would probably be replaced by someone more conservative than herself.

[Walt Starr]

13. They only need 51 votes due to two words

NUCLEAR OPTION

Think it won't happen? If you do, you're dreaming.

[donco6]

22. The women who voted for Bush made that bed . . .

. . . now they'll have to lie in it, I guess.

Join the club. I'm waiting for the sodomy laws to be reinstated. Hope my bunkmate is cute.