What is astonishing about this comment thread is not the number of men who object to abortion--Linda Greenhouse always stimulates male right-to-lifers to furiously lecture us about the murder of babies--but that they still don't understand that the only people who pay attention to them are other male right-to-lifers.
As for the women in the thread who object to abortion, don't have one. Don't let your sister have one. Don't let your daughter have one. But talk to them, not to us. We're not listening. Not today. Not tomorrow. Not ever.
40
Donald Trump's budget eliminates the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP). The tax bill written by Republican congressmen, eliminates tax credits for adoption and eliminates medical deductions, raising the cost of caring for medically fragile children.
Republicans also want health insurance for prenatal and maternity care to be optional. But if it's optional, then the only people who will buy a maternity rider will be couples planning to have children - and so the cost of health insurance for young couples who are starting their families will go up. And the unplanned, unwanted pregnancies that conservatives piously insist must go to term? If maternity care is optional, then more of them will be uninsured too -- leading to more sick, fragile newborns, delivered by mothers who could not afford prenatal care or L&D costs (which covered, for now, by Medicaid - a program that Republicans plan to cut by $1 trillion dollars).
Republicans are "pro-life" because it wins them a set of one-issue voters. But let's be clear: they are neither pro-child nor pro-family.
29
It is 2017 America and women are fighting for their rights to abortion and contraception period. sad!
11
As Dr. Leslie White wrote in his essay, "The Symbol," a child isn't a human being until it can participate in its culture. And that NOT happen a birth. His example was the late, great Helen Keller who was a year and half years old when a fever took her vision and her hearing. And her family treated her like the family pet. The play/movie, "The Miracle Worker," portrays this sorrow and the child's fumbling around the dinner table grabbing food other family members' plates and stuffing her mouth. But one Annie Sullivan, the tutor the Kellers hired, was able to teach her words by spelling them out in Helen's hands, she began to grasp meaning and in time, civility. Her mind was sharp as a tack and I loved seeing her on TV in the 50s. But pro-birthers have little concern for what happens after a birth. And the horrors surfacing in Ireland, a staunch Roman Catholic country where abortion was not allowed and still isn't, where homes to house unwed mothers and force them into giant laundries to do the clothing of nuns and live with the stigma of their unsanctioned motherhood has shocked and horrified a nation. And the church is to blame. The graves are being opened and the shabbily maintained records are being released to reveal these horrors and their resulting stigmas and suicides. The NYTImes coverage of these horrors was splendid and was one of the most read articles when it was published. Comments from pro-birther men are shameful as men never face the dilemmas.
10
THE GOP BELIEVES THAT LIFE BEGINS AT CONCEPTION AND ENDS AT BIRTH. Prescient words by Representative Barney Frank. The article describes in horrific detail the lengths to which the extremist activist ideologues are willing to go to intervene when there is a fetus involved. But when it is a person who has already been born, they're on their own. Why would they need any help from anyone? They're adults, so they're capable of surmounting any obstacles thrown in their way, right? WRONG! I hope that Tony Schwartz's prediction that Trump will not complete his first year in office will come true very soon. Then Mueller can shift his focus on the legal violations alleged by Pence, Sessions, and others. Anybody with security clearance and access to documents that showed collusion with Russia who did not report it to the Attorney General or the President in a timely way, is guilty of obstruction of justice. When this nightmare has ended, it will make Watergate look like a stroll in the park. One can only, that given the choice of resigning and rolling over on Trump, his alleged companions in crime will do precisely what Papadopoulos did by bargaining for a lesser sentence whlie rolling over on the higher ups. That's what the Watergate gangsters did. I doubt that this bunch of slime snakes will want to get schlonged. So they're slither to safety by taking plea bargains. There won't be any empty space at any reptile house in any zoo in the US when they're done sliming away.
9
One of the very last tasks the republican part wants to accomplish involves 86ing abortions. Nationally. their fake outrage serves, depending on the moment, as a fundraising cash cow and/or a rallying point with their base. Overturning Rowe leaves them with tax cuts, loving guns, homophobia and god rules.
4
This is the cutting edge issue religious fanatics employ to impose their theocratic dictatorship on everyone, and to wage their population wars for global hegemony between each other.
8
Abortions should be regulated just like Guns. That is, barely at all. How's THAT, GOP? Yeah, thought so.
18
Here’s the thing for all you people who wonder why anyone would ever have an abortion -
I can think of circumstances where abortion is the humane, merciful choice - then access to safe and legal abortion is necessary. To declare otherwise is cruel.
And where abortion is not legal, there is no stop to abortion - never has been, never will be - there are only be dead girls.
15
Florida Voter,
About 10% of Abortions are for Medical/Psychological Reasons.
The rest are elective for reasons that do not seem necessary if the
Mother is willing to give the child up for Adoption.
As for you last sentence -
And where murder is not legal, there is no stopping murder - never has been
never will be - there are only dead people.
Every abortion ends the life of the youngest human beings -
more girls than boys.
3
After the churches that oppose abortion get their own congregation to stop having abortions, we might consider a conversation as to why they want to impose their rules on non-church members.
6
You have to wonder how many abortions our CIC has paid for. Or his sons. Look at the sexual harassers being exposed as of late. How did they hide their misdeeds? To those with money, anything can be bought. That will be the difference between those who can and those who cannot get abortions in the near future.
5
I am glad that people are worried about the state of abortion. It means that the pro-life crowd has been successful in their efforts to portray it as murder which it is. You are robbing an innocent fetus/baby of a life. That is deplorable and inhumane.
8
With all due and sincere respect for those who dispute my pro-life side of this debate, I simply assert that there has got to be some fair way to contest the differences between us. One side says that prohibition of abortion imposes a morality that denies a woman her freedom; the other side says that abortion is a cruel and arbitrary imposition of death on prenatal human life. The problem with the law and ethics that have prevailed hitherto on this dispute mirrors exactly the cynicism in Roe v. Wade, where the court essentially held that the "pro-choice" side should win merely because there existed no fair test of the dispute. To those of us on this side of the debate, that was one of the most incredible cop-outs in legal and moral history.
4
I just see men who obsess about this as people who believe that no woman in their right mind would want to bear their child.
8
I think you are way too deep into denial that people make mistakes and so does nature. Why can't you concentrate your attention onto running your own life?
6
Just WHY would you support the killing of babies? This from a non-aborted baby who has enjoyed 70+ years of existence.
4
Do you believe the only thing that saved you was the prohibition of abortion in effect 70 years ago?
16
How about a political compromise? The Left accept more abortion restrictions; the Right accept more gun-law restrictions? Both sides need to let go of their preferred choice of violence. The winners? All the innocent. This would be a major victory for both sides; and an even bigger victory against violence in our culture.
3
I don't want any of your intrusions into my body. The ugliest characteristic of gunners is they would rather kill than compromise.
6
Steve,
I am supposing your are a man.
How does restricting Abortion intrude into your body ?
2
Elections have consequences, vote in 2018-20.
10
If you don't believe in abortion, don't have one. I understand your anguish if you believe it is murder but that is your BELIEF not mine. I strongly believe in a woman's right to choice. I so strongly believe , that if you choose to have a baby despite having nine others that you can not support or a baby with no possibility of quality of life I not only support you but your choice. I do not object to my tax dollar spent on such an already born child. I respect your belief why can't you respect mine.
21
The analogy one needs to consider is this:
"If you don't believe in slavery, don't have a slave. I understand your anguish if you believe it is wrong to have slaves, but that is your BELIEF not mine. I strongly believe in a person's right to property, and if you bought a slave no one should have the right to take that slave away from you"
7
No fetus is sufficiently informed to have an opinion on whether they want to live in your world or not. In fact, the human soul is the software one develops from living independently after birth.
6
If you don't believe in slavery, then don't force a woman to go through pregnancy, labor and delivery against her will, bearing both the substantial financial costs and not-insignificant physical risks herself. A "right to life" is not the same thing as the right to use another person's body in the most intimate way possible.
13
You have no idea how crazy this makes me. Why are men still in charge of women’s bodies? Why are men privy to private issues like unwanted pregnancy, birth control and every other element of life that KEEPS WOMEN DOWN. And why are there so many women who embrace these very men (OLD WHITE AND OBESE) and their antiquated ideas. I have been marching and fighting for women’s rights my whole life. I vote for plenty of policies that are not in my best interest, that will help other people, and those OTHER people, vote against those policies! I know this: the surest way to remain poor and hopeless is to have too many children.
37
While there are clear opposing views on abortion, I would hope Democrats can at least understand that, irrespective of current judicial rulings, if a person views abortion as murder, then it would be expected that they would do everything in there power to oppose it.
On a side note, slavery was supported by the courts before being rejected by it. Courts rulings are temporary in nature, and Roe vs Wade is only constitutional under the next ruling declares it unconstitutional.
6
Hey, when Christians collude with laissez-faire plutocrats, it ain't going to be pretty. I'm reluctantly using the term these folks apply to themselves. However, their attitudes and actions toward the poor bear no similarity to Christ's actions or his teachings. You'd think Jesus had been a banker, business owner or trust fund baby the way these folks fawn and kow-tow to them.
17
What does one do when one believes that a fetus is a human being from the moment of conception.
Our society takes the easy way out-get rid of the problem of an unwanted child or a child with physical "defects".
We are going the route of western Europe. Does nobody make the connection between our abortion laws "assisted suicide" and Germany from 1933 to 1945? Is inconvenience the overriding factor in the decision to abort a baby? Or is it something else:perhaps a denial of our humanity which will necessarily lead to the killing of those who are not productive members of our society.
4
The correct term is not 'pro-life,' it is 'forced birth.' These people want to do away with abortion and birth control. The Pence people now in charge do not care that they are swearing falsely to uphold the Constitution; they believe that their god gives them a pass because they are working to bring about a theocracy in this country any way they can. The GOP tax increase on the middle class allows churches to endorse political candidates. Where's the debate on the repeal of the Johnson Amendment? It's being blocked. If they can't do away with the 19th amendment, they will work on blocking women from voting with voters id laws. These people have to go!
26
I hold whoever voted for Jill Stein or didn't bother to vote at all in the presidential election responsible for this erosion of my right to control my body. I remember many commenters in NYTimes comment sections exuding such hatred for Hillary Clinton that they couldn't even see straight to the fact that it was she standing in the way of exactly what this article describes. Who cares what she did in the past when my right to choose was in the direct line of fire of her opponent?
Voting for the person best able to defend hard-won progressive rights is deadly serious and not a place to mount some sort of ideological purity test. Stein voters, most of whom are pro-choice, were so hung up on Clinton's supposed corruption that they rubber-stamped Trump's even greater and well-documented corruption and the all out assault on my reproductive rights under way now. Thanks a lot, Stein voters.
33
I believe the problem is the narrative of "the lesser of the two evils." If we looked at representatives as perentages who are more closely aligned with our values people would feel emotionally differently about how to cast their ballots.
On public policy issues from reproductive health rights, taxation, turning over public lands to private uses, environmental protection, worker's rights and a host of other issues I was in 2% alighment with Republicans. I was 90% in alignment with Hillary and 98% in alignment with Bernie. But I'm also a black woman and pragmantically, I though HIllary understood and would work better with the legislative branches than Bernie. She wasn't the "lesser of two evils." She was the candidate most closely aligned with my values that would also be able to move the ball forward.
Now, instead of just working on the 10% areas where we weren't in alignment, I'm having to refight battles that we already have fought and won.
16
'The worrisome future of .........'. Just fill in the blank. You're sure to hit something, like education, climate change, clean air and water, housing, infrastructure, free speech and freedom of the press, separation of church and state... I could go on of course.
The worrisome future of abortion is one among many.
13
Sort of off the point, but I never understood the undue burden aspect of the religious businesses not wanting to sign a letter that would state their religious underpinnings and thus their employees would get health insurance for contraception through other means.
They sign the employees checks! Do they check to see if the money they gave with their signature is used to do other 'non-religious' things? Do they check to make sure the men they employ aren't using the money on dates that lead to sex outside of marriage?
11
We are witnessing an acceleration of the increasing influence of religion (specifically, Christianity) in government. This is truly frightening. Like so much else, these days.
I have a moral objection to the death penalty, and war. Can I request that my tax dollars not be spent on these things? Consistency, please.
17
For the people who believe abortion is murder, is our nation's widespread failure to provide pre-natal care, particularly to poor women in states like Texas -- is that then state sanctioned child abuse? Especially if those children are born massively premature or with other avoidable birth defects?
What if a government supplies drinking water full of bacteria, toxins, or heavy metals, or allows the use of teratogenic pesticides, causing miscarriages and birth defects -- will those actions be considered crimes against the unborn?
Because that's what we're doing as a nation, right now, to millions of potential babies.
15
The most zealous members of the antichoice community want, when you strip away the veil, to control wwomen's lives and freedom. If they genuinely wanted to reduce the number of abortions they would, perhaps reluctantly, join in supporting funding for medically accurate sex education and access to all methods of contraception.
21
I despise the Trump administration for a lot of reasons and I will vote to have him and the egoistic materialism of him and his economists separated from political power. But that doesn't over-ride the basis of my own view that Ms. Greenhouse and her side of this debate express exactly the same ethic in their view that considers prenatal human life to have nothing but instrumental value. It is simply not self-evident to all fair minds that an abortion is and ought to be nothing more than the expression and test of the freedom of a woman and her doctor, subordinating to that view all other social, demographic and moral considerations.
4
We have no requirememt in law that one person must sacrifice their life for another person's life. If I'm walking down the street and see you bleeding out I'm not legally required to help you even if all I'm doing is getting a cup of coffee and to help you would take 10 seconds and cost me little. So this belief that someone isn't required to sacrifice anything to save the life of another is deeply imbedded in our culture and isn't just a caveat for someone who would put themselves under threat of bodily harm to save someone's life.
Embryos and fetuses are potential life. One of the things that this specific type of potential life requires to survive to viability is a willing host to supply the essential elements to help it grow from potential to realized life. If the potential life doesn't have this key ingredient, it doesn't have all necessary requisites to move from being potential to realized.
Additionally, we do little or nothing to help pregnant women support and sustain potential life. When viewed from this perspective why is this the only case in which we demand that fully realized life should subordinate itself to providing the necessities required for a fetus to move from being potential to realized? Unless we as a community are willing to meet all of the needs of that potential life, we shouldn't really have a say in it at all.
14
Debate all you want, David, shout your social, demographic and moral views from the mountain top, but you are never, ever going to force women to give birth when they don't want to.
What is self-evident, here, is that you wish the truth were different.
9
We all know that the GOP wants to install a theocracy to get and keep an iron grip on this country. They don't mind strangling what made this country great as long as they are comfortable during what they know is a decline into 3rd world status.
We have 2 futures: Pence and his army of theocrats feeding you and your bank accounts to the richest of the rich. Or we hurl the GOP into the ash heap of history and delete every one of their attacks - laws, appointees, executive orders, every trace from this "administration."
16
Memo to HHS -
1) You are called Dept. of Health and Human Services for a reason;
2) You are part of the US government
3) You are tasked with following the constitution and law - not changing it.
4) "Human Services" requires an awareness and understanding of human concerns;
and,
5) I tip my hat to those career staff who refused to sign on. Hang in there 2018 (and 2020) are coming soon.
14
This is another example of how the GOP tortures and demeans people it disagrees with.
We have started to rid ourselves of the GOP plague.
2018 can't come fast enough.
12
Scary that the idea that US government officials should follow the rule of law is controversial.
Scary that many are so quick to insist the young woman in question be forced to follow their religious belief instead of her own.
14
No surprise at all. Mike Pence even said on 60 minutes that his religious views supersede the constitution that he swore to protect and defend. I seriously doubt Sessions will live up his oath of office either.
17
This is about reproductive power. It always has been. It has nothing to with the “sanctity of life” or cute babies. And this is coming from someone who had 4 cute babies of her own.
When contraception and abortion are available to women, women have the complete power to decide whose genes get passed on and whose don’t. Humans are very smart animals, but we are still just animals and we are affected by the drives of biology just like any other form of life. One of the factors that defines life is the ability to reproduce. No man who is adamantly against abortion thinks of it in these terms, but the ability to pass on genes is absolutely one of the major factors in the anti abortion “feelings.” Just because some women buy into it does not negate the part biology plays.
With the combination of contraception and abortion women have the ultimate biological power. There are some people out there that seem very threatened by that.
28
Amen! And furthermore, religiously based codes of sexual "morality" are nothing more than male power exerted over female sexual autonomy as well as insuring the right genes are passed on.
16
My response to any man who is adamantly against abortion is to laugh in his face. And continue laughing.
This may not change his mind, but I feel good.
14
And that is what matters. You should also be aware that a higher percentage of woman are opposed to abortion rights than men.
WE THE PEOPLE MUST DEMAND AN EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT to OUR United States Constitution right now that says, "NO law shall be passed in The United States of America, or any of it's territories, that discriminates based on gender."
NOW is the time!
18
That would do nothing. Men can also be prohibited.
Thank you for this very insightful column. Yet again we see why Trump must not be impeached or removed from office: Pence will make all of this happen with much greater speed and efficiency. He would gleefully fulfill Margaret Atwood's dark prophecy while staring into cameras with that vacant, cultist look in his eyes. Trump's lies are erratic, self-serving, and often contradictory; Pence, however, believes the lies by which he lives and he will consistently force them on the rest of us in the name of his vengeful, sexist, God.
14
Vice-President Pence is hardly a shoo-in to replace Donald Trump should #45 be impeached and removed from office. With each passing month, Pence's role in the Russian scandal continues to come under scrutiny. Bill Moyers recently published a time-line of Pence's role in the Russia affair, including Pence's central role in the cover-up relating to the firing of FBI Director James Comey. Meanwhile, our country's lying, dishonest Vice-President continues to defend Trump’s wildly false claims (example: millions of illegal Clinton voters denied Trump a popular vote victory). As the Mueller investigation continues, we should expect even more ugly truths to rise to the surface about Mike Pence.
12
Oh, I hope you're right. It's an outcome even a heathen like myself might pray for.
5
Abortion is not murder. There is no biological fact to support a belief that a baby springs into existence at the "instant" of conception (whatever that means). In 1973 a CONSERVATIVE Supreme Court carefully considered the facts, not the religious beliefs, regarding human development and the assignment of human rights. After a year of serious deliberation these smart men came to the decision that abortion is legal till the fetus has achieved the possibility of being viable outside the womb, till the third trimester. Since then a truly ignorant and shameful propaganda campaign has convinced half the country that the Gerber baby is writing poetry at the zygote stage and that health care professionals are murders that must be stopped by any means necessary. That is the true evil in this misunderstanding.
14
Mike Holloway---Were you aware that there is a nasty little clause in the Republican Tax that could be used to overturn the 1973 Supreme Court ruling ? It grants the potential parent or parents of a fetus in utero (a/k/a an unborn child) the right to take the parental deduction...and...opens the door to the granting of personhood to a fetus.
9
The forced control over women from these right wing zealots is frightening. Abortion is a terrible choice, but one made by the pregnant woman, no one else. This is the same group that is against birth control. They are really against sex for anyone, but themselves, and hypocrites. How many of these "esteemed" GOPers, have only 2 children per family? Do they abstain or use birth control? Really.
7
I'm starting to believe the the only way to get rid of the democracy-destroying justices on OUR United States Supreme Court is for a grassroots. physical movement to DEMAND THE RESIGNATION OF GORSUCH, THOMAS, and ROBERTS.
We can get rid of judges at other levels, with our votes and pressure on lawmakers to appoint socially conscious appellate judges, but the only way to get rid of United States Supreme Court justices is to put so much pressure on the democracy-destroyers that they will decide it's not worth it.
The vast majority of Americas approve of abortion and it is legal in The United States of America. WE THE PEOPLE must not allow a few socially unconscious, radical religionists to take away a Woman's Right To Choose What She Does With Her Own Body. It is a Woman's Inalienable Right, given to her by HER creator.
4
"Claims by private parties for not following laws that they believe would make them complicit with evil can be bold, as they were in the contraception case, though are hardly unprecedented."
I've been thinking about the "moral objection" by any groups who have employees and have to provide health care.
They object to birth control by incorrectly concluding it's ending a life, and they morally refuse to participate even by signing a paper in the potential legal taking of a life.
So - they shouldn't even be allowed to have paid employees, since paying average citizens means taxes will be going to federal government (military, plus still potential federal death penalty out there, I think). States that still have the death penalty would also be supported by these organizations paying money that will be taxed.
They're not trying to stop having employees, they're just picking and choosing their moral application.
6
What is this purported "constitutional right to an abortion?" It is a disputed decision handed down by the Supreme Court 40 years ago. It was a political marker that held the line for a time. It was never a clearly enunciated principle of the constitution. Abortion "rights" as a collateral exercise of an invented right to "privacy" was an ingeniously engineered interpretation devised to satisfy a political agenda. Under Trump, as we all know, that disputed interpretation is going away.
It is fake news to assert that the constitution grants a woman the right to an elective abortion. Nine unelected people in a different political climate made that grant. They used the constitution as their fig leaf. Nine others in the present time can rewrite the grant or rescind it completely, using the constitution the same way. Ditto by the way for gay rights. Or gun rights.
The problem is that our Supreme Court is no different from the one that meets in the holy city of Qom. Both courts have exclusive authority to infallibly interpret foundational scripture as their country's basic law.
It is ironic that America is a nation that is essentially Reformationist in character, yet we are adamantly refused the right to read our founding scriptural text for ourselves. The Republicans lately seem eager to bring back the sale of indulgences. Meanwhile, Hillary's supporters have, for the past year, subsisted largely on a diet of worms.
3
The right to an abortion is routed in the right to privacy and the right to make decisions about one's own body. What you seem to fail to realize is that women who have already been born are human beings with rights which are paramount to the rights of a fetus which cannot exist independently of them
11
The Supreme Court is designated by the Constitution to INTERPRET law. So of course it will interpret what 18th century white male landowners wrote in a way that applies to today's citizens. As for "founding scripture", most of the founding fathers were not Christian in the current right-wing evangelical sense but deists. They used history, philosophical texts by a range of thinkers, and English law as basis of the Constitution, not the Bible.
As to my right to an abortion, it's crystal clear in several amendments.
Fourth Amendment: No unreasonable search and seizure of my uterus.
Ninth Amendment: "enumeration of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage other rights retained by the people" which means your right to practice religion can't be used to force me to submit to its strictures.
Fourteenth Amendment: "...nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property." I have full liberty to pursue my life with or without pregnancy. This is so obvious it makes me laugh that people twist it to be anything other than that. If I decide a pregnancy will impede my constitutional right to pursue life and liberty, who are you to tell me the Fourteenth Amendment doesn't mean exactly what it says?
As Justice Kennedy stated, "These matters, involving the most intimate and personal choices a person may make in a lifetime, choices central to personal dignity and autonomy, are central to the liberty protected by the Fourteenth Amendment."
11
While I'm not in favor of denying people what they are legally determined to have a right to, I'm not sure why abortion counseling and crisis pregnancy groups are being vilified. Having an abortion is a big decision, and a 17 year old girl, in prison, and on her own in a strange country, of all people, should be able to discuss the implications of having an abortion or deciding to be a mother in a judgement free environment. I get that most prisons and the DOJ are not likely to offer much in the way of compassionate support, but people working in crisis pregnancy centers genuinely want to help. If people like Ms. Greenhouse actually wanted women to have a real choice, they would support the idea of people who simply want to help. No one should feel the need to have an abortion because they literally have no other options, just as no one should feel compelled to continue their pregnancy because they believe they will be shunned for having an abortion. Greenhouse is wildly pointing fingers everywhere she can, but I'm not seeing much in the way of self examination. As an aside, I have met Bishop Zubik and he is a kind man. He would undoubtedly show compassion for this young woman, rather than throwing her into a cell or shoving her back to the place she felt desperate enough to run away from. Advocating for religious freedom is not the same as denying the needs of others. Sweeping him into the same category as someone as cruel and heartless as Arpaio is simply incorrect.
5
"Crisis pregnancy groups" are being vilified because they do not seek to further the woman's interests; rather, they lie and deceive in an attempt to persuade her to give birth. They are the exact opposite of a judgment free environment and are usually run by religious groups. They don't simply want to "help," they want to get a "save" -ie convince a woman to do all the work of gestating and raising a baby she didn't want so they can pat themselves on the back.
Do some research and stop being naive. This phenomenon is well documented.
18
The intention of opening spaces for people to discuss pregnancy options is great. Unfortunately, many anti-choice groups open 'crisis pregnancy centers' to scare teens away from abortion and pressure them into carrying a pregnancy to term. These centers don't truly provide the 'judgement-free' environment you suggest this teen required.
12
Crisis centers may want to "help" but only on their own right-wing, religious terms. That means these places do NOT give any information whatsoever about the option of abortion. That means less choice, not more choice. The only purpose of these centers is to trap women in their pregnancies, not meaningfully explore both ending and keeping them. Planned Parenthood lays all options on the table, including continuing the pregnancy and the necessary pre-natal care. How can anyone see a religiously-based pro-pregnancy center as a better option?
12
In 1916 Margaret Sanger was arrested for providing birth control (diaphragms).
In the judge's ruling he stated that "women do not have the right to copulate with a feeling of security that there will be no resulting pregnancy."
That is the widely held belief of Mike Pence and many of the Republican base. Every woman and heterosexual man in this country needs to paste that quote on their bathroom mirror. We don't need to move back to the 20th (18th, 13th) century.
29
The theocratic state seems well established.
6
Let's let Maureen Dowd weigh in on this -- she worked harder than Trump-Pence to defeat Hillary Clinton.
13
GOP definition of life: whatever it takes to get the evangelicals and Catholics on board. If that means an undifferentiated clump of cells is a person, then that's what they'll do. What they won't do is care one whit about a person once they are actually born. Unless they are rich...and white...and male...and Christian. Spend millions on lawsuits preventing an abortion? Check. Spend millions making sure those pregnant women can get family leave or medical coverage for their pregnancy? No. The party of "family values" is a cabal of old white philandering men determined to punish women for being women. They would love to go back to a day where a woman's place is barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen and subservient to the will of her patriarchal master.
13
Shame on every woman who votes for these republicans, and who voted for the disgusting Trump.
These old men will never, ever understand that a stranger's pregnancy is none of their business. And they will never stop dumping children as soon as they are born.
26
It’s an undeniable fact: Jane Doe’s lawyers rushed the abortion before it could be appealed, for no reason but deny an appeal from being filed in the first place. Not surprisingly, The Times gave a pass to that audacious move, no editorials, no open comments, no nuthin’.
To their credit, and given the bar for their objectivity is low on this issue, The Times didn’t also openly glee. Ditto for Ms. Greenhouse, although she does rehash stale arguments (on everything but the ACLU’s sneaky behavior).
Let’s be clear what the ACLU did when they sneak-rushed the abortion: obstruction of justice, in parallel, contempt of the highest court in the nation. Not to mention violation of protocol and basic courtesy. In other words the ACLU acted like the bunch of ends-justifies-means leftist socialists that they clearly are. Had they *not*, an appeal would definitely have been filed, and SCOTUS, without doubt, would have heard it.
Two, repeat, TWO, institutions, got undermined by the ACLU with their flawed end-justifies-means juvenile misconduct. The DOJ, and also SCOTUS, denied from hearing the appeal.
Therefore, the first order of business for SCOTUS is to reprimand the ACLU in no uncertain terms. Then, the merits of the case, which, imho, favors DOJ.
But first, grant DOJ their day in court, denied, in childish fashion, by the ACLU. And ensure, with ruling and therefore precedent, that gimmicks such as these, have life-altering consequences. Yup, like early abortion of careers. Bah.
5
Uh, you do realize that they got her the abortion because she needed to terminate the pregnancy at that time? You understand that pregnancies don't simply stop because there's a court case pending, yes? I know that women's reproductive health is difficult for cons like you to understand, but come on.
10
@C
Jane was at least 4 weeks away from the legal deadline of 20 weeks when she was rushed to abort. Nonetheless, nice try, amusing though! Come up with more? ACLU lawyers need all the help they can get to wriggle out of this one. Do share here.
3
"...obstruction of justice, in parallel, contempt of the highest court in the nation. Not to mention violation of protocol and basic courtesy."
You're joking, right?
Obstruction of justice? Trump firing the FBI director in Nixonian fashion because of, as he publicly stated, the investigation to his campaign's relationship with Russia as it sought to undermine our democracy.
Contempt of the highest court of the nation? Trump's repeated verbal and caustic attacks on the justices that ruled against his travel bans and judges who ruled against his companies' corruption.
Violation of protocol and basic courtesy? Trump has signal-handedly attacked and destroyed basic courtesy in hundreds of foul and noxious tweets and statements that parents all over the country are shielding from their children.
Trump has created and blessed the current atmosphere you decry and the ACLU has every right to operate in a fashion the president has condoned. If you're unhappy with it, start at the top to effect change. Trump is the problem, not the ACLU.
5
In paragraph 4 Ms. Greenhouse wrote ".......in federal custody as an undocumented immigrant, from exercising her constitutional right to an abortion." Please help me understand how an 'undocumented immigrant' has access to constitutional rights.
6
"No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/immigration/255281-yes-illegal-ali...
4
Women should pay for their own abortions. The rest of America doesn't want to hear about it. Abortion is such a dry and foolish topic.
Just like how women say that men should pay for their prostrate exams and Viagra, women should pay for their own abortions. What you don't like for yourselves, you shouldn't want for others.
2
women do pay for their own abortions
11
So, Bob, stay off this thread and out of discussions regarding abortion if you think it's "dry and foolish". Incredible, the complete disconnect from the lives of actual American women like me. When I was pregnant in high school, my life and the incredible opportunities I've had would have been destroyed if it weren't for the "dry and foolish" abortion I was able to freely access. If you're sick of hearing about it, then vote for people who will leave the decision to women to make in private and not the right-wing religious loudmouths who won't leave Roe v Wade alone. They're the ones disrupting your peace, not the women who are just trying to get on with their lives after an unwanted pregnancy.
Furthermore, there's nothing anywhere that says anyone other than women themselves are paying for abortions. What are you talking about? We're discussing the actual right to get an abortion, not having someone else pay for it.
And since when is one man in Edison, NJ "the rest of America"?
13
Abortion is the pregnant woman’s decision. End of discussion.
16
Most awful part of this is that it's obvious that Trump personally doesn't care one iota about abortion, he's just playing to his misogynistic base, with zero consideration of who gets hurt, as long as it isn't him. Appalling.
18
Don't underestimate how important ending abortion is to right-to-life people. In recent years, there have been more than 600,000 abortions a year in the US. At one point, it was more than a million. If you think these are human beings being murdered--which is the argument of prolifers--then this is a colossal holocaust.
So, a candidate runs for office who is an obnoxious, misogynist pig, but he will appoint supreme court justices who will end these ongoing mass murders? Once he became the only choice likely to do so, it's not hard to see why prolifers overlooked his behavior.
3
Stay out of Women's choices. Men and Women can own guns and take a life as well. Just stay out of peoples choices
6
Let’s call it what it is: fanaticism, pure and simple.
14
pro-life: wrong
pro-choice: wrong
pro-abortion/anti-pregnancy/anti-procreation: right
procreation is the mother of all evils. ALL pregnancies should be aborted as early as possible. abortion is mercy. end the cycle of death and suffering.
"Again I looked and saw all the oppression that was taking place under the sun:
I saw the tears of the oppressed—
and they have no comforter;
power was on the side of their oppressors—
and they have no comforter.
And I declared that the dead,
who had already died,
are happier than the living,
who are still alive.
But better than both
is the one who has never been born,
who has not seen the evil
that is done under the sun."
Ecclesiastes 4:1-3 NIV
"... a pregnant 17-year-old, an “unaccompanied minor” in federal custody as an undocumented immigrant, from exercising her constitutional right to an abortion."
There was a time, when only US citizens had constitutional rights. At that same time, this woman would've been in a hurry to document the child – thru birth.
If the Justice Department is not an outpost for a National Right to Life Committee, what good is it?
If the ‘16 Election was the planning of Operation Overlord. The result was the success of the mission. Optimism leaped within the womb i.e. attic. Uh oh … , the Bulge, i.e., many to never see a Hanukah menorah. “Will the allies ever get here?” “Maybe the Russians will get here first”, i.e., pass the gestational limits. Meanwhile, they’ll trust Miep, e.g. Right to Life. And hope they’re not betrayed, nor detected too being noisy in … Imagine the angst of those innocents? Imagine the guilty, hearing survivors decry ‘never again’!
One of the greatest responsibilities of a civilized government is to protect the rights of those who cannot protect their rights themselves.
If you understand that there is a life, who has an inalienable right to liberty and the pursuit of happiness, at stake in an abortion then the State taking a position to speak and act to safeguard life makes perfect sense.
Consider this:
The NYT has run several pieces on gun control after the recent church shooting. If it is not too soon to talk about gun control, before the victims are even waked, is it too soon to talk about the loss of the eight-week (8) pregnancy one of the deceased victims had?
“The majority of abortions in 2013 took place early in gestation: 91.6% of abortions were performed at ≤=13 weeks’ gestation.…” Source: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/65/ss/ss6512a1.htm.
Check your emotions and be honest: Was the eight-week pregnancy another murder victim or not?
Should a perpetrator who kills a pregnant woman and ends the pregnancy be punished more severely, or is the pregnancy not a factor?
Do a gut check.
Finally, politicians are beholden to voters: Those who get abortions vote, those who receive abortions do not.
5
A fetus is life according to some but not all religions. If the government declares a fetus a life, then it is endorsing some religions over others, and some religions over no religion. That violates the First Amendment, which, keep in mind was written by men who were against a state religion and were for the most part unaffiliated with any particular religious order.
4
Who cares about pig fetuses?
A human fetus is a human being. That's not (just) religion: that's science; that's logic.
1
I have checked my emotions and am being brutally honest. An eight week pregnancy is NOT in any way a murder victim. Being honest means admitting to the scientific fact that there is no way at all that an 8 week fetus can live independently of its host and as such is not entitled to any status separate from said host until it is able to do so.
But maybe it could be prosecuted as grand theft of personal property of the pregnant women if her actual murder in and of itself isn't enough of a felony for you.
2
forced pregnancies - sexual harassment in another form
9
This is one of a zillion reasons why we have to get Trump and the Republicans out of office. Democrats have to retake the presidency, the House, and the Senate so they can get rid of all these anti-abortion zealots and replace them with normal people. In addition, we need to be careful what we wish for. If Trump gets impeached we get Mike Pence, and he is a certifiably crazy religious wacko. Better to defeat Trump at the ballot box than give Pence a chance to become an incumbent president with all the power incumbency bestows on a candidate.
8
At a time when they are doing all that they can to get rid of birth control...
They say they care about life, but they don't. They only care about the fetus. Similarly they say they care about justice, but they don't they only care about their agenda.
What they seem to fantasize about - that they will get is a lot of white babies - this plays to the ongoing racism of this administration.
Since they desire control over bodies...every time a woman is forced to carry an unwanted child a random responsible white man should be picked up and imprisoned for the duration of her pregnancy, then he has to give up 25% of his income and also he'll need to raise the child every other week and weekend for the next 18 years...This does not have all of the violence of rape or incest but, like their ill considered agenda, it certainly would wreck lives.
5
Yeah, let's go back to the 1950s and '60s when as many as 10,000 women died each year from illegal abortion. Women on Web is already ramping up to add the US to it's list of countries they will supply with illegal abortion pills. Women are already setting up Underground Railways to get women out of the US to states that will never outlaw abortion, where they can safely terminate their pregnancies. Women are already preparing to set up new "Jane" projects.
The fact that all of this is happening points up how fascist this regime is.
8
So, religion belief trumps (pun intended) the law? Isn’t that unconstitutional? Can restaurants now refuse to serve women who don’t wear a hijab?
5
Funny how the whole country is held captive to the inane religious beliefs of the superstitious and republican. Funny as well is that humans keep reinventing this god in their own likenesses. Anyone for a nice god who won't let my wife die in child birth because some divine inspiration thought by some television evangelist?
6
I am pro-choice, but if you want to take away my guns, then don't expect me to care about your inability to get an abortion.
3
Why do you think the right to bear arms is absolute and subject to no exceptions? If the government can execute searches without warrants in exigent circumstances, then why can't it ban certain types of guns or ammunition?
2
And I'll go further than statueofliberty in saying that as we ask of gun owners, I'm happy to accept some compromises to my right to an abortion, such as no at-will abortion beyond the point of fetal viability except in cases of gross fetal genetic and developmental abnormalities or the life of the mother is in danger. There is always room for compromise in any of these matters and our society would benefit tremendously if opposite sides would just stop being so absolutist in eliminating all guns or all abortions.
2
Since when did you think that your "right" to an abortion is subject to no restrictions?
This is just another example of the conservative religious crusade against reproductive freedom and human sexuality in general. Its not a coincidence that the same groups that oppose contraception and ANY abortion are the same dogmatic bigots regarding LGBTQ human rights. The catholic church's obsession with sexuality that they can't control is particularly relevant to this case and the government officials behind it. Their long standing history of child sexual abuse coincides with much of the church's history of shame and repression of all those they designate as sexually sinful. We need no lessons on human sexuality & reproductive rights from an institution complicit in the disposal of dead children whose very existence was considered sinful in a septic tank in Tuam Ireland. (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/10/28/world/europe/tuam-ireland... Their hypocrisy is what is truly shameful, why else would they go to such lengths to hide it behind clever word games and legal trickery.
5
I wish we would at last and forcefully reclaim the motto "Right to life" and place it where it rightfully belongs: in the hands of all who know that the Sandy Hook victims, and all gun violence victims, had a right to expect their government to protect THEIR right to live without being terrorized by paranoid, violence-loving, arsenal-addicted, concealed-weapon-bulging fools who have perverted the word "freedom" beyond all moral sense.
4
Forced childbirth is slavery. Abortion is rarely a good thing, but slavery is always much worse.
11
Notice how the worrisome future of the life of the baby (or the lack of same due to its' murder via abortion), is never mentioned by Linda Greenhouse or the Times. Concern for human life is apparently beyond the worldview of the Times.
And if it not a baby, then why is someone who kills a child in the womb charged with murder? If it's not a person, as the pro-abortionists claim, how can you murder it? Yet another logical inconsistency by the left.
2
Would you have taken care of Jane doe's child? Or any other woman if they aren't able to care for a child they were legally forced to have? Will you also vote for laws that feed, clothe, and school other children by women who weren't allowed to have a choice?
Bet you won't.
6
Were my wife and I still of the appropriate age to adopt, we most certainly would, Traci. Unfortunately, we aren't, but there are other people of faith who are. I am curious, though, how you could presume to know what our family would do from half a continent away.
Denying women the right to make decisions over their own bodies again is part of the GOP War on Women.
7
I mourn for them - no, not the unborn, who Noel J. Francisco believes cry out to him - but to the uneducated and uninformed who think the republican party cares about them and thus keeps these scoundrels in office time and time again.
9
Our government will happily sell weapons around the world. It will gladly use those weapons in all manner of wars, declared and undeclared. It refuses to put even the most minor restrictions on the sale of and laws around military-style weapons. Our government is complicit with death Every, Single. Day. Yet it will pull every stop to prevent one young woman from having an abortion? This is utterly ridiculous. It becomes sickening when you consider how vigorously the government has been working to make sure this baby, and others like it, would never receive health care. Who ARE these "pro-life" people and how to they manage such EPIC hypocrisy???!!!
5
Women voted for these people. This is the result. I am now way beyond the age of ever getting pregnant again, but I have a daughter who is not. My only consolation in this dismal situation is that I have the means to be able to take her to any country in world where the procedure is legal and safe. And that consoles me. Otherwise I'd give in to despair over the sheer meanness and cruelty of this horrible administration.
10
An unholy alliance of Catholics, Evangelicals, Pentecostals, and other "right-to-life" advocates, have been attempting to establish their collective Fantasyland belief (and dogma) that a human being is created at conception as the national religion for decades.
They would coerce American women into embracing the right-to-life creed, regardless of any personal beliefs. They have been trying end runs around the SCOTUS abortion rulings for decades with state legislators trying to pass fetal "heartbeat" bills, regardless of whether lungs are formed yet, They even stooped so low as to attempt including an unborn fetus as one of the murder victims at the Texas church shooting.
Now these Fascists of the Soul may actually be in position, after decades of trying, to actually coerce the Nation into espousing their cult's dogma as the National Religion of America. It should surprise no one if the next SCOTUS nominee takes the oath of office using a Vulgate or Septuagint translation of the Bible to establish Church priorities as this of America.
6
One of the greatest responsibilities of a civilized government is to protect the rights of those who cannot protect their rights themselves.
If you understand that there is a life, who has an inalienable right to liberty and the pursuit of happiness, at stake in an abortion then the State taking a position to speak and act to safeguard life makes perfect sense.
Consider this:
The NYT has run several pieces on gun control after the recent church shooting. If it is not too soon to talk about gun control, before the victims are even waked, is it too soon to talk about the loss of the eight-week (8) pregnancy one of the deceased victims had?
“The majority of abortions in 2013 took place early in gestation: 91.6% of abortions were performed at ≤=13 weeks’ gestation.…” Source: MMWR.2016;65(12);1–44.
Check your emotions and be honest: Was the eight-week pregnancy another murder victim or not?
Should a perpetrator who kills a pregnant woman and ends the pregnancy be punished more severely, or is the pregnancy not a factor?
Do a gut check.
Finally, politicians are beholden to voters: Those who get abortions vote, those who receive abortions don not.
2
Ms. Greenhouse, your argument fails the vast majority of abortion cases. Rape and incest make up less than 1% of abortions. You have succeeded in painting the worst and saddest scenario, and expect our sympathies to carry us to the conclusion that murdering unborn children is all right.
You may counter by saying it isn't murder, but the Times is running an article at the moment detailing the breakdown of the horrific shooting in Texas--"10 women, seven men, eight children, and the unborn fetus carried by one of the victims." You cannot pick and choose when to define life and who deserves to have it.
5
A world turned upside down? You're arguing that an illegal immigrant, & so every woman in the world, has a constitutional right to an abortion? Truly bizarre.
3
Much of this could be avoided if the supreme court allowed supposed self-governing Americans to make abortion policy through normal legislative means. Justice Kennedy can't retire soon enough.
2
Ms. Greenhouse writes, “When Senator Jeff Flake, the Arizona Republican, gave his retirement speech on the Senate floor last month, declaring that ‘I will not be complicit’ in what he described as the country’s loss of moral authority, . . . .” Yes, the country has lost its moral authority; it lost it once it condoned, not legalized, but merely condoned abortion, which I and other Americans consider nothing short of the systematic murder of the unborn. I see nothing morally good in abortion. Thank you.
5
All the disgusting blowhard outrageousness off Trump has a way of overshadowing and distracting from all the behind the scenes tactics this administration is taking, right now, that have a very real impact on human lives. Thank you, Linda, for your insights and shining more light on the ugly realities of republican retrograde politics in 2017. The more awareness we have, the better prepared we can be to fight to preserve our constitutional rights and moral dignity.
2
If America sees fit to force unwanted childbirth onto its women and girls, America had best be prepared for infanticide on a grand scale. Personally, unable to harm a child, I'll be more inclined to find my inner Lorena Bobbit in the name of prevention. In any case, Bannon doesn't know what disruption is. Thought the Civil War was uncivil? Don't try this.
3
So, a couple of questions for the incredulous Ms. Greenhouse. And before we go further, let me stipulate that I'm vehemently pro-choice, but virulently anti ILLEGAL immigrant.
Who paid for Jane Doe's abortion?
What if ICE had simply deported her - I would assume that would negate her "constitutional" rights; an idea by the way that I find abhorrent for non-citizens.
4
If women could be prevented from having an abortion under any circumstances, perhaps we should outlaw heart operations for GOP legislators at all levels of government, since they don't seem to have hearts. Or brains.
4
To these men (and women who fawn and pander to them to obtain reflected power), women are not humans, women are property. Girls are conditioned to be owned in this country. They are taught their own names are worthless and should be discarded when they marry so they can be branded with their husband’s name to declare his ownership of them. We were complicit when we said nothing of Barack Obama’s ownership of his wife as his property - Mrs.
Barack Obama (Of Barack). It is uncomfortable for men and women who do not believe they treat women as an object to be owned to realize their own family’s naming structure is a fundamental part of de-humanizing women. We think the Trumps of the world treat women as something to be owned and controllled, but we fail to look in the mirror to see our “family name” is only a man’s name branding. Women can be so easily turned into factories to produce humankind because even our “nice family practices” erase women (from their own family and the children they produce) and reduce them to property to be owned.
1
The problem with this contrived political debate over abortion rights, is that the Politicians understand that there is no absolute clear path....but they use FEAR to corral the voters one way or the other without any resolution or de-fusing of the issue!!
The Supreme Court made it clear.....abortion is a medical issue, to which an individual(the woman) has a right to authorize a medical proceedure. The Supreme Court did NOT, however, and declare that a doctor or hospital has an Obligation to provide such services....which is precisely where the Abortion Rights Activists have pushed the debate......FORCING hospitals and doctors to offer the service, with the threat of loss of Federal $$$ if they refuse.
As most sane, independent thinking Americans understand....if one hospital refuses to perform abortion....there is inevitably another hospital on the other side of town that WILL perform abortions. The insanity of this issue now becomes one of Federal Bureaucratic Rules over-riding local concerns. We used to call this "Authoritarianism" or even "Fascism".
As an American....I do not understand why anyone who lives in NY would want to force a TX hospital to perform abortions.....nor do I understand why, to what practical purpose, TX would want to prevent someone in NY from getting an abortion..........except for the uncontrolled use of Fed Tax $$$ to coerce one group or the other to do its arbitrary bidding.
And we're back to stupid politics.........
If any person who wants to preserve women's reproductive freedom hopes that Trump will leave and Pence will take his place as POTUS had better think again.
Pence will do every thing in his power to drive this country to a patriarchal theocracy.
He is the most dangerous person in the Trump administration.
4
Thank you Ms. Greenhouse for your sage columns. It appears this is the beginning of four years of judicial manipulation. Please write a column on the hijacking of the judiciary by McConnell. For the originalists are being nominated to lifetime appointments that will turn the law into a pretzel.
1
Republicans are hypocrites. they claim to hate government, but want to use it to control women's health. They claim to love children, but only until they are born - then it doesn't matter whether they have access to health care, good schools, clean water, etc.
Unless and until we all recognize this, we will move backward to when "women were seen and not heard," and "women were met to be barefoot and pregnant." (to ensure that we have a viable workforce for the future (as one WI legislator recently stated).
To all women - pay close attention! Run for office. And, please, please vote in every election.
3
According to these religious zealots, their bible instructs them to protect the unborn and their 'right to life'. Why, then, do these same religious zealots work so diligently to remove prenatal care to the mother, refuse to mandate paid parental leave, remove medical care for poor children, restrict SNAP (food stamps) and school meal programs, remove pollution (EPA) standards that imperil health?
It will be illuminating if this religious zealot groups will quote their scripture justifying ALL of their actions. Until them, they are far less than the persons God created OR if (their) God created them in His image . . .we all must think about that!
4
Will we start seeing immigrants flooding into our country to have an abortion? Will we become an abortion sanctuary country? I pray to God this does not happen. This prospect is very frightening.
1
It would be a wonderful thing for the U.S. to: Be an abortion sanctuary country.
2
Rea Tarr,
The US will never become an abortion sanctuary country as long as the Trump administration is in office. They need to put another Supreme Court justice on the bench. Hopefully it will happen soon.
1
Well done, Ms. Greenhouse! I am furious, beyond upset and wishing America could be done with Trump, Pence and all the anti-abortion Republicans.
16
The Supreme Court, a once- upon- a- time respected institution considered the ultimate site for justice to be upheld, has lost all credibility as it becomes partisan. Especially concerning when we men try to decide on things that only affect women (even as we contribute to their predicament), and certainly not our moral right to decide for them what decision is the appropriate one in a given circumstance. Arpaio's abuse ought to be intolerable to a society where women are an integral part of human relations. That the Supreme Court (men in the majority, republicans, by the way) refused to slam Arpaio's cruel stupidity is appalling.
7
The GOP and this administration have gerrymandered states, cities and now the courts. Before you know it, it will be the Trump Supreme Court and a very bigoted body indeed. Where are we to turn without the rule of law? They will rule with an iron fist. Sound familiar?
3
So, where are the arguments for "religious freedom" that have brought to the Supreme Court a bakery owner's ability to deny service to those whom his version of religion opposes. (He argues his cakes are artistic expressions allowing him to discriminate based on his religion). The religious freedom argument vanishes when it comes to women's health care rights. Look at religious laws of all peoples and see if they hold that a person exists from the second an egg meets a sperm. They don't. Further, why does all of this sanctity of life stop at birth, where health care funding for children, pregnant mothers, and regular women and men are being cut or eliminated. And, what about education as well as job opportunities for this sperm/egg person? They also seem to stop at birth. Could this be the old punish the poor and the women reemerging as a new "protection" of eggs and sperms people? With our new pro life rules and laws, will we still see the Representative Murphy exception to ant abortion for those egg/sperm persons who are politically inconvenient? Why aren't more people upset about this hypocracy?
7
These words stopped me short: "Suppose Jane Doe had not been able to get her abortion in time. She would soon be giving birth to a United States citizen. Then what? The administration doesn’t say."
6
It's evil intent is obvious, but the GOP is going to be more effective just at making such displays of malice than they will be at having real long term effects on abortion. The technology and pharmacology of managing pregnancies has become too small, accessible, pervasive, inexpensive, and proven for the Republicans to control. There are too many people who use it and too many who support its use in principle for them ever to achieve any effective prohibition. This all in the end is another Conservative exercise in retrogressive stupidity that's already backfiring against them, as well it should. The ostensible party of small government is learning yet again that they can't legislate reality.
31
Abortion rights were slowly removed from El Salvador. It is easy to think that is just a backwards country with thugs in office. But they were progressive enough at one point to have legal abortions. Countries CAN move backward on these laws. They just can, especially when people are not paying attention. I believe that is why they are trying out new language and approaches to the laws on immigrants....they thought no one would pay attention or care. They are wrong. This article is so important! We can easily become a "backwards country with thugs in office". After paying attention, we must act!
7
Conservatives - small government? Hypocrites is what they are. Why can't they mind their own business. All moderates should be voting against this unwanted intrusion into the private lives of citizens and non-citizens alike.
6
The Republicans have sold their souls long ago to religious zealots for votes. No one cares about these women or the children they bring into the world. They cut medicaid which helps these poor women. There is also demonstrated a sort of meanness and punitive attitude toward women demonstrated by men and some women. They give these often single moms no help and tremendous responsibility as heads of their families but try to stop them from their lawful right to control their own reproductiveness, as if that is the one aspect of their life they can't make a decision about. Does anyone remember there is separation of state and church? Your salvation is no one but your own business. So much for less government, ha.
8
If a child is born while the mother is in immigration detention within the U.S., is it automatically a U.S. citizen? (And thereby a de facto anchor baby?)
I'm sure this consequence would have the Trump administration changing its tune real quick....
2
The same people who value the unborn child so much that any means to prevent an abortion is acceptable almost universally oppose or fail to support most measures that would help to the child they saved from abortion. What sort of twisted minds can value the fetus so much while rejecting the feeding, medical care and education of the same life once it is outside the womb. Abortion is a terrible act and should be rare but unless and until the " pro lifers" embrace the post born with the same passion as the pre born they will in my eyes be hideous, hypocritical, sadists.
13
Great article but It's an old story--move the goal posts and abortion proponents seem inept at responding or moving them in a different direction.
2
"Given those options, the government was under no obligation to facilitate Ms. Doe’s abortion."
This argument is a particularly bad "straw man." The government was actively PREVENTING Doe's abortion. No one ever asked for them to "facilitate" anything. The government did not need to pay for, arrange or perform the abortion. All of that had been taken care of by outside parties. The issue was that the government would not ALLOW her abortion, not whether or not they would "facilitate" it.
10
Once the so called religious right succeeds in imposing even some of their moral values on the nation as a whole, the steps toward a theocracy in America will likely quicken. Herein lies the real threat.
7
Overturning Roe vs. Wade will bring the decision about abortion back to the states. As a MA resident I am confident that there will remain safe and legal abortion options, same as I remain confidence that if Obamacare goes away, MA will go back to its own healthcare law.
If people want their daughters, their wives have the option of safe and legal abortion they need to go to the polls. Why is it that the East Coast and West Coast liberals have to remain the adults in the house, and constantly get belittled as being liberal elitists.
7
True. We are really battling for the rights of our fellow Americans here; we are fighting for poor black and brown girls and women in Texas and Mississippi whose rights are impaired by their repressive, conservative governments. We can't give up on them.
3
This is the genius of the forced childbirth movement. It's very easy to get middle class voters to ignore the plight of an undocumented immigrant, when they enjoy their own reproductive autonomy in the privacy of their own physician's office. We should remember that the movement has never been satisfied with their own considerable progress, and they have us in their sights.
2
Ms. Greenhouse,
Your article demonstrates, once again, that the self styled right to "life" movements are nothing more or less than forced birth movements. These are the very same groups and individuals who seek to remove the social safety net for those who are actually living in need.
11
If you do not protect the freedoms you have, you may not keep them for long.
At this point, the whole pro-forced-birth movement is full of horrible people. I do not know anyone who supports abortion. Abortion is always a bad thing. It is just that preventing them is worse in most situations. But sadly, we have lost the ability to thoughtfully analyze this and realize that first instinct (protect the fetus) may not be the right thing to do at all times.
That said, current support for Roe-vs-Wade is 5-4. One vacancy this year and it is likely gone. The same people who are voting for this will regret it.
Just like, you realize Obama was so good when he is gone.
42
do from mi.
I encourage Adoption over Abortion.
I and my wife adopted two children who were abandoned by their parents
and raised them. Both had medical problems from birth.
They enjoyed the lives they lived and I don't think anyone had or has the
right to say your should never have been born.
Are we "horrible people" ?
Later on we worked in an orphanage in Zimbabwe for orphan babies
who had AIDS until one of Mugabe's henchmen decided they wanted
the land the orphanage was on and closed it.
Were we "horrible" people to help take those babies/children ?
Sadly there are some children who will die in the womb and some
who will be born dying and some who will die in the days following birth.
Even more sadly is the use of abortion as a post-contraceptive where
healthy babies, girls and boys, are killed in the womb because they are
an inconvenience to the Mother/Parents.
A small percentage of abortions are done for purely medical reasons.
Were the Supreme Court to overturn "Roe-vs-Wade", which they should
because it is un-constitutional, each State would still retain the right to
write their own Abortion Laws.
One can hope that mothers will choose Adoption over Abortion whenever
possible.
Up next: the war against contraception. Birth control pills and condoms cause abortions, too. No, no, don't ask how this works. Just trust that it is so.
11
What are we to make of the spectacle of our American government acting in our name to criminally subvert our laws?
There is no parallel that I am aware of in our history to explain what is openly going on. We see it time after time--with healthcare, immigration, taxes and more: An overt claim of 'tax reform' which happens to enormously and demonstrably benefit the very wealthy at the expense of the rest of us. The attempts to eradicate 'Failing Obamacare' which happens to successfully provide quality healthcare to 23 million of us and now, the instance you cite.
This is McCarthyism in another more pernicious form. A government led by a pure huckster enabled by two craven majority leaders eager to be in bed with power.
And an electorate too besotted to understand what is being done to the delicate fabric of our civility.
I am afraid that this pestilence may have uncovered the softest part of our political union and done permanent damage to our republic.
5
Articles, such as this one, continue to describe, but inadequately explain, the doings, not doings and undoings of a range of elected and selected policymakers.Locally.Regionally.Nationally. Even globally.WE, as readers, need help to understand, as best as is possible, what our options are when THEY, a diverse group of influential policymakers, underpinned by ideological principles of faith, continue not to take personal responsibility.For their ill-spoken-words. Damaging deeds, to our well being. Both known and unknown ones. Measurable as well as not.Temporary and more permanent ones. Daily. Not doing what their elected and selected roles mandate.For ALL of US. A diverse population. In so many ways. As all of US continue, daily, to cope.Function.Adapt as best as we can. In a range of roles in various safe-unsafe situations.Contexts. Networks. Environments.In a constructed and sustained daily, violating, WE-THEY culture. Enabled by each of US at various levels. Qualities.Each of us is entitled to know, and to understand, what our viable options are for making needed changes which "institute" a policymakers’ personal responsibility for what they say and do which they shouldn’t. As well as not saying and doing what they should be. To enable levels and qualities of well being for all.There are no recipes or formulas for all of this.Perfection is as much a myth as certainty. Predictability.Total control.How can OP-EDs help each of US to learn to negotiate “good enough?”
1
When little girls are impregnated there are two lives involved. Why do Republicans always take the side of the unborn fetus? Why are little girls' rights to health, even life, worth nothing? Roe v. Wade was an excellent decision which balanced the rights to life of impregnated women and girls and the evolving fetus they carry throughout pregnancy. Republican party values are severely unbalanced; they turn a blind eye to the rights and needs and medical issues of little impregnated girls, and elevate the right to life of the fetus above all.
6
Roe v. Wade was a horrible decision. Not due to the whole pro/anti abortion debate; that is an area where honest people have vast ands irreconcilable differences of opinion on a matter which cannot really be resolved, but from a purely legal standpoint. It gave legal precedent to a right never put into the Federal Constitution while completely ignoring the ninth and tenth amendments.
This matter should have been up to the individual states to decide. If the decision should be overturned there would be no reason why individual states could not legalize the procedure if they so chose.
2
Great piece from Linda Greenhouse. Her outrage is fully justified.
3
The pro-life/pro-abortion debate has been going on for years and will continue for many years to come. The pro-life movement has been gaining ground with many coming into the movement. People have finally realized that the taking of innocent human life in the womb is serious and is an act of murder.
I am very involved with the pro-life cause as are many like-minded men and women. We have come a long way and will not give up. We have had much success in convincing women to carry their babies to term. We are there to assist them before, during and after birth with housing, jobs and counseling. There are many good people who devote their time and energy to this cause. These women are not alone and we are compassionate and caring. It is what we do.
3
I do not think forcing a little girl who was likely raped to remain pregnant is "compassionate and caring."
3
I strongly believe you can continue that work AND abortion can still be legal. This is not an either-or situation. It is gray...and not all women get the support you and your group provide. I think this is where we should all meet in the middle. Keep abortions legal, but let's all try to minimize how many happen through healthy reproductive education, easy and informed access to birth control and providing strong support once a challenging birth occurs. The work you are doing is good (depending on how supportive, and honest your techniques are for convincing a pregnant women to keep the baby.), but should not be in place of abortion for all.
2
I am hopeful that the government's appeal is rejected with vigor, and even outright disdain. This type of argument should not be accorded any respect It is not grounded in real law, but rather in some vision of what the law should be.
7
I'm not a lawyer so I must be missing something that I've missed since Roe v Wade was decided.
I've never understood the 'privacy' part of the decision. I've wondered if it was just the era that prevented the lawyers from presenting and SCOTUS from deciding abortion rights on the basis of a woman's equal right to determine her own medical care.
Can someone explain why that didn't come up then and never comes up now, even for messaging purposes?
3
I'll give it a whirl.
Because back when Roe was decided women were NOT Constitutionally equal.
Therefore it couldn't be decided on an "equal" rights basis.
Fast forward: The actual "Equal Rights Amendment" came, was okayed to be sent to the states to be ratified by the states..... and then the "Moral Majority", Jerry Falwell and Ronnie Reagan stopped it dead in the water.
"You took too long," they said (72 years)... and then they slapped in their own new amendment ( that was 203 years old and had to do with how the Boyz are paid in a timely fashion).
Women do not have "equal rights". They never have had them, nor do they have them now.
They have Jane Crow Laws and "Titles", but their sole inclusion within the Constitution is that they may vote.
And, THANK YOU, NEVADA, for passing the federal ERA this last March.
Well done!
By the way, South Carolina, your state, is one of those states that has never passed the Equal Rights Amendment. If I'm correct, it was re-introduced in your legislature this year, again. It's languishing there, somewhere.
Give it a nudge along, ay?
2
This is an excellent analysis. Thank you. If anything you understate the problem undocumented immigrants face with respect to constitutional rights.
As you write, "so the administration unleashes its anti-abortion fury on the most vulnerable among us, unaccompanied minors, pregnant and alone, who are here only because they had the gumption or desperation to flee something even worse." Sheriff Joe stayed awake at night thinking of ways to deprive his detainees of all constitutional rights. Now it seems that the Solicitor General is doing the same thing. If SCOTUS refuses to hear this case, as it should, the SG will just keep looking. Unfortunately for most of us he will perservere, just as Sheriff Joe did.
Conversation across the liberal divide is impossible on this issue, as it depends on what is focused on. Pro-Life advocates see abortion as we readers see infanticide, except we do draw a line at a different point in ontogenic development. It's not at "quickening" or even the third trimester but actual birth, but then to kill the child is abhorrent.
I just grabbed this from Wikipedia: "it was even advocated by Aristotle in the case of congenital deformity — "As to the exposure of children, let there be a law that no deformed child shall live" Now no liberal today would agree with this, but why should that hour between in utero and birth change the morality of the act of killing. So, what the Trump administration is attempting is to prevent the unborn in the same way that we would fight to save the living infant- even the deformed one that Aristotle and his peers believe it's fine to kill.
Perhaps if we liberals make an attempt to understand religious conservatives, it could be possible that cross ideology conversation comes back in style, and only that will be an answer to the absolutes that now prevent such conversation.
Not only do the Grand Old Perverts support a good, old-fashioned forced pregnancy and Christian Shariah Law, but they also enjoy a good intellectual rape of Constitutional law and female civil rights to demonstrate their manhood.
Scott Lloyd, Trump's supremely unqualified and religious director of the Office of Refugee Resettlement, co-authored the controversial "conscience rule" in 2008 for Bush-Cheney's Health and Human Services Dept. that allowed healthcare providers to refuse to provide abortions, contraception, end-of-life care, infertility treatments, or family planning care.
In a blog post from 2011, Lloyd called for "savvy state legislators" to require women to get the father's permission before getting an abortion, thus restoring "men's rights" as long as the women didn't "lie."
"They could do this by writing a law that says essentially that women must notify the men of their decision to abort, and gain their consent, except in situations where their reasons for aborting relate to the physical realities of pregnancy," Lloyd wrote.
http://www.businessinsider.com/scott-lloyd-jane-doe-abortion-case-contro...
Women of America - and men of America who respect women - Trump-Pence and the Grand Old Perverts want women and girls to bear their unwanted male sperm whether they want to or not.
The Dark Ages are back.
Vote...vote...vote....and get all your friends and family to register and vote against these medieval Mad Men trying to knock women up.
50
I enjoyed the article until the author mentioned Rosa Maria Hernandez. I have wrestle with the comparison of these 2 cases and feel strongly that these are not the same at all. This is voluntary vs. involuntary which is such a great legal issue. Hospitals along the border cannot be scheduling "free" surgeries for all the residents of Mexico. That is quite a stretch of our resources. When I schedule surgery, it takes a day of paperwork. How was this possible?
2
there was no "free" surgery and the federal gov't did not pay for it.
5
LAMom: When all the residents of Mexico come for "free" surgeries, I'll pay attention to your complaint, which is (I'm being kind here) premature.
3
This prospect worries me, too.
I’m not sure that the attention created by official actions in the plight of the 17-year-old girl who, while in U.S. detention for illegal entry into the U.S., chose to abort and suffers official resistance, isn’t more related to the rights of illegal aliens than to abortion rights generally; but there are plenty of other disturbing indications. The drive to remove the requirement that free contraception be provided by ObamaCare-compliant healthcare policies, as Linda cites, is a leading indicator of coming trouble. The intensifying attempts to narrow, even slightly, the period during which a woman may choose to abort under Roe for any reason, also are disquieting.
Much of Linda’s analysis centers on Ms. Garza’s troubles, when other threats to abortion rights are more pernicious and not conflated with attempts to disincentivize illegal immigration. That’s unfortunate, because the Solicitor General may win this case – the argument that the U.S. government owes Ms. Garza an abortion, even if it’s not paying for it, because it’s illegal in her own culture is the wrong tack to take. And the fate of abortion rights in America is not going to hinge on the fate of unaccompanied minors in CBP/DHS detention.
The real solution lies in the resignation of Jeff Flake, with which Linda concludes. Replacing those who believe in governance-by-religion with more secular leaders is the strategically sensible answer to excessive religion in our governance.
6
Abortion may be a "lawful" procedure. So was barring women from voting and slaves from freedom, Laws that are morally wrong can be changed.
Let's work together to find a solution that gives pregnant women all the help they need to deliver another human being into the world.
Humankind deserves a right to life.
7
no problem - liberating women from unintended pregnancies through widely available family planning techniques has been around for almost a half a century, and is proven to bring women out of poverty, who then take their entire families along with them into a freer life. Those liberated women feel more respected as human beings, more in control of their bodies and their selves, and bring joy to the earth and good life to all around they. We just need to figure out how to keep the bigots and mysogynists out of our pants and pockets. Here's to more realized human beings in the world, including the awakening to empathy and tolerance of many narrow minded religious bigots: we will welcome you with open arms.
3
Someone us just don't want to be forced to have children we don't want. There is no amount of "help" you could give me to deliver a baby because I don't want to.
Nothing deserves a right to my body. End of story.
3
Lake woebegoner - recently, in an Irish hospital, virtually every doctor agreed that if a pregnant woman there did not have an abortion, she and the fetus would die. The Catholic hospital refused, and both died.
If you believe this was wrong, you're pro-choice. By this definition, over 90% (90%, 90%, 90% - please let that sink in...........
of Americans are pro-choice.
It's not ideology that's the problem, it's identity politics. If you're a member of an evangelical church, and your identity is formed by what the church tells you, then that's identity politics poisoning your mind.
Similarly if your identity is wrapped up in a group calling themselves "secular humanists" or any other group.
see David Kinder, "Neither Liberal Nor Conservative." It is barely more than 17% of the population that is familiar enough with political history to formulate a clear sense of what "liberal" or "conservative" mean. The rest (83%) simply go along with their tribe.
Bernie understood this. Hilary did not. To the detriment of the entire planet, Steve Bannon understands it all too well.
Those who understand this will win in 2018 and forever after (at least, until humanity evolves beyond tribalism). Let's hope there are more Democrats than others who understand this.
Beautifully and clearly written expose on the lengths this administration is willing to go to control the bodies and destinies of women. Clearly, the role of women, as seen by Trump's henchmen and their agent, the Catholic Church, is as pleasure objects for men and vessels for production and care of their children.
20
Is someone (like the Little Sisters of the Poor, a nursing home for the impoverished elderly, who were somehow garbled into this disjointed rant of a column) making women have sex? Or telling them they're a prude if they don't want to have sex with an irresponsible man? Nope, that was people like the "hero" of the "sexual revolution", Hugh Hefner. If a woman wants to be sexually active/use birth control/exercise her legal rights, great. But let's not pretend that plenty of supposedly feminist liberals don't see women as actual play things who look cute dressed like bunnies, rather than trying to give sex some actual dignity. Preying on women is endemic, as we have repeatedly seen in the past year.
It appears that turning the Department of Justice into a partisan political squad is sometimes bad... sometimes not worth anyone's attention.
2
It's always amazing to me that the pro-life crowd believes that chipping away, bit by bit, at access to abortion by whatever means necessary (waiting periods, etc) will make abortions rare.
Many of them are also very pro-2nd Amendment who also have no trouble believing that chipping away, bit by bit, at access to guns will do absolutely nothing to make gun violence rare.
I feel more and more that, like Alice, I've gone down some rabbit hole and entered a world where big is little and up is down.
25
And do not forget those that are often "pro-life" are for chipping away at social services and insurance requirements.
11
Now, all of a sudden, when the death of abortion rights is almost at hand, we are supposed to *start* worrying about their future?
As one of the many who have been worried about it all along and felt the futility of trying to get *anyone* to lift more than a finger to protect them, I find that rich.
The time for worrying was when the Republican Party sold its soul to the radical Christian right decades ago. It has been living in Joe Arpaio country since the 80's and has gotten away with bending our political system to its agenda ever since.
Don't anyone say no one noticed when Mitch McConnell and friends flipped from being pro-choice to anti-choice all those years ago and that the destruction of abortion rights has been of the highest priority on the Republican Party agenda ever since. That it wasn't perfectly obvious that when the Republican Party gained control of Congress and state houses across America, they would implement the radical Christian anti-abortion agenda with a vengeance. That they would put men on the Supreme Court for the purpose of overturning Roe v Wade and enshrining personhood for foetuses in the Constitution.
We liberals have been pleading with anyone who would listen to acknowledge the plight of abortion rights and get up and fight for them to no avail for *decades.* By all means, everybody else, start worrying about shutting the door after the horse has already left the barn. Maybe it's not too late.
24
I stopped voting for Republicans in 1980 when the anti-choice plank was written into their party platform.
2
Control. It is about control, and this is a very basic, visceral way to grab it (just like the President likes) from women. This is the easiest, fastest way to let women of the population know they are not equal, they are not protected in the same way, their futures and rights are not as important. The government does not care if pregnancy is a burden, physical and financial. They don't care about a woman's struggle to raise a baby on her own. Republicans don't care once it is born, and their lack of empathy almost makes me think they enjoy perpetuating the cycle of poverty and desperation by limiting family planning options.
54
From whence the underclass military recruits?
What exactly is the outcome for this fetus, young mothers lack the education and support necessary to raise a child, Certainly, the Republicans lack the capacity to use Federal, State, and Local monies to pay for these young citizens who need, shelter, healthcare, education to mention a few. Obviously, the father has just walked away, no further involvement is needed.
The plan is to continue the penalization of this young woman for the rest of her life and that of her child as well. How do these actions benefit America?
17
I'm sure that this is a wrenching time for career Justice Department lawyers. If they stay at their jobs, they are tarred with the brush of this maladministration's depredations on the nation's legal system. But if they leave, they have to fear those who would replace them--likely individuals who have little or no sense of how that system is supposed to work.
At this point, however, those career attorneys should organize a resignation en masse, to show that they will no longer provide cover for Mr. Trump and his cronies.
7
Women have sought and received abortions since the days of Galen in ancient Rome. There will always be women seeking abortions, legal or otherwise. Reducing abortions is accomplished by regular medical care and consultation, and the use of contraceptives, which the GOP seek to either defund and eviscerate, or outlaw.
29
Abortion rights trumps the rights of the unborn fetus in the womb according to those who are pro choice/pro abortion. That is very upsetting and disturbing to those of us who take pro-life very seriously. Pregnancy is not a disease but a wonderful gift. These innocent human beings should not be discarded but cherished. Pro-life is pro woman.
1
Pregnancy is not a gift if it's not wanted.
It's sort of like how sex may be wonderful when it's between two consenting adults who love each other, and completely terrible/the worst thing in the world if it's non-consensual.
Funny that, it turns on consent.
It's very upsetting and disturbing that you think I should be forced to bear a child against my will. Just like it would be disturbing if you thought I should be forced to have sex with a man against my will. I decide who uses my body, not Busybody WMK in New York City. Pro-life is not pro-woman; pro-life is pro-enslavement of women.
7
Pregnancy can often be life threatening the the woman who is pregnant. Pregnancy can happen to a 12 year old raped by a relative. Pregnancy is not anyone's business but the female whose body must carry an unborn fetus to term. It doesn't matter what your personal beliefs are, you and the government have no right to force a woman to carry a pregnancy to term. BTW - until that fetus is born, and can live outside of the uterus, it is not a person, any more than a mole is a human, even though it has living, human tissue!!
2
Has it ever occur to you that for some women an unwanted pregnancy is not a gift of life but rather that of misery? You have no right to impose your believes on others.
6
So long as people of faith claim they are complicit for signing a form enabling birth control, the government is fine to enable the behavior. The minute that is extended to people who are whistle blowing to avoid being complicit (as in Chelsea Manning) or refusing to serve in the military (if the draft ever returns), then suddenly the government defines the behavior as treasonous. When can I not pay taxes as I do not want to facilitate the military actions in 128 countries? It's a matter of conscious.
3
Thank you for this column. We have not seen such overt misogyny in many years, its march forward is truly frightening. Women voters must vote Democratic, their lives may depend on it. African American and Latino voters must vote Democratic, their lives do depend on it.
16
African-Americans and Latinos have voted Democratic for years, and it has not helped them in any sense in terms of economics over the past 40 years. Failing schools, grievance, and dependency is not the way.
Americans--all Americans should reject all parties and vote Independent one of these days. I recently voted Democratic Tuesday. I vote Republicans or Democrats depending on the political environment and the economic conditions. Both parties are not representing America's interests. It is time for a new Independent directions---or else say bye bye to America itself.
When they overrule Roe v Wade, and folks it’s coming after Kennedy retires, the Court won’t bother with an erudite and honest jurisprudential treatise on the due process rights inherent in the Constitution and how the Court has gotten it all wrong since 74.
No, you’ll have a sloppy, disingenuous and jurisprudentially indefensible decision based solely on political considerations.
See, e.g. Citizens United; Shelby County.
That is why parsing the Solicitor General’s latest filing with the Court in an attempt to find any legitimate basis is at best a fool’s errand. There is none, they know it, and don’t care.
8
Jeff Flake is still complicit In some of the worst votes taken to fleece the American public. Just because he is mouthing words to be remembered by when he retires from the Senate does not remove all that he has been complicit in.
And the abortion issue is one of those issues.
Choice of how we live our lives is actually part of the Declaration of Independence, "we are endowed with certain unalienable rights". Bit by bit the Republicans and the Trump Administration are interfering with us to live as we see fit. This includes choice of seeking abortion or not. The fact that this poor child has been used as a political football when it comes to the Right to Choose and Immigration Reform, shows just how desperate these Politicians and their Religious zealots are to get their beliefs converted to a law that will end up taking away our "unalienable rights".
6
Women are a majority of the entire population and have it within their power to seize control of the political system to reform all aspects of their condition in society. As a male voter I hold women responsible for their fate on these matters: if you don't vote, or if you vote without a clear vision of what you want, you have nobody but yourself to blame for all aspects of how women are treated by the political order...
4
The majority of Hispanics are solidly pro-life and very family oriented. The fact that this 17-year old Mexican was seeking an abortion is very surprising and questionable. I do pro-life work where many of those involved are Hispanics and are anti-abortion. Was she coerced into having one by another person? It would be interesting to research this more fully.
WMK: The nationality of Jane Doe has never been revealed, so for you to declare she is Mexican, which from the tone of your comment you despise, is beyond the pale. As many have told you, if you abhor abortion, then don't have one, but keep your opinions to yourself with regards as to whether or not other females should be able to have one. The U.S. is not a theocracy, much to your dismay!
3
Well said, Linda - as always.
But I suspect that that "tomorrow" ( "... describe the law of abortion not as it is today... but as they wish it to be tomorrow...") truly IS coming "tomorrow" or as soon as the R's can get the "Tax Cut" bill passed.
Contained within the tax-cut bill is the definition of what an "unborn child" is.
"An unborn child means a child in utero. A child in utero means a member of the species Homo sapiens, at any stage of development, who is carried in the womb."
This is close to the wording of the "Personhood Amendments" that have been voted on by the states.
Let me point out: Those "Personhood Amendments" have failed every time they have been voted on by the general public.
It's only 25% that are anti-abortion zealots. The rest of the populace is very willing to let stand the common definition of "life", "individual", or "baby" be defined by receiving a birth certificate or the actual drawing of the "first breath".
But the right has grown antsy. It understands that time is running out on them. They've packed every department with fringees who despise birth-control and abortions, but they can be gone in the blink of a new administration's eye.
Why would religious zealots care about a tax-cut for billionaires?
Because in that bill is the wording they want to end Choice, BC and abortion.
Women will breed as the Lord provides.
It is to be "Theocracy" over "Democracy".
Read the fine print in this bill.
They have no intention of waiting on Kennedy.
144
A special thanks to Jill Stein voters, grumbling stayed-at-home Bernie voters, and the US media, whose coverage of Hillary's emalzzzz and "likability" vs her actual substantive platform was at a ratio of 99:1
15
Is it worrisome? Shouldn't abortion be the exception not the rule? Pro-choice rhetoric these days comes across as Pro-abortion. In my opinion, this is a very strange approach. I recommend folks to tread lightly and think critically about the implications of your ideology.
2
it is the republican party which wants to make contraception harder to get. If they were really against abortion because they were "pro-life", they would be acting to ensure that contraception was available and affordable to all to prevent unwanted pregnancies. Instead they enact policies making contraception less available, and cut funding to programs designed to prevent teen pregnancy.
15
You have it exactly backwards. It's the other side that is "anti-choice." For so-called libertarians and small-government proponents, they're awfully quick to extend the government's reach to taking away a woman's liberty ("CHOICE") to do what she needs to do with her own body.
the usa, often a bizarre place, outdid itself a year ago yesterday.
the chickens will continue to come home to roost for an unknown amount of time into the future.
pence is just as bad as trump, but in a different way.
9
“If I wanted the federal government in my uterus I would have slept with a republican congressman.”
That was my favorite sign from the women’s march earlier this year. It’s much worse than we feared then. Why can’t these republicans, so passionate about freedom from government interference, understand that deisions about pregnancy and contraception belong only to the woman—and man—involved.
And, as greenhouse points out, the administration now is fighting their abortion war against the most vulnerable females. Are we all going to have to tske to the streets, dressed like recent protestors in Handmaids Tale robes to make a stronger point?
16
I'm not pro-life or choice, but have a position which both extremes would reject. What always disturbs me when reading advocates on either side is that there is never a nod to the other side, never a possibility that they may have values worth discussing. Instead, the other side is always overtly or impliedly described as evil, stupid or crazy. It's so with all contentious political issues, but maybe most so with abortion.
Not once in Ms. G's column is it considered anywhere, in any example she gives, that there is a life to consider - other than the mother's, and that people who value that fetal life are not bad or clueless for thinking it important to try and preserve it and doing what they can to change the law so that those lives get what she has. I recognize that, like her opponents, Ms. G is motivated by why what she believes are important values, including compassion and empathy, and that her opposite numbers demean her in the same way she demeans them.
I realize that my own beliefs about abortion may be "wrong" - I may change my mind (as I have before) and future generations might look back at us with horror or wonder. I wish there could ever be a public discussion of this important issue without the tunnel-vision and a smidgen of an open mind. Instead it is always a fight between those who are certain and those who have no doubt.
BTW, who did she expect Trump/Pence to put in HHS - pro-choice advocates? That's their right. Don't complain. Win the next election.
11
actually, all the pro-choice people I know strongly believe that everyone has a right to be pro-life when it comes to their own bodies. The problem is when you impose your view on all women
12
If you are pro choice, you can choose to be pregnant. You can keep a baby if you have been tapers. No one stops you from that either. But the anti abortion folks protect life not born unless,a la Representative Murphy, such a life is politically inconvenient. And, of course, all life is on his or her own once born.
7
The religious right shut down any kind of discussion long ago. You can't "reason with" or have a "discussion" with fundamentalists, whether they are christian, islamic, libertarian, or any other type of fundamentalist.
14
Extreme "christian" religion is being forced down this country's throat even though the man in charge is absolutely not religious in any way. Pence and his colleagues are behind this. There are millions of such people.
They are afraid of women controlling their own bodies. They are afraid that women having easy access to health services will threaten their ability to keep the men in charge. They see women as being scary unless they cover up, bake pies and go to the approved christian churches. Anything else and the men are helpless to the "wiles" of women and those women (you know the ones) need to "be taught a lesson."
Such a nightmare. Thanks for the informative and clear article. Send money to NARAL and Planned Parenthood, folks. Right away.
18
If you believe that abortions are homicide but oppose the welfare state and universal health care and free high quality child care and university education for all, can you really claim to be pro-life? Maybe you just don't know what it is that you want, and are just doing what some else told you that you should do?
16
Young women believe that the government would NEVER interfere in their right to a safe and legal abortion! They are delusional. The good news is that Republican extremists lost California through this type of maneuver and they have no hope in the foreseeable future of regaining power here. I hope that the same will happen nationally.
18
And this is all government intrusion on the most private areas of our lives...by creep (and creeps!). If anyone involved in "facilitating" or administering a government policy feels complicit themselves, they should not be in that position. We have come down to this argument: that simply living in the same country where others "sin" by your personal standards, makes you complicit and as guilty as the "sinner", even when you are nowhere in the harm's-way of that sin.
10
If women do not have control over their own bodies they cannot be sovereign citizens nor make decisions about their own lives, subject as they might be to a biological imperative that they could not alter. The State, under the direct urging of Conservative Religion of all shades, will have become the controller. There is no difference between this and the Chinese decision to impose a one child rule. Only the outcomes are the same for the women: the State telling them how to run their lives. The method of state dictatorship is the same. When Republican Conservatives like Pence decide to deny abortion access to half the population they are telling you that you are not a Real Citizen. You are only acceptable if you live your life as they tell you to. Time to get out and run for office and VOTE —as if your life depended upon it!
13
Not sure the "control over your own body..." is the strongest argument. For example, your argument could apply to heroin and suicide; two things we aren't allowed to apply to our own bodies. I'm not saying your position is wrong just that there is stronger arguments to be made.
Something I've always thought crazy was a fetus at 15 weeks isn't considered a life because it is allowed to be terminated by the mother. However, if I murdered a 15-week pregnant woman I would probably be charged with a double homicide. So our laws say a fetus is a life when it is convenient and just cells when it isn't?
Perhaps one way to solve the abortion issue is to keep abortion legal but revamp state adoption laws to be easy/free (domestic adoption of a drug baby typically costs up to 40k!). Lets create financial incentives for the mother to put the baby up for adoption and for couples to adopt. Even if abortion is illegal you will never eliminate all abortions but perhaps we should focus the issue on giving people options without restrictions - make abortion and adoption real options.
1
"Not sure the "control over your own body..." is the strongest argument. For example, your argument could apply to heroin and suicide; two things we aren't allowed to apply to our own bodies."
You're incorrect; this is an extraordinarily strong argument. The right to bodily integrity is absolute. We can't force anyone to donate organs or even blood. We don't even take organs from dead bodies without clear, explicit consent. Even if I shoot you you can't force me to donate blood if it would save your life. We don't force people to undergo surgery against their will. The argument is far more complex and well developed by actual philosophers and bioethicists and people who specialize in reproductive health- you haven't undermined it by simply pointing out that 'uh, derp, sometimes the government passes laws that affect our physical bodies.'
It is not illegal to *do* heroin. It is illegal to possess heroin.
Suicide is not illegal everywhere, and shouldn't be illegal.
2
I support the right of all patients to Medial Privacy and think the government is overstepping it's bounds regarding abortion rights. I also am personally not comfortable with the use of Abortion as birth control excepting special cases. Like Bill Clinton used to say: RARE, safe and legal.
Until we as a nation get past those who wish for a Theocracy regarding abortion rights this is going to be a contentious issue. This has been going on since my childhood and I do not expect it to be resolved in my lifetime.
It amazes me how many Republicans that claim to be "Libertarian" want to put the power of the government into your bedroom and the Doctor's Office. Nothing else could be quite as intrusive.
Those who wish for a blank check for unrestricted Abortion rights are living in a fantasy world- it will not happen in the lifetime of anyone reading these words. It may be occasionally medically necessarily, but there are far better methods of birth control in 2017.
5
Birth control methods are not 100% effective, and sometimes pregnancy occurs even when birth control is used, or sometimes when a woman is raped, or a pregnancy might be ectopic (very painful and dangerous for the woman), or in the second or third trimester a major deformity in the fetus is discovered. There are countless reasons why women choose abortion, and it is not the State's right or business to regulate a woman's uterus! A very apt observation: if my uterus was a gun, the government would not allow any restrictions or control over it.
Two constitutional rights, with COMPLETELY opposite protections. Our not-exactly-explicit right to keep and bear arms will have no rational restrictions or regulations despite thousands of senseless deaths to American human beings every year. Our not-exactly-explicit right to reproductive choice must be burdened to the point of failure at every conceivable (pun intended) point in the medical system despite clear medical, moral, and ethically compelling needs. Because, I think, the NRA and the gun industry behind it will tolerate no elected officials who waiver from its orthodoxy while those of us who support access to safe and legal comprehensive reproductive health care roll our eyes at the sanctimonious sanctified and neglect to vote them out of office. We don't have to be crusaders, but we do have to vote them out of office. Maybe Tuesday's elections are the lighthouses that show us the way.
8
We the People must vote to maintain our rights.
Elections have consequences. We all ought to think of these cases of indecency when we go to the polls in 2018 and in 2020.
Give control of the Congress to the Democrats. It is especially important in the Senate so there will be a check on Trump nominating right-wing judges.
We get the government we deserve.
5
I had to look it up : bigotry, since it is used so much these days I had forgotten its meaning, intolerance toward those who hold different opinions from oneself.
That does seem to sum it up. They ignore the spirit of the law - and the American ideals of individual freedom - and impose their view by bureaucracy and regulation. Vote then out - make America free again.
8
What a fantastic and insightful piece. Ms. Greenhouse should be required reading for everyone, particularly anyone who would serve this government. We should all be afraid, very afraid.
8
Of course, the women upon whom this burden falls most heavily are the very young, poor and uneducated. They don't have the personal resources to overcome sustained impediments to obtaining an abortion (or to obtaining contraception, for that matter). They can't just take a flight to another state, spend a night or two in a nice hotel, and return, like wealthy and connected women can, or go to a private doctor and pay hundreds of dollars for long-acting female contraception. But when women tell you they are not prepared to raise a child, believe them.
I invite Vice-President Pence and other "warriors for life" to follow some of the resulting children from these unwanted, coerced births around during a normal school day. Kindergarten teachers can differentiate very clearly during the first week of school which children have parents who provide adequate nurturing and instruction, and which ones don't. The very best teachers cannot make up for a chaotic and deprived home environment, and the resulting damaged children.
15
It is infuriating that men believe they have the right to decide what is best for half of the population and even more infuriating that half of the population isn't up in arms about it.
14
Agreed. I lost much of my faith in America when I saw that a majority of white women actually voted FOR Trump. Shameful!!! Only college-educated white women voted otherwise.
3
In this diverse country of many religions and of people who believe in no religion the issue of abortion should not concern the government.
To me the bottom line is that only the woman who is pregnant should have the final say re abortion. If she wants to consult with others, ie: physicians, loved ones, etc. that should be her choice.
The procedure should be available, affordable and safe for all women without the interference of the government..
17
If things had been different in the 1950s I would not be here. I would not know the difference. My parents lives would have been different in a positive way. They would not have stayed married to each other. They might have had happier lives had they not been forced to have a child they weren't prepared for, economically or psychologically.
Forcing women to have children they don't want reduces women to baby factories. Concern that ends once the fetus is born and requires tangible things like food, shelter, a constant care is a farce. Blaming men and women for having children they cannot afford, having children out of wedlock, or abusing children that they didn't want because no help is forthcoming from the government that forced them to have the children is hypocritical. Take it from someone who knows: an unwanted child who was abused and grew into an adult who trusts no one because of how she was treated as a child.
The reality is that allowing abortion saves lives. It allows women who were raped or whose birth control failed to end a pregnancy they are not ready for or don't want. It allows families who cannot support another child to continue to care for those they have the way they want to: with love and time and the money needed to raise a child in today's world.
I challenge those who oppose abortion to imagine how the unwanted child feels, especially when it knows it wasn't wanted. Just remember, abortion is an option, not a mandate.
216
So you don't mind if you were never born? I understand your point that you wouldn't know but what if someone raped you while you were unconscious - would you mind... I mean you wouldn't know the difference, right?
Perhaps your parents should have put you up for adoption, especially considering abortion wasn't legal and they weren't ready for you. Steve Jobs, the founder of Apple, was put up for adoption because his parents in the 1950s weren't ready for a baby. Jobs was adopted by a very loving family and became a huge success.
2
Well said!
3
so which is worse--to be born and struggle to heal from the emotional burden of feeling unwanted, or to be killed?
1
Individuals who oppose the death penalty AND work to insure the life, health and well-being of people already alive can rightfully claim the moral high-ground of "pro-life". Opposition to abortion does not make a person "pro-life" any more than my strong support of a woman's right to choose makes me "pro-death" or "pro-abortion".
Whether intentional or inadvertent, far to many in the press and the media have accepted and normalized the use of emotionally manipulative, euphemistic language. What we say and how we say it matters. Thank you Ms. Greenhouse and the Times for avoiding the inaccurate words and inflammatory terminology which make it that much more difficult for people to have rational, respectful discussions about this complex issue.
29
"Whether intentional or inadvertent, far to many in the press and the media have accepted and normalized the use of emotionally manipulative, euphemistic language."
For example, " J.D. entered the United States without proper documentation ", making it sound like she was arrested for a bureaucratic error, not because she knowingly violated the law.
Did she have criminal intent? She violated the law in order to escape an abusive family and a pregnancy she did not want, which may have been the result of that abuse. What would you do, in her place?
Ms. Greenhouse is an astute observer of the Court. I am very appreciative of the unusual level of outrage implicit in this fine piece. A cogent explication of the complex issues is necessary, but insufficient. We must all be outraged at the manipulative, unlawful imposition of a Right to Life agenda using the power of the government. It is an absolute abuse of power.
177
Taking the life of another human being is not a complex issue necessitating a cogent explication for the benefit of anyone with normal brain function; it is murder.
2
The preponderance of medical and ethical opinion says otherwise, Bill. So does the law. As the bumper sticker says, "If you are against abortion, don't have one."
And the pro-life men who want to control women's reproductive lives have no moral authority at all.
6
A clump of cells is not a human being! If you believe abortion is murder, then you shouldn't have an abortion. But your beliefs should have zero influence in what other, living, breathing humans decide to with their bodies and how they choose to live their lives.
1
It should not be surprising that a government that ignores international law, that routinely invades other nations and murders thousands of innocent people under the innocuous label of "collateral damage," and that is entirely under the control of a greedy, ruthless plutocracy, is now vigorously trying to overthrow the rights protected in its own Constitution.
81
I wrote repeatedly in the NYT comment section during the 2016 campaign that if young women were considering voting for a 3rd party candidate instead of Hillary - or decided not to vote after Bernie was defeated - they were risking handing the presidency to Trump. That's what happened. A switch of a few thousand Jill Stein ballots would have put Hillary in office.
My belief was many women under 40 saw no great personal risk voting for Stein instead of Hillary - but I had certainty if Trump was elected, he'd do exactly what he's doing. Any woman seeking an abortion during the Trump presidency would face any roadblocks the far right could throw in their path - & which would be brutal & inventive.
Young women - & the men who date them, love them & will marry them some day - in 2018 vote for your reproductive freedom! If Trump/Pence get another Supreme Court appointment - which is likely - they're determined to make abortion illegal in this country. And if they can't do it to you, they'll do it to frightened 17 year old girls with questionable status - because the current GOP believes, as Trump & Pence do, that women who seek to control their reproductive status "should be punished." (Trump's words).
Vote in 2018 like your life depends on it. Those of us who remember this country before Roe v. Wade already do. We don't want this country to turn into "The Handmaid's Tale" - which is exactly what crazy man Mike Pence wants.
You should be a lot more scared than you are.
333
Bravo. As a woman under 40 who did vote for Hillary, I pleaded and pleaded with friends on the fence, or ardent Bernie supporters who felt it was better to write in or vote a 3rd party candidate because "there's no way Trump will win". I warned friends that we were in real danger of a Trump victory, and now, here we are. He's doing exactly what he said and worse. Trump/Pence are a real danger to humanity, and the apathy of many is terrifying.
We MUST get out and vote in 2018. There is no time left.
7
I could not agree more. The Republican Party, long since the political arm of the National "Right to Life" Committee, has brought abortion rights almost to the brink of extinction. Now that it has control of the White House, thanks to voters who cared more about sticking it to Hillary Clinton than preventing the Republican Party from implementing the social agenda that the radical religious right has been trying to impose on America since the late 70's, it is in a position to finish the job.
Worry should have begun decades ago. If fear hasn't set in yet, people are still not paying attention.
Vote, run for office, make the Democrats stand up for abortion rights. If we don't, they, and so much else, will be no more.
3
great post. Allow me to edit your last sentence. "You SHOULD have been a lot more scared than you WERE." Elections have consequences and every vote counts. I am afraid the horse has left the barn. Of course trump should be impeached, but I really fear what will follow, at least as far as the reproductive rights of women are concerned.
1
This column makes it pretty clear what a President Pence administration would be like.
194
Don't leave out what's going on at EPA, Interior, Energy, Education and almost every other agency.
It's almost totally a Koch/Pence government.
7
What is beyond frightening about the appalling prospect of Pence as president is that Congressional Republicans would be able to pass their Dream List without any of the problems that are occurring with Trump in the Oval Office. The country would be doomed and would be completely down the path of an ultra conservative wing nut Christian theocracy before most of us had caught our breath.
4
"The Casey decision did indeed say that the government has an interest in unborn life from the beginning of pregnancy and that it can adopt policies that allow it to express that interest, including seeking to persuade a woman to change her mind and carry the pregnancy to term."
It does not seem, however, that their "interest in unborn life" extends to helping to provide good prenatal care. Any "interest" also ceases after birth.
70
Of course. It's the love of puppies, in a world swimming in abandoned adult dogs. Ugly, but there is no other way to reconcile the love of unborn children coupled with contempt for birthed humanity exhibited by most right-to-life politicians.
4
How is this not a GOP driven move to a police state? Medicine, alternative religious beliefs and the ultimate challenges of biology do not count but the GOP and evangelical extremists get total rule over a woman's body? Just call it full medical rights and vote for it.
43
I believe that a vast majority of the 'right wing' secretly wants the availability of an abortion for their family should it become necessary. The chance of Roe v. Wade being overturned are less than 25%.
10
I think there's enough recent evidence from GOP lawmakers that you can upgrade your "belief" to something a little stronger....
4
Possibly. But if they can somehow maintain the abortion option for themselves, and deny it to almost everyone else, they will do so.
12
So true. Conservative and liberals all have situational positions - I think it's one of the reasons why we hate politics so much in this country.
I truly respect someone who lives by their values, even if I disagree with them but those people tend to be the exception, not the norm.
1
Women need contraception if they want to prevent pregnancies. They need to prevent pregnancies to prevent abortion. Not hard to figure that part of the birds and the bees story.
Shutting down Planned Parenthoods would never occur if it was to be decided wholly by women in charge instead of men. (yes, some women do vote to do away with PP, but we all know it's driven by the majority of legislators that are men)
Is this really about pro life or is it about power, who's holding iit, and using it as a threat? Pretty easy to do that when you have a total bully running the country.
111
Wrong, women are as bad as men, what we need is good and normal legislators who stay away from this personal decision and busy themselves at improving our standards of living.
1
Three words: The Handmaid's Tale. In my mental picture of this chilling story, Mike Pence is always The Commander.
74
I am reasonably sure that the very officials who worked tirelessly to prevent this young woman's abortion would be equally as vigilant about returning the woman to her country of origin with her child, if it had been born. The child of course, would be a US citizen. No matter. Further,if the abortion had been denied, there is every reason to be concerned that maternity care would be denied to the mother since the republicans consider it a nonessential benefit. Finally, if the baby had been born, it would lose preferential status accorded the unborn under republican doctrine and simply become part of the great burden imposed upon society by people who have unprotected sex.
59
Forced mass production of African/Native American people for the slave trade built the fortunes of many Anglo-American families and institutions in the 19th century. After all a fieldhand's life expectancy was only about 5 years. Forced pregnancy of teenage female fieldhands insured a continuous supply of hands for cotton and cane harvesting.
For these modern, elite, mostly-AngloAryan American men at the Justice Department, controlling the sex life and reproductive healthcare of vulnerable women, particularly non-white women, is deeply interwoven in their patriotic American religious and legal values.
This history of human livestock breeding was told to me by an African-Anglo-Tejano man whose family originated at a Texas breeding farm and by a Nashville woman whose Plains Indian great-great-grandmother was a sex slave at the women's jail built on the site of the Atlanta breeding farm. The network of such farms extended to Atlanta, Baltimore, Waco Texas, and Nashville. The field girls were driven to these locations to be impregnated after the harvest. They were driven back to their plantations around Christmas time.
Supposedly, livestock breeding of fieldhand enslaved people was so important for continued profits that the operations were still running full tilt when the Lee surrendered at Appomattox.
45
a majority of white women voted for this- no one can plausibly claim that voting for a republican , no matter what the name is , would not have led to this situation.
16
Our citizens are ignorant about a lot of things, including the history of contraception and abortion rights in the US. I'm well-informed, and cannot imagine voting for a Republican until the GOP platform is changed and no longer reflects a desire to subjugate every female human being on earth (I'm referring to the horrific Global Gag Rule, which allows American misogynists to impose their hatred upon girls and women around the world).
6
...would this include the majority of white women who voted for DT? Women are their own worst enemy, quite unfortunately.
2
Anyone still think the Republicans, controlled by Christian Conservatives will not overturn Roe v Wade? The good news in that is that abortion rights rolls back to states, hardly an ideal situation, but at least there will still be a FEW states where the right will remain in effect. If they overturn Obergefell vs. Hodges (same sex marriage), all federal benefits that accrue from marriage (SS for surviving partner, tax benefits) will go poof into the air.
For those who are more conservative than the Democratic Party (ME for example) and thought that better supporting Repubs because of gun control or 1000 other issues that they might be better on, let me ask you this. Do you want to see Roe v Wade handed back to the states?
10
"Anyone still think the Republicans, controlled by Christian Conservatives will not overturn Roe v Wade? "
Why would anybody doubt that? They've been saying it for 40 years. They've been up front about building an anti-abortion majority on the court. Why would anyone think they wouldn't?
2
"Do you want to see Roe v Wade handed back to the states?"
You don't mean "Roe v Wade handed back", you mean "abortion law handed back". Roe v Wade, having been overturned, would cease to exist.
But thank you for clarifying the consequences. Many people seem to think that overturning Roe vs Wade would make abortion illegal altogether ( and the abortionist lobby encourages this, since it frightens their supporters into defending the decision)
@Charlesbalpha -
"the abortionist lobby"????? Just what is that? Some figment of the right-wing anti-choice imagination, of course.
A commenter to a 'piece' in yesterday's paper less than optimistically "hoped" that a "return to sanity" will come in time to save our democracy. My greatest concern that his hope might be more-or-less entirely cast asunder 'resides' in the composition of the Supreme Court -- now, and as will be made the worse if trump (or pence, or ryan) gets another (or more than one other!!!) 'pick.'
Environmental and other regs, if not w/o time and difficulty, can be restored "to sanity" in 'due time'; cabinet and other 'posts' can be returned to responsible persons (in place of the parade of the current administration's appointees -- best known as their respective department's premier antagonists, or as 'know nothings' and experientially 'bottomless holes').
BUT.... to 'change,' for healthy-democracy purposes, a sufficient number of Supreme Court justices can take far too long to save even a semi-righteous facsimile of democracy as we need it and once knew it -- 'ere the thomases, the scalias, the aliotos (and in advance of those looming others who will surely seal the law and politics of our doom in a many-decades capsule if trump gets one or more additional chances to turn back the 'hands of time' and reason and civil liberties and church-state 'constitutional arithmetic' -- et cet er ah ... et cet er ah ...et cet er ah.
Keep up the good work, Ms. Greenhouse. At least you will be able to say, rightly -- "I saw.... I cared ....I tried."
29
I applaud Ms. Greenhouse on this article. So many things this fraudulent administration is doing is slipping beneath the airwaves (yes I'm talking to you Scott Pruitt and Betsy DeVos) and she has provided more grist for the mill. Thank you!
This is yet another example of anti-people activities by the amateurs this administration has put into positions of power. Nothing these dummies can do will stick, but constant vigilance is needed. Lawsuits are needed. Watchdogs are needed. Hotlines for staffers are needed.
50
I am 100% with Ms. Greenhouse regarding abortion rights. But she does not restrict her argument to the politics of abortion. Mostly she talks about the law. And as a legal matter (I, too, am a lawyer), I think she misses the mark.
Bad faith lawsuits are penalized by the Courts. But none of the suits Ms. Greenhouse complains of was held to be filed in bad faith. Her arguments tothe contrary all fly in the face of Court decisions. She strenuously argues bad faith and she's consistently wrong according to the courts.
Abortion is among the most controversial of legal matters. Those of us who are pro-choice believe that abortion rights are fundamental and essential. The other side believes abortion is murder. Courts are understandably solicitous of both sides. And they give extra leeway to both sides because the stakes are so high. That can be endlessly aggravating. But it's the law.
By way of analogy consider the death penalty. There are often 10 or more years of court challenges in death penalty cases. Some of them seem absurd, but Courts seldom rule that they are filed in bad faith. As with abortion, the stakes are incredibly high.
By repeatedly alleging bad faith contrary to law, Ms. Greenhouse has let her emotions get the better of her. I hope you understand that my argument is strictly legal. I am 100% in favor of abortion rights. But I am a lawyer, which requires me to abide by the law. I believe Ms. Greenhouse has largely failed in that regard.
4
You may be a lawyer, but you're wrong. I'm also a lawyer. I'll clear it up for you. First of all, Greenhouse didn't use the term bad faith. She stated that the government is advancing legally dubious arguments, which is true.
You're limiting your use of the term bad faith to the strict legal meaning like you'd hear in a civil context- for example, when one neighbor sues another for trespass over a petty spat over a garden--, when Greenhouse is using it to indicate that the plaintiffs are filing suits they know violate current parameters of the law to attempt to force a particular policy result. You're confusing bad faith litigation with impact litigation. Do you know what impact litigation is? It's carefully crafted and developed litigation that is designed specifically to force a policy change or change existing law. It happens across all social justice issues. It's always the hardest, most nuanced and carefully cut cases that make it to SCOTUS- the stakes are high because they're designed to be close calls, not because the arguments are fundamentally strong. That's why 20 week bans exist. That's why the "partial birth abortion ban" happened. That's why TRAP laws are passed. These are all laws that are designed to trigger challenges involving highly specific legal issues that can undercut Roe v Wade.
Maybe don't accuse a highly respected female legal analyst of being "too emotional," just because you don't understand the issues, mmkay? How ironically sexist of you.
16
" The other side believes abortion is murder. "
They also believe that Roe vs Wade is not a valid decision, since it depends on a "Constitutional Right" that is not in the Constitution.
1
One lawyer should correct another lawyer when he or she is wrong. Your interpretation of that as sexism is way out of kune. I treat all lawyers the same. You call hands off om a mistaken woman. Who is the sexist?
1
The case of Jane Doe is outrageous but its main significance is in creating a political and cultural climate for an assault on the reproductive rights of American citizens. The anti-abortion activists win when they generate enough ethical and legal fog to convince the public that there is something wrong with abortion and contraception. Too many defend abortion by pointing to exceptional cases: rape, incest, life of the mother. But most women have abortions because we don’t want to have (more) children, and this is a perfectly legitimate and ethical reason to undergo the procedure. I don’t need to be in dire straits in order not to want to go through the inconvenience and expense of having a baby. Of course, contraception is better because it puts less strain on the woman’s body but contraception fails, and if companies decide to opt out of including contraception in the medical insurance for their employees, these failures will multiply. I wish more rational people (both women and men) had the courage to say that a fetus is not a human person, and that forcing women to have more children than they want to or are capable of supporting is slavery.
65
Well said, Mor. I became pregnant when my second daughter was 6 months old, and during my first trimester I contracted Lymes disease, which causes many birth defects. I had to take into account my children who were born. They needed a mother who was not consumed caring for a disabled and possibly deformed sibling. This was a heart wrenching decision, and I thank my God that I was able to make that decision with the support of my husband and doctor, without the government talking us what to do!!
10
"forcing women to have more children than they want to or are capable of supporting is slavery"
This.
7
A fetus is not a human person and forcing women to have more children than they want or are capable of supporting is slavery.
Thanks for giving me the space to say that.
Without "Choice" it is all just forced breeding, religion's version of "animal husbandry".
9
The future of abortion is certainly frightening but not in the way abortion proponents see it. I am a pro-life woman and find it abhorrent that we are still allowing innocent lives to be terminated in the womb. These are not just blobs of cells as the pro-abortion folks argue but living. breathing human beings that have worth and value.
We finally have an administration that defends the sanctity of life and is fighting for us. Past administrations talked the talk but did not walk the walk. They give lip service but was not that serious about pro-life issues. We finally have an administration that has appointed pro-life advocates and put them in positions that can have some influence on preserving fetuses. They are very serious about this issue and do not take it lightly. They will continue speaking out against the evils of abortion and will stand up for the unborn. This is what they were appointed to do and they will not give up on this very nice important mission. There are many of us who support their actions.
6
What are you doing to make sure that contraception is widely available to prevent unwanted pregnancies, and thus reduce abortions? Do women's lives matter? And by that I mean women who are already born, and are of reproductive age. Sometimes abortion is necessary to save the lives of women. In Ireland recently, a women needed an abortion to save her life. The doctors would not do it, telling her that Ireland was a Catholic country. She died, and of course the fetus died too. Are you ok with that sort of thing happening here? Certainly I respect your decision to be against abortion for yourself, but you don't get to decide that for everyone else. And unless you are fighting this administration's efforts to make contraception more difficult to get, your stance is more anti-woman than it is pro-life
17
Dear WMK, I believe you are sincere in your belief that life begins at conception. Unfortunately, being Pro-life in thst respect is not sufficient. The administration whose actions you applaud and the party it represents continue to take actions which endanger the lives of children by cutting funding and oversight at both the federal and state level for access to pediatric and pre-natal healthcare, services for the disabled, clean air and water, services to children at risk, services for foster care, and programs like foodstamps and WIC. The tax bill now under debate calls for cutting the tax credit for adoption as well as the deduction for medical expenses that is a boon to parents with chronically or seriously ill children. The same administration and party also seek to limit access to contraception and education on how to use it, two things which would help prevent abortions in the first place.
I respectfully suggest that you consider urging the administration and party you seem to support to take the term "Pro-life" more seriously.
14
@WMK Your anti-choice comment displays a sadly common ignorance of basic biology. Fetuses don't breathe. All their nutrients, including oxygen, through the umbilical cord; they are totally dependent on their host, the woman. You remember her, right? The living individual who has the right to determine her own life, including whether or when she has children. So many anti-choice people never even mention the women, as her rights are just so inconvenient. If you want to live somewhere where women are second-class citizens, feel free to leave. If you don't want an abortion, don't have one. You have no right to impose your beliefs - religious or otherwise - on anyone else. We have freedom of religion here, and it's not just for you.
24
That the republican party, which opposes abortion, also wants to make contraception, which prevents unwanted pregnancies and therefore reduces the number of abortions, less accessible, makes it clear that the so-called "pro-life" movement is not about the sanctity of life or babies. It is about controlling and disempowering women. Instead of pro-life, the movement should be called what it really is all about, anti-women.
116
The irony in this is that the Trump gang is using government (which it professes to detest) like a blunt cudgel to impose administrative and bureaucratic diktats to deny a woman's right to choose. Its message is clear: folks, if you don't like this law or that law, ignore them; we've got your back. What it is doing with regards to abortion, it is also doing with environmental protections, public education and park land, among other issues for which there has been broad, unwavering agreement.
It is basically saying that citizens don't have to obey the laws they don't happen to like. Ponder the destructive power over time of that idea . . .
23
Casey’s legitimization of the state interest in fetal life has been an albatross. A secular state should have no interest in fetal life beyond ensuring necessary prenatal care, such that pregnancies women choose to carry to term result in healthy babies. The undue burden standard - something less than strict scrutiny - permits states to make women second class citizens in their own bodies, held hostage just short of death in some cases. The primary backstop in undue burden seems to be a showing of serious harm, which sometimes requires waiting until irreparable damage is already done. I grew up among people of faith and respect differences in personal belief. But I’ve become certain that these beliefs have no place in our laws or government. Want to know how this fanaticism ends? Look at the mass graves of unwanted children in Tuam, Ireland, and the Irish women who continue to flee to the UK for abortion services. Look at the overflowing orphanages and deeply damaged children in Romania under Decree 770. Look at the skyrocketing maternal death rate in Texas. Look at the women of El Salvador, where abortion is a crime, who worry that even a miscarriage could land them in jail. The lesson is clear: prohibition leads to death and suffering — of the living and of those brought into the world unwanted. Faith that permits this in service of medieval theological equivalencies is meaningless and cruel. Forced pregnancy is enslavement, no less an evil than forced abortion .
63
Whatsoever a man soweth that shall he also reap!!
When you put a person like Sessions in charge of DoJ, he will bring with him his Alabama-style understanding of government: government is bad unless it regulates your personal issues in which case it is perfect. Not to mention his definition of what is moral and what is not. Just remember what Coretta King said about him and Elizabeth Warren tried to highlight during his confirmation.
52
So, now the government qualifies as a party in litigation to determine whether it must enforce federal law? As Professor Greenhouse states, such an attitude turns the Constitutional world upside down. It separates government from the people the Constitution requires it to serve. Elected officials can vote their consciences when they take a stand on proposed legislation. Once a bill becomes law, however, it legally represents the will of the people. Government officials henceforth function as agents to enforce that will.
This same issue arose when Kim Davis refused to execute the law on same sex marriage by signing marriage licenses. The rule of law requires that officials do their job and not condition enforcement on their own opinions or values. This point seems so fundamental and elementary that only gross ignorance or intellectual dishonesty could explain the attitude adopted in the government brief and by Kim Davis.
223
As a side note, Kim Davis wound up costing the county she was employed by a good $200,000 for her little foray into the evil secular world.
She had her fun, but it was the good folk of her county who got stuck paying the bill.
Someone needs to keep track of how much these religious bigots are costing the tax-payers.
11
This is what the despicable & falsely named religious freedom act has brought us to. That horrid piece of legislation needs to be repealed and ASAP. It has managed to enshrine "religious belief" as a legitimate way to act toward others. In fact, none of us should know anything about anyone else's religious beliefs except whether they act as a decent person toward their fellow human beings. And in no situation does proselytizing or inflicting personal beliefs on someone else qualify as being a "decent person".
4
James Lee,
And yet the Obama Administration declined to enforce laws it disagreed with.
It also failed to provide Lawyers for Appeals of Cases that involved Federal Laws.
One the last acts that Obama undertook was to threaten the loss of funds
of school districts that did not follow the mandate sent out concerning
Transgender Students and Bathroom/Locker-room use.
Hardly following the 10th Amendment there.
Reading about this is especially chilling after seeing the article about the mother-baby homes and Magdalene Laundries in Ireland, that unbelievably remained in operation until the 1990's. Is that what we are headed toward (or back to) now?
39
The Republican war against women is relentless. Now women cannot count on the US Justice Dept to protect their rights but will work against them. Republicans are now proving women and progressive men another reason not vote for Republican candidates in 2018 and 2020. We are in the throes of one of the most right wing administrations in contemporary history. They need to go and go soon.
30
Abortion is murder. Finally, we have a president who is making great progress in in one year term of office. I pray for another Trump triumph! He did far more thus far than Obama did in 8 years. Out with the divisive left wing progressives!
1
I have been a Democrat all my adult life. As a kid, my parents convinced me of the rightness, the general goodwill of most Democratic party candidates. While LBJ's dunderheaded war against the Communists and Vietnam , used up and killed thousands of US kids lives as if we were Kleenex, "Use once: throw away!",convinced millions of Americans that the FDR Democratic coalition that had survived a Great Depression, World War,(again), and the Cold War with Asia and the USSR, enforcing a form of armed accord between the GOP and the Democrats whenever an issue concerned events beyond our ocean boundaries, far too many Democrats completely forgot after the Nixon administration, that the basis of any successful minority party control of power was to always be ready to agree to conceded your enemies and other party members have rights, too, no matter how distasteful many seem.
Until the election of Obama in 2008, the Democrats seemed willing to forego such agreements in favor of being "holier-then other" Democrats and , as a result, helped elect Republicans repeatedly,(except for three presidential elections , both former Southern governors of once Confederate states.
Unless we can overlook our differences, Democrats will, once more manage to see a Republican elected because as much as they despise the GOP , they hate the minor differences within their own party even more.
2
Choice is the only answer. Roe is the law of the land. It seems likely that the Democrats are going to end up with both the Congress and the Presidency by 2021. Should that occur a Reproductive Rights Bill should be enacted to codify all aspects of this question left over from the 70's. In addition the vicious anti-abortionists must be made to understand that appeals to murder, assassination, and violence will not be tolerated. The country's opinion on this issue has not changed much over the last 50 years. Seventy to thirty percent in favor. It's way past time to put this issue to rest; it's been decided.
In the meantime. Resist.
17
Paul, it may not be that easy if this administration packs the Supreme Court. We already have Gorsuch instead of Garland.
3
There is no age-old, universal prohibition of abortion. There is no age-old embryology or theories of personhood to back the arguments of the "pro-life" people. That any Americans would impose sectarian beliefs on all is indeed a reason to worry.
We are gearing up--families and especially retailers--for the celebration of Thanksgiving. That distorts history. The Pilgrims came to an almost virgin land, not to one densely peopled and governed by tolerance. They came to people it their way, and to govern it in their intolerance. Puritans! Shucks, Oliver Cromwell had his soldiers scour the homes on London on Christmas Day to inspect ovens for evidence of un-Godly celebration. In the American South, a mix of Roman Catholics and Calvinists established a dour, prohibitive ethos. The question of abortion tests our commitment to a Republic.
12
"the government may adopt policies favoring life over abortion; it is not obligated to facilitate abortion"
Why shouldn't this be the government's position?
@ Steve Men would never ask that question if control over their bodies and lives were at issue. They would demand access to the full range of reproductive healthcare.
9
Steve, because we give certain rights to citizens, including the right to bodily autonomy and making their own medical and reproductive decisions.
We give those rights equally to everyone. Even to women. Even to pregnant women.
No one forces you to donate a kidney to save someone else's life, though it would. You don't get to force women to carry pregnancies to term in the name of saving someone's else life.
Do you really want the government to be making YOUR medical decisions for you? I don't. If you want a country where everyone is forced to manage their personal lives as the government dictates, there are countries that do that. This isn't and shouldn't be one of them.
4
Steve - Go back and read the four paragraphs beginning with the sentence "Several aspects of this passage stand out." Pay attention to the distinction between "persuade" and "prevent" and to what is meant by an "undue burden".
4
I️ agree that we must fight for an unencumbered right to abortion. But we should also prepare to lose that right in certain states. It will always be legal in the blue states: CA, NY, OR, WA... I️ wonder if we should prepare to lose the fight in places like Texas and Kansas.
If that occurs, perhaps we could concentrate on another constitutional right: the right to interstate travel. Why not spend money on infrastructure to transport women out of the "Gilead" states to free states like CA for abortions. They can make abortion very difficult perhaps even illegal. But they can't stop you from travelling to non-Gilead states. Not yet...
4
Accepting losses in some states because women can travel to other states is a slippery slope--and when questioned about this last year Trump blithely stated that women can just travel to states where abortions are readily available. This ignores the reality of women who can't afford to travel, can't take time off work, can't obtain childcare when traveling, don't want to have to explain travel absences, don't have the wherewithal to investigate out of state options, etc. We must fight for access for all women. And bless Linda Greenhouse, who has been drawing attention to this fight for decades.
18
Kentucky, Tennessee, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, West Virginia . . . anywhere poor women struggle just to survive
2
I️ agree. I️ was just suggesting a plan B where funds and resources would be provide to those who need to travel. Hope for the best, prepare for the worst.
2
This is a chilling fore-shadowing of what is to come if the anti-abortion fanatics are allowed to continue. They feel they have some sort of "moral" right to impose their beliefs on everyone else. It is a tyranny that will only grow in the present political climate. The equality rights that women have fought so hard to get are once again under siege. The danger is very real. The world of The Handmaid's Tale is only a step away.
256
Tyranny is the correct word! Thanks!
1
The idea of tolerance is not part of the faith of people who agree with and behave like Arpaio--and many of those in leadership positions in our current federal Dept. of Justice. Tolerance is not, at this moment, useful for the whims of the guy in the White House.
We can hope that the trends seen in the recent Virginia elections are sustained into the 2018 mid-terms and beyond. We can hope that we start to elect leaders more tolerant of the beliefs of others. We do not need leaders demanding faith over tolerance, demanding a litmus test for inclusion.
198
I, too, hope for change via the 2018 elections. But we need more than hope. We need action. We need folks who believe in Democratic values to get out there and WORK toward this change. An easy step you can take is to help register voters in your community.
56
The ability to maintain our independence as women and manage our lives requires we all vote for what suits us, not what suits the established church and other arrogant powerful organizations. It does take both men and women to conceive a child. . Please remember to vote, and to preserve your life.
9
Arpaio is an officially empowered sadist. The US is perverse.
6
I have always found the Republican attitude towards abortion contradictory - but then again, we are living in a topsy turvy world. Longstanding Republican principles extolled the virtues of autonomy, individualism and free-thought. Why would this not extend to a woman's right to choose what's right for her body? Additionally, why would it not extend to one's right to death, for the elderly or infirm?
Contemporary Republicans seemed to have forgotten that their self-described skepticism towards authority -- myopically focused on "big government" in recent decades -- should apply, in equal measure, to corporations and religious bodies.
224
Republicans have always been contradictory; they don't see "getting government off our backs" having anything to do with abortion because they feel they have the right to control women. Their disdain against government extends to an even stronger contempt for women (note our current 1950s administration). Just when some Republicans were coming into the 21st century, others stepped up to pull them back. I don't see that some of these guys will ever recognize that abortion is none of their business. The best solution I can think of began Tuesday when many women were elected to office. I think even a religious woman can recognize that women have the right to make their own decisions---whatever they may be.
17
They have forgotten nothing. Were it not for the religious right , Trump could not have won. The Republicans have no concern for anything but votes and money, Accordingly , there are now significant encroachments on the First Amendment. Religion now has the upper hand over government in the eyes of both the Republicans and the religious stooges , disguised as Justices , that sit on the right side of the bench. At least four of them will allow a baker to hide behind the Bible and discriminate against gays.
The thirst for money and votes has permitted these distortions and the destruction of the Constitution...all at the hands of the Republican party.
And now we have an outright fascist in the White House who will accommodate each and every whim of the Elmer Gantry crowd.
7
Well, if you follow GOP logic and a corporation is a person I suppose it's not much of a stretch to also claim that "the government" is a person. Heaven forbid we give "the government" a guilty conscience.
Interesting that their great concern for 'innocent life' when it comes to the unborn does not extend to a desperate 17 year old...
277
The GOP likes to 'protect' people in theory but not in reality. Many of their biggest lies support this. They want to 'protect' people from being 'forced' to purchase health care - but they don't want to protect people from dying because they're uninsured.
27
"...girl."
A-M Hislop, I think you forgot the final word of your final sentence, "...17 year old girl."
THAT'S what we're talking about.
3
In fact when you study the policy of the Republican Party, their great concern for "innocent life" stop after the birth.
5