I agree, Gail. I believe anyone who is opposed to abortion MUST support not only contraceptives but sex education as well.
82
What a coincidence that the very same Republican legislators and judges who proclaim that they believe all life is precious including a fertilized egg, vote to allow the slaughter of innocents by opposing common sense gun regulation (hundreds of children have found unsecured loaded guns and shot a friend or relative https://www.thetrace.org/2016/10/when-kids-pull-the-trigger-interactive/ ), vote to suppress the votes (ie freedom) of born people, and proclaim that money is speech and corporations are people.
They also vote to take away health care from born people, leading to delayed care and deaths of many beloved family members.
Hypocrisy? The Republican party is exemplified by the Republican Congressman in Pennsylvania who was running ads proclaiming his anti-abortion purity, while at the same time telling his mistress to get an abortion.
Anyone who votes for a Republican to protect life has been conned.
135
You have a president who said yesterday that 'immigrant gang members are not people. They are animals.' This is the world you are living in. And largely acquiescing to it. Your Dark Ages view of women and god, propelling laws through state legislatures, not to mention the US Senate, is beyond comprehension, but does reinforce that Trump is the leader you want, tolerate, and deserve.
43
If anybody every called me "the host body" I would slap them right across the face.
98
Just cut to the chase and ban sex altogether.
38
The topic of abortion is so upsetting to many. They cannot fathom taking the life of an unborn baby. We hear so often that a woman has a right to control her own body. We hear very little about the life in her womb. Where is their rights or do they have any? They are not just a clump of cells. They are tiny human beings and must not be destroyed.
4
The "Love the fetus, hate the child" crowd confirm the opinion the in America "one can be a Christian or a Republican".
50
Sorry Gail, but your call to " ... join hands and work together ... " is doomed because, simply put, they are "right" and you are "wrong". It's not 50-50 ... it's 100% to zero. With such certainty, there is no margin for the "wrong" to have a place, to have a voice, or to even exist.
9
another victory for individual freedom in the usa.....the freedom not to have an abortion
6
@brupic
There has always been that "freedom" you spoke of, its the retracting of "Other Choices" by the uninformed and hateful that is concerning
3
If a woman is raped and becomes pregnant, why should she be forced to give birth?
51
Some religions, notably including the Catholic Church, believe sex is sinful if it precludes the possibility of producing a baby Maybe that's why the church ignored all the m2m child rape all these years..no baby no sin!
41
Even Gail can't find anything funny about these evil zealots.
44
Bernie bots and Obama-please-come-back types ... when you stay home from the polls and or cast protest votes (what on earth was jill stein thinking) then you need to look in the mirror.
Aging scotus justices - and millions stayed home from the 2016 polls. And now here we are.
Whomever the dem candidate, vet off your butts and vote. That is the only solution here.
59
It’s time to name names. Call it #YouToo. Every aborted baby had a father. If Joe Biden is held accountable for touching women’s shoulders - and he should be - surely we can publicly acknowledge the fathers who suffer no consequence while their girlfriends, wives, daughters, sisters, friends are excoriated for pursuing a completely legal abortion.
54
What sort of moral authority does the Catholic Church have given that it protected monstrous pedophiles who sexually abused children and failed to protect children.
This heartbeat legslation is the work of men who hate women and children. If they genuinely cared about children they would make sure they are loved and wanted and not impoverished.
70
From your lips to gawd's ear, Gail. Woe is us. :/
9
Abortion is simply another way for men to try & control women and their sexuality. "How dare you have sex before marriage! You must have the baby & wear your 'shame' publicly." I think everyone should remind themselves that white rich women and their mothers, daughters, sisters, etc., will continue to have access to abortions. And let's face it, if men were the ones to get pregnant, birth control would be free and there would be an abortion clinic on every corner complete with Starbucks. So sick of the Handmaiden mentality that this country is sinking to.
76
"Spay and neuter your animals to control the pet population." We've all heard that told to us before in PSAs or read it somewhere. Sex is primal and animals can't control their [seasonal] urges.
With bipartisan support, H.R. 1632 (https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/1622?r=82&s=1) was introduced (03/07/19) by Rep Panetta (D-CA-20) in the House Agriculture Committee.
Here's a summary of the Bill:
Kittens In Traumatic Testing Ends Now Act of 2019 or the KITTEN Act of 2019
This bill prohibits the Department of Agriculture from using cats in experiments that may cause pain or stress, unless the pain or stress is a result of a physical exam or training program.
___
At what point during a pregnancy does a fetus become a child, feel pain or stress, unless the pain or stress is a result of a physical exam?
What separates humans from animals is our ability elect politicians we detest.
6
"If you want to claim the moral high ground in a fight over terminating pregnancy, you have to support effective family planning. Otherwise you’re either an appalling hypocrite or an elected official attempting to impose your religion on Americans of different faiths."
Or both.
49
"Here’s the thing: If you want to claim the moral high ground in a fight over terminating pregnancy, you have to support effective family planning. Otherwise you’re either an appalling hypocrite or an elected official attempting to impose your religion on Americans of different faiths."
Gail, you're so silly. Why can't someone be BOTH?!
Republicans = elected hypocrites
26
Just think of all the women, many of them famous, who have rejected Trump's advances in horror.
He's a vengeful creature.
35
How many of these men in power have wives/ girlfriends who use birth control? How many have an abortion in their past? Oh to hack their histories and expose the hypocrisy of these men! Maybe past girlfriends/ wives would be willing to go public - oh, right - they have already been paid off and signed a confidentiality agreement....
30
Just what I was recently thinking; it’s not about the “babies”, as failure to provide support for living children shows, but about “sinful” sex outside of marriage.
22
Excellent piece, Gail.
14
Ah, Republicans ... pro-life all the way from conception to birth.
55
"What’s truly going on here, people, is a war against sex without procreation."
This is the brain teaser... The people that want to prohibit sex outside of marriage support a serial philanderer.
49
Old white men looking to control women's bodies is similar to Saudi Arabia's version of controlling women's bodies albeit not as strict ,not yet anyway. Trump the ultimate man's man in his mind thinks himself a macho hero while McCain was a total coward. Strong men around the world he admires so much dismiss and disrespect him as weak fool. Kim gets his rockets ready Trump praises him, Putin puts bombers and troops in Venezuela Trump cowers in his presence ripping up notes of meetings where Putin reminds him who is top dog. MSB bombs civilians in Yemen with American bombs and arrests USA citizens in Saudi so Trump send Jared over to pander to him looking for loans now and when Trump is incarcerated in New York.
24
Trumpsters never cease to amaze me. They root so ebulliently for the man who rips apart their healthcare, and is right inside their bedroom making lifetime choices for them, woo hoo!
33
I'm sick and tired of old white men making decisions about women's reproductive rights.
30
Thank you for this, Gail.
11
Except for the “still evolving” crack re Trump, Gail is not in a jokey mood today. Can’t blame her. What a country.
21
“What’s truly going on here, people, is a war on sex without procreation.” Ms. Collins, you nailed it.
23
How 'bout plain ol common sense?
When will the pro birthers criminalize menstruation?
20
The Monty Python song is so appropriate anymore:
Every sperm is sacred
Every sperm is great
If a sperm is wasted,
God gets quite irate
15
Well it's back to coat hangers and back alley abortions soon. We've been there and I remember it well. There will always be abortions. They'll just be illegal again, like in the 'good old days '.
25
All the MALE DEITY religions seek to keep women subjugated and use biological control to help keep men in charge. Internet access to home delivered abortion pills will physically empower women and thwart that plan. The #metoo movement will teach the next generation that women inherently are of equal value to men and deserve respect.
Women must gain political power and remake the world to reflect women's values!
7
"There ought to be a way for people of good will to join hands and work together to make all pregnancies wanted pregnancies."
Your president, after spending hours a day watching Fox News talk about him, uses his twitter feed to stoke resentment and generate controversy and ill will, on purpose, to further his own ambitions. When the message from the very top is pure animosity at all times, cooperation becomes traitorous. White evangelicals are undyingly loyal to the lecherous, morally bankrupt president. If they are prepared to sacrifice every single Christian principle of goodness by supporting Trump in exchange for pro-life judges, finding good will and cooperation is...
A. Unlikely
b. A naive pipe-dream
C. A direct flight to hell
The U.S. faces a daunting long term problem. Your society is deeply riven in a way that defies traditional paths to reconciliation. The two sides cannot even agree on common facts. In the short term, reconciliation isn't an option. Massive electoral rejection of Trump and his mob of unthinking minions is the only way forward.
21
Religious fundamentalists of all stripes apparently believe the body is dirty, especially the female body, especially during menstruation. And yet, those weak males are constantly tempted by all of us temptresses, which means men having sex would be dirty, too - - unless they can produce a baby. Of course, a girl baby is dirty, so this reprehensible, ignorant cycle continues.
19
Ironically, but not unexpectedly, the states with the highest rate of teen pregnancy are those holier than thou red states, Bible thumping hypocrites, sucking at the teat of blue state largess to preserve their antediluvian way of life. These bills are meant to keep the rubes within the GOP fold, but don't the women have an ounce of self-awareness? Doesn't the fact that their reproductive rights are being used as cynical pawns to preserve the power of an old man's party camping out at death's door ever enter their consciousness? I guess its the same Stockholm syndrome that keeps Melania in the White House.
29
We went from 20 weeks to 12 weeks to 6 weeks.
Well, the next step will be to only allow abortions up to the moment a woman gets pregnant.......
11
If you don’t believe in abortion don’t have one.
41
Keep all religions and politicians out of people’s bedrooms.
32
It is frustrating to me that these anti-abortion activists are not willing to adopt babies and not willing to fund programs such as WIC, food stamps or other social programs to help people in need. Once the child leaves the womb and enters the world, they are of no consequence to these narrow-minded people.
35
Trump's is a disjointed "administration." He has no realistic, constitutionally-compliant policies. It's about political expedience for him. He is there simply to massage his own ego and to please conservatives (even if they can't stand the sight of him), his oblivious base, especially white nationalists, and to make business deals from the Oval Office. He bloviates to detract from his public and private troubles, which are infinite.
11
The religious right have always relied on hysteria to push their policies and hysteria is not conducive to common sense.
15
Any such ignorant anti-abortion bill must come with the caveats that:
1. No politician will be allowed to cast a vote for such legislation until he or she passes a detailed physiological and medial test on knowledge of women's reproduction, the reasons an abortion may become necessary, and fetal development.
2.. Included in such legislation is the caveat that the the fathers of these fetuses where a woman needs an abortion must have DNA tests, and if found positive, must pay for carrying this pregnancy through delivery as well as pay child support and for the child's 4-year college education. Failure to pay will result in garnishing the man's wages or jail time.
3. If paternity cannot be determined, then the legislation includes the stipulation that the state will pay the costs of the woman's pregnancy, delivery, and child support until the child reaches age 21.
4. Any male politician planning to vote for such ill-informed and cruel legislation must: (1) be subjected to a thorough background check to make sure that no female in his immediate family or woman with whom he had an affair had an abortion because he impregnated her; and (2) he will no longer be allowed prescriptions for erectile dysfunction drugs.
Why do I have the feeling that #1 alone would probably result in the elimination of most of the politicians allowed to vote for such "ill-conceived" and punishing legislation?
28
Abortion is not about procreation. It’s about sexism and men controlling women. I mean, does anyone really believe if men were the ones to get pregnant this issue would even be a debate?
31
“What’s truly going on here, people, is a war against sex without procreation.” Not exactly. Nobody should have sex if not rich enough to cover it properly. Remember Kavanaugh?
5
Let's give Donald J. Trump the opportunity to speak for himself on the issue. (From Maureen Dowd's column on 04/03/2016)
Maureen Dowd (paraphrase): "When you were a swinging bachelor in Manhattan, were you ever involved with anyone who had an abortion?"
Donald J. Trump: "Such an interesting question. So what’s your next question?”
For many of Trump's faithful, the eyes refuse to see and the ears refuse to hear that which has been happening right in front of them.
19
Republicans are up in arms about killing babies, but they don't seem to mind killing the planet. They don't seem to mind ripping babies from their mothers arms and putting them in cages when the mothers trek thousands of miles in search of a better life. They don't seem to mind leaving the children starving or sick without adequate health care. They want to force the mothers to work but they don't want to provide childcare. They don't want to pay for sending the children to school so they can be a productive citizen. They don't mind building prisons to house them when they grow up. So, i can't hear them for what I see them do. Republicans are a joke and if they want to live life in a different way let them take all their tax breaks and buy and island and start their own country.
30
Trump does not care about abortion. He cares about Trump. No discussion of issues is helped by reference to whatever faux position he may happen to feign. Trump does what he does because of Trump.
Few members of the Roman Catholic Church USA believe sex without procreation is a sin. Many do, however, believe abortion is a grave sin.
3
This is about hating and wanting to control women. Period.
25
AmerExit. Time for our two countries to go their separate ways, huh? And it is two countries.
6
These red state fetal heartbeat laws are forced pregnancy laws designed to kill sinful girls and women. It's all about control, and has absolutely nothing to do with abortion. Personhood for eggs is next. Any business, who cares about girl's and women's health will leave these states, and this includes health insurers and physicians. When you cannot obtain birth control, surgery for an ectopic, poisonous pregnancy, or hysterectomies for cancerous conditions, sinful females will die in droves, which is at the heart of these abortion bills. It's wonderfully wild, sweaty, and delirious times for white, Christian, zealots. Creating desperate lives is their specialty. Back alley abortions will kill girls and women in the name of life; particularly for the poor. Somehow, when girls and women are forced to stay pregnant, southern legislators believe heaven will open, and God's cruel justice will finally prevail for female sinners. Between Alabama's death camp prisons and deadly legislation for girls and women, the future of these states has become sanctioned sadism and desolation.
18
To the roster of National Treasures, add the name
Gail Collins.
15
Correct me if I’m wrong, but part of the reason these Christian religious zealots feel so strongly is because their holy book’s god tells them to, “Be fruitful and multiply.” When that fictional command was issued, there were only several million people in the world. At over 7 billion people now on earth, can’t They just declare “mission accomplished.”?
11
In my humble opinion, the white evangelicals who support Trump because of his anti-abortion policies have lost all credibility. They'e sold their collective soul to the devil. Embarrassing and detestable.
20
What I wonder about these "religious" men who feel the need to control women and their reproductive rights is, if, they have only one or two kids, have they not had sex more that that one or two times? Are their wives using birth control or are they jointly practicing celibacy?
When we have male senators and reps who actually think a woman is pregnant right after she has sex and would know that, or who think that if a woman is raped her body will repel that rapist sperm, or that woman shouldn't have tampons or pads while incarcerated (which is necessary when menstruating), we are doomed to the rule of stupid.
And even though it is repeatedly pointed out that pro-life means pro-fetus and everything thing these zealots do in Congress, most specifically the GOP, is most certainly not pro-life. Have more babies is the mantra of some but once born everything is stacked against you if you are a female, not part of the 1%, or are poor.
The GOP is the most despicable, unethical, corrupt party on this earth.
31
"If you are a woman who happens to live in Kentucky or Mississippi..." - you have my sympathies already.
25
There are abortion instruments from Roman Times in the museum.
Abortion has always been and will always be. You shame, threaten, jail women and their providers but abortion will remain.
Do you want more injured and dead women as a result?
13
Accountability won't change until we make it clear that women don't get pregnant, they get impregnated. If women could get pregnant, then men would be redundant.
13
It’s only a matter of time before some state passes a law prohibiting women from getting abortions after the second week of pregnancy.
Duh!!!!!!!!
They are testing the waters to see if overturning Roe v Wade will harm them at the polls and if it will, how much. I thought that they would use Obergefell (same sex civil marriage) as a test case, as the same people who howl when they rescind those rights will do so over Roe, but that doesn't seem to be advancing as quickly as I thought it would. The only question remains is whether SCOTUS will overturn Roe or merely allow states to kill it via a plethora of regulations. Never doubt it, the decimation of Roe v Wade is a done deal.
4
The last time this issue was brought to the front I wrote about a woman I knew years ago who was desperate enough to try to abort her unborn fetus with a knitting needle. She ended up in the hospital with blood poisoning. Let that be a warning to those people who want to take our rights away from us. Women will do what they have to do if they are forced to carry an unwanted fetus. I would like to know if the people who are against abortion have any plans for taking care of these unwanted babies.
11
Leaving aside the impression (fact?) that anatomical and physiological ignorance of the female body (more specifically, it's reproductive organs and processes) is not optional in order to be a Republican, it's hard to conceive (wonderful word here) how any of them manage to successfully complete coitus. Sheer luck, maybe?
What is needed is a virtual reality app wherein (wherewith?) a Republican legislator, in order to even join the conversation let alone vote on the matter, must undergo the virtual birthing process, very much with all the physical "joys" of labor (think passing a watermelon rectally) for a minimum of 4 hours on the clock before their participation in the debate and voting on such legislation is allowed.
The real danger, if the above were a requirement, would that abortion would be made mandatory
6
Too bad there isn't a contricepive lobby. If there were one, you would see all this nonsense vanish in a "heartbeat."
4
Women, stay away from men and you will control your body and your life. If men want sex let them go to professionals. If they want to control people let them start with themselves. Maybe in time they will learn women control their own bodies. Then they will be welcome in intimacy again.
12
We are in the midst of a battle for the soul of the country. On the one side we have an intolerant and fearful minority, carefully cultivated by Rupert Murdoch and his buds Rush Limbaugh, Robert Mercer, the Koch Bros, Roger Stone, Alex Jones, et al for their own enrichment in both power and wealth. On the other side we have the tolerant majority, who until Trump’s election, was blissfully ignorant of the long simmering hate and fear on the right. For decades the tolerant majority dismissed right wing politics of fear, conspiracy theories and hate as “crazy and third-world banana republic nonsense” only to wake up to the horrible realization that 30-40% of us actually believe in white supremacy, the disenfranchisement of women and minorities, and the politics of hate and retribution. Abortion, guns, immigration and religion are the topics the right uses to divide us, as deeply as possible, to secure and hold minority rule. When Roe v Wade is overturned and the minority rule position that government is for the rich only continues on its middle class eviscerating path, women on both sides of the political divide will suffer, as will their families. Problem is that only 55-60% of can see that. The rest of us are too busy waving our confederate and nazi flags, praying in our intolerant and hate-filled churches, and voting for people who promise to hurt “ the other” to notice how votes for haters and conspiracy theorists bring us only more misery and frustration.
11
The fixation of the conservatives on fetuses clashes with their indifference to the rights of those already born.
23
Fetus worship. Actual born, breathing, living Children : Not so much. They are on their own.
Seriously.
30
We need to stop calling anti-abortion zealots "pro life". The one thing they are NOT is pro life. What they really are is pro birth, and they should be tagged as such. They do not care about life. All they care about is birth.
27
Here's a situation for pro-life supporters:
A child who has already been born becomes desperately ill and needs a bone marrow transplant. Should the state be permitted to FORCE the child's male parent - the biological father - to donate bone marrow (or any other body part that will not kill or disable the adult parent) to keep that child alive if doing so goes against the father's preference?
Currently, some states can force the mother to donate her body for nine months to keep the fetus alive, regardless of her personal feelings about pregnancy or her religious beliefs against medical intervention to save a life. But no state has yet put in place laws demanding the MALE parent donate a body part to keep his child alive. Should laws be changed to force the father to donate his organs, skin and tissue once the child is out of the womb?
Why should the mother be forced to carry a pregnancy to term to sustain the life of the fetus but the father not be forced to donate part of his body to sustain the life of the child?
No parent can be forced to submit their child to vaccinations or other medical treatments if their religious beliefs oppose it. But women CAN be forced to carry a pregnancy to term. Isn't time MALE parents were also forced to donate part of their bodies to keep their children alive?
25
Here is my suggestion for the Republicans' 2020 campaign slogan - "Back to the Future". Return to the glory days of America's past when abortion was illegal; banks and other financial corporations did not have pesky reporting and disclosure requirements; you could own any gun you wanted; money wasn't being wasted on Medicare, Medicaid Social Security and a national health cae act preventing massive tax cuts for struggling millionaires, billionaires and multi-national corporations; unions were illegal; no regulations existed prohibiting coal mining andcoal burning companies from polluting nearby rivers and streams with the refuse of their operations; oil companies were not burdened by any safety requirements; and there was no agency existing to protect consumers from corporate and business financial exploitation and fraud.
By its actions, The Republican Party and its members have demonstrated time and again they do not care a whit about the well-being of the American people. There should be no more explanations and excuses offerred for theit behavior.
24
The people declaring they're pro-life in legislatures around the country aren't handing out vouchers for free contraceptives because their only real concern is getting themselves into heaven.
That's why it's not enough for them to "choose life" - they believe they must interfere in the lives of neighbors and strangers to prevent them from making their own choices.
Pretty selfish, I'd say.
11
Science and medicine grind onward, even as we're stuck trying to force opinion into fact. These "heartbeat" laws are already obsolete. As it turns out, a heartbeat has nothing to do with being alive (or does it?), as proved by the "Heart in a Box" technology, developed to protect and transport organs, specifically hearts, for transplant. A heart is taken from a donor's body, put into the medical device and is kept pumping with warm, oxygenated, and nutrient-enriched blood. It is then transported to the recipient's hospital and placed into another body.
If lawmakers choose to believe that a beating heart is all that's required to prove life exists, they'd better start working on laws to protect the "life" of the machine as it makes its' way across town or around the world to the recipient. Does the heart in the box provide the same potential for life that the fetal heartbeat does? Both will possibly give life to a human being. If someone takes the battery from the machine, have they committed murder?
9
Thank you, Gail Collins, for expressing so well my own thoughts on the subject of "pro-life" hypocrisy. More evidence of the true motivation behind the anti-abortion fanatics is the fact that fertility treatments involve the destruction of large numbers of embryos, yet we don't see "pro-life" activists picketing fertility clinics and calling those clients murderers.
26
Has it ever occurred to we pro-choice supporters that perhaps the best tactic would be to NOT file a suit and let all these states live under the regime for a few years and see how the electorate then feels about it all? Make no mistake, every one of these cretins, governors included, expects these laws to be rushed to the SCOTUS. Imagine the looks on their faces when they sign these bills without that to save them?
Plus that would avoid the Supreme Court altogether, unless they decide to challenge their own law to get it there! (LEH!)
Same paradigm regarding Trump;
Has it occurred to the press gaggle on the south lawn to NOT shout questions at all for a day or two?
How about ignoring his tweets for a week?
How about NOT shouting the expected softball question that sails right into his and their lie wheelhouse?
How about asking something completely unexpected?
We are still not effectively countering any of this new Trump paradigm. He is still winning every day. He has barely been slowed down yet.
In fact, every day he is in office it's winning for him, permission to step on the gas!
The damage is enormous, and will grow substantially before the mess is over. It will take decades to fix as of now.
17
When I was in my first year of law school at LSU, Baton Rouge, one of my professors was asked point blank by a fellow student whether the sole purpose of sex was procreation. He responded with a resounding and enthusiastic YES! He was Catholic.
The hypocrisy of these pro-life advocates pushing these bills to restrict abortion is mind blowing. Not only do they fail to fund or support family planning, but once the unwanted child is born, these same folks say: “OK, kid, you are on your own. No money from us for early childhood education, medical or nutritional support. If you end up poor or in prison, it is your fault.” I am sure this philosophy is just what Jesus would do, particularly since an unwanted child, is in my opinion, at greater risk of being abused and impoverished. When each and everyone of these pro-lifers adopt an unwanted minority child, I might give them the benefit of the doubt as to whether the real goal here is to deprive women of reproductive freedom and the ability to make these choices based on their economic circumstances and ability to care for the child.
What does the “host” statement from the Florida Legislature remind me of? “The Handmaid’s Tale, of course. I am 65 years old, but if all my credit cards are suddenly cancelled, I will be heading to Canada forthwith.
31
@Karla R Holomon
Is it not strange that nature uses coitus as a reproductive mechanism no matter what we think we are using it for? When I hear the words "unintended pregnancy" I think unintended by whom?
1
"Of course a man has the right to change his mind …" if only he had a mind to change.
23
How many abortions did Trump pay for, during the two decades of what he described as his "Vietnam", avoiding venereal disease in New York City in the 70's and 80's while was cutting as wide a swath as possible through the jungles of NYC nightlife? Really, how many did it take before he decided he was agin' it? It was, after all, only an unavoidable cost of doing "business." Call it "overhead."
23
@Glen
Spot on!
The unending hypocrisy by this President is simply nauseating.
8
The thing that is so ironic is that just as all these states attempt to pass civil laws that are largely in accord with the Catholic hierarchy, Catholics themselves are fleeing the church in droves on account of the sexual misconduct and deviancy of the hierarchy.
26
Maybe we should change the name of the so-called pro-life movement to "All sperm matter". That would make it clear what this is really about: forcing women to carry a man's genes into the next generation. Men (in a generalized way) have always been terrified of independent women, who might reject bearing their offspring. Think of the Incels who are in a rage because no woman will have them. So much of law and religion throughout the ages has been focused on controlling women's lives and bodies so that their procreation can be dictated (or punished) by men. Fair warning: Women are equal humans, not just walking wombs, and we've come too far to be enslaved again. We will overcome this, too.
28
Calling these people "pro-life" is a misnomer. They are anti-abortion, period. They are not the same people who protest the death penalty, the state ordered termination of the life a living person. It is only the act of aborting that they detest; the life of the child after birth is of no consequence to them.
They are often the ones who protest tax payer dollars being used to support single mother's and the children they are forced to bear.
Cardinal Bernadin said life is a seamless garment, from birth to natural death. That is "pro-life."
21
So, no provision for health of the mother, or consideration of the source of the pregnancy.
These laws are punishment for “loose” women, disguised as protection of the fetus.
13
DONALD THE QUACKKK PRESIDENT, is DucKKKing out on the issue of abortion. Leaving it to the states to shred Roe v Wade. And to assure there is discrimination based on gender. Women are prohibited from receiving the same quality of medical as men, who are permitted to discuss birth control, vasectomy, transmission of disease to sexual partners. In Trump's AmeriKKKa, women are given second class status. I see it as highly ironic that there is no problem at all with men or women discussing the health of their pets, including their sexual health, and deciding to complete unwanted pregnancies, or whether to neuter either female or male pets to prevent them in the future. Humans, also being animals, should be given at least the same rights as pets and other animals. Women, in fact, are being given lesser status than farm animals and wildlife that are endangered species. The first US child abuse laws in NY in 1874, shortly after the Civil War, were based on the the laws protecting animals. I believe that going back to that precedent should provide a reframing of the entire debate about a woman's right to make decisions about her own body. Women are guaranteed in the Constitution to equal protection under the law. States that wish to treat women like pet animals need to be shown, firmly, that women, while human animals, are NOT the property of their male owners. Clearly those who favor no abortion hew to the Declaration that says, all men are created equal. But NOT superior!
5
The GOP Right Wing's refusal to support any kind or realistic family planning calls out its true intentions: they don't give a wit about the lives of fetuses (or many other lives for that matter). It's all just a ploy to whip the anti-intelligentsia into a single issue frenzy to keep themselves in power.
20
Thank you - your essay says just about everything that needs saying about the abortion conundrum
7
Sorry, in Trump's America women are only potential “host bodies”. And once they are a "host body", that is what they need to stay.
4
Men are able to do whatever they want with their bodies without government interference. Women deserve the same right.
20
I was acquainted with a man who liked to “cat around” and did not want to be responsible, or be in a committed relationship. His behavior forced at least one woman to have an abortion. Now, he regrets the abortion, feels guilty for causing the lost child but is still incapable of a committed relationship. I suspect he’s anti-abortion, and that is probably the reason many other men are. They can’t respect women, want to use them, then don’t want to face the consequences. And the women? Their fawning enablers. I have to wonder how many abortions Trump has caused.
12
The core belief here, is those purveyors of hypocrisy don't believe in women as people, as humans with all the same rights as men. Women are the receptacle, the tool, the mother, the teacher, the cook, the cleaner. This is the reason why I chose not to raise my children in the Catholic church- any church that teaches that women are LESS than men, is not a church I will raise my daughters in.
16
There has never been a more abjectly hypocritical group of people in American history than today's Republican "Christians." They've managed to destroy the credibility and integrity of both institutions.
16
@Cowboy Marine, summed up in that great quote "The Christian Right are neither".
8
The Republican Party has morphed from a political representative of corporations to a criminal predator of labor, which is the large majority of us. They sell their services to corporations (for a hefty price) to manage the herd. And one important way of managing the herd is reproduction.
9
The arguments really are childish. Heartbeats? Seriously?
If having a heart beat is sufficient to make killing a living animal morally wrong, then that applies equally to the heart beats of pigs, ducks and fish. It the anti-life "pro-lifers" truly believed their own rhetoric, they would be hardcore vegans intent on criminalizing all killing of animals, save those too young to have a heartbeat. We do not value human lives because they have a heartbeat, which means nothing except that there is a heartbeat.
The dishonesty here is impressive and leads to very real moral evil against women who would seek to abort what is not a human person, for which a heartbeat is an irrelevant consideration.
And as others have noted, if the state forces women to bear children they did not freely choose to have, then the state has a moral obligation to fully support those children and their mothers.
15
My parents, both strong Roman Catholics, practiced the rhythm method for family planning. They married after Dad graduated from West Point. They wanted three children. We five boys are proof that that of that strategy's effectiveness. While I personally am happy to be here (I am #4, lol), the rhythm method would is successful only if you stop having sex.
In your early 30's.
Not highly likely...
Abortion is not something I'll ever have to consider. Intelligent family planning is. If your real goal is to eliminate abortion, the only winning strategy requires access to accurate sex education and all methods of contraception. Anything less than that is a sham (aka asserting your beliefs are more important than anyone else's).
20
Land of the free for the few: the Koch Brothers, Rupert Murdoch, and a misogynistic minority willing to erode Senate rules for the sake of one party owning the title of “morality” and “grace” by imposing theocratic and autocratic will over the majority.
18
Gail, this isn't funny. I read your columns to have a laugh in increasingly difficult times, but this time I'm not laughing. As a man, I am ashamed by my gender's utter and complete lack of compassion and common decency. Happy to start wars, not so driven to protect those under our collective thumbs.
8
for all those "ethical" men who oppose abortion my suggestion is that they refrain from sex. All sex. After all, a pregnancy cannot occur unless sperm is present. They they can sleep at night, knowing they have prevented an abortion. So much more personal and proactive than trying to legally regulate others... they just need to regulate themselves. And by the way, abortion will continue to happen, the only question is whether it is safe and legal or dangerous and illegal.
15
But what happens is the religious right gets its wish and the Supreme Court overturns Roe? That merely replaces a federal law with state laws.
How can one state promote women's health and family planning while the state next door throws women in jail for doing the same thing?
We would eventually end up back in federal court on an equal protection challenge.
What should be painfully obvious in the Trump era is that we cannot legislate morality. If we could, Donald wouldn't be president.
10
There was a time before the pill, when abortion was illegal. Rich women with unwanted pregnancies left the country for their procedures, poor women were faced with a grimmer reality, which could include a trip to a risky back alley operation. There is no reason to believe that these draconian 21st century antiabortion/contraception measures will prevent the resurgence of a woman’s sad and desperate attempt to take control of her life and her destiny.
17
Dear @noni, Abortion is taking control of all life and its destiny, including the human fetus and its destiny.
How tragic and horrific it is to witness the abortion of an unborn child, another human life and its destiny is lost.
We need to help all mothers through pregnancy and the child she bears.
1
Gail, this issue of abortion is far more than a moral one. It's an issue of protecting all life. It requires our being humane.
You write: “The maternal mortality is 50 percent higher than the rest of the country and rising,” said Dr. Wen." That's a critical problem, and so is the infant mortality in abortions where we find 100% mortality.
It's time we all come together to end this horrific solution to pregnancy. You list several effective remedies: planning, contraception, sex education. Let's add more care for mothers during and after pregnancy.
As a humane people, we all need to choose life for ourselves and for others, including those in the womb. Abortion is not the answer. Lives are, for all.
3
Abortion will never end. Legal or not. It has always been around and will always be around. It happens in country’s where it has always been illegal.
We need to come together to prevent unwanted pregnancies through comprehensive sex -education, provide free not questions asked, no parent permission needed birth control starting in high school, develop a birth control for men, pay a living wage...
All of these things have been proven to reduce the number of abortions.
14
@Lake Woebegoner ..... Great idea .... let's raise taxes and build thousands of orphanages to house unwanted children. What could possibly go wrong?
Oh wait ... Republican's hate taxes. Let's just increase the National Debt.
7
@Lake Woebegoner Has your enthusiasm for "life" caused you to favor the complete shutdown of the tobacco industry and a ban on all firearms?
If you can't answer with an unqualified "yes," then you aren't pro-life. You just want to go back to the 1950's when every unmarried woman was fearful of an unwanted pregnancy.
12
The Democratic candidates need to start framing this debate in terms that make it clear this is anti-family legislation. They obviously hate women, but it gains us nothing to keep saying that, since that seems to be a wholly acceptable position to take in the Republican party. But they are intent on taking away the rights of both women and men to plan their lives. Making the choice about when to have children and how many to have, based on their own needs as they define them, not as the government defines them, should be the right of all families. First and foremost it is a women's choice, but the misogyny runs too deep in the Republican Party to resonate there, even among women.
12
Dear @HumplePi, the right of all families must include those humans yet unborn. All humans have a right to life, even those in the womb. Just as you and I did.
1
What's that old saying, "If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament"? I don't know whether these (overwhelmingly) white male legislators know how out-of-touch-with-reality they look, but I'm pretty sure they don't care one bit. Heartless.
557
I wish some one would run a poll to find out what the percentage of antichoice people, those who think every pregnancy has to end in a live birth, are also anti-death penalty. To me if you are antiabortion it should follow that you would also be anti-death penalty. A life is a life. The thought that any republicans care about women, women's health, and the health and well being of a child is a farce. They would make a woman bear a child, wanted or not, regardless of the health of the fetus, and then once the child is born walk away from any responsibility to help that mother and child in any way. I would say that the GOP has a woman problem(s) among them, equal pay, equal rights, equal consideration under the law, equal voice, the right for a woman to have control over her own body no matter how much they might disagree with her choices, the list goes on. Women make up about 52% of our population, here's hoping they all vote. My advice to anyone who does not like abortion however is the same as many others would say, don't have one, but do not take that right away from every other woman who might need that procedure. I am sure the evangelicals are out there claiming they need to win the abortion battle to win this country over to their religious way of thinking, on one win over anyone else by taking away their rights under the law, they just make a lot of people very angry.
16
Realistically, there will always be unwanted pregnancies. Unfortunately, our society has devolved into moral puritanism since Roe v Wade in 1973. Add to that mix basically no effective push-back against these anti-choice forces by child bearing age women and men.
11
@alank
Be honest... The State's plans to supplant the family means more and more young men are claiming the women they impregnate are "single" mothers, so her pregnancy and childbirth costs are not borne by the father or his insurance plans.
Once we lost the social stigma of having babies out of wedlock on the taxpayer's dime, only the suckers/responsible men and women choose to pay for their own.
In the end, the responsible parents raise healthier, watnted children who are provided for from their very first breath. No amount of State support will ever replace that. I think that is why there is such an outcry and judging of those families with "privilege" -- it's jealousy and envy at what intact, lifelong families off, with no State help.
I will try to be honest and sincere. I want people to have the option of abortion. We are well into the 21st century. It’s obviously not an easy choice to make and I am sympathetic to those that make it. But yes, I support keeping that choice safe, legal and private.
From a conservative point of view, I also think it is of dubious morality that others are asked to support your children, pay for their health care, college, and give them a guaranteed minimum income.
We either believe in privacy, freedom, and liberty, or we live by collective rules. The latter of which keeps the abortion debate legitimate. Society decides, or individuals decide. You can’t have both.
13
If only the 'Pro-Life' believers believed in the rights of the living as much as they believe in the rights of the unborn.
A reasonable compromise would be a hold on any and all further restrictions on abortions until America's third-world rates of infant and maternal mortality are brought into line with other first-world countries.
The reduction of the appalling U.S rates of infant and maternal mortality would need the institution of nationwide, free and freely-available pre and post-natal care.
The 'Pro-Life' believers would, undoubtedly, see this as Socialism and would make sure it never happens.
But, at the very least, their hypocrisy about being 'Pro-Life' would have been exposed and they would need to find a different catch-phrase to hide their motives behind.
25
It is all about ginning up votes for Republicans. Period. Who honestly thinks the GOP cares about women, women’s health, women’s economic futures, women’s careers, or anything that doesn’t result in more votes for the GOP via abortion politics?
44
How convenient to drag the man into the picture when there’s a penalty involved. Up till that point no one ever bothered to consider the man’s input (pun intended) or his right to the pregnancy. And yes even a man has the right to change his mind.
2
The extremists in charge at the Department of Health and Human Services oppose contraception; that's why they are now using family planning funds to fund organizations that don't provide contraception. They think that only married women should have sex and only if they are willing to become pregnant (unless they are past menopause).
I would just love to see a reporter ask Trump why, given his own record of promiscuity that undoubtedly depended on women having access to effective contraception, does he want to give money to programs that refuse to provide contraception? Does he think women shouldn't have sex unless they both are married and want to be pregnant?
I'd love to see some commercials in 2020 with quotes from Trump about his promiscuity and then saying "Today this man is using federal family planning monies to promote organizations that do not prescribe contraception."
22
In that trump bragged about his prowess in the 70’s and 80’s, one might wonder if a few of his “conquests” wound up with an unwanted/unexpected pregnancy...and what options they chose.
4
There's a very important detail that often gets overlooked when discussing these very short abortion window bills: because of the weird way that we measure pregnancy, women are generally considered around 2 weeks pregnant the moment they conceive. That means that these 6 week bans popping up everywhere are actually 4 weeks in the real world, and the 2 week ban suggested at the beginning of the article is effectively a total ban.
16
The third major tenet of the GOP is control over women. They fail to see the irony of their position when the GOP loudly proclaims that there is too much government intrusion into people's lives.
40
@Tom Clemmons- It is interesting that the GOP has always fought against "government" intrusion in all its forms yet has always been a great advocate of the State controlling our every action within the bedroom.
11
As a public service to provide fuller information about the current state of the abortion debate in this country, the Times should be collecting and disseminating information about prominent politicians who publicly oppose abortions, but who have had them, paid for them or helped other people to obtain them.
The logical place to start would be with President Trump.
30
@A. Stanton: For every high profile male politician whose affairs have been exposed in the media, there have to be dozens more who haven't been exposed. Your suggestion, though interesting, would only unmask those who were unlucky enough to get caught.
1
How does this policy square with Trump’s claim that the US is already full of people?
23
"But it doesn’t allow them to pass laws that make the rest of the country follow their religious tenets.".
That one sentence speaks volumes concerning what is happening in this country-it is becoming a religious state in which all citizens must follow the religious tenets of "christianity" (lower case intended as those who force their beliefs on others are not Christians).
Trump and those politicians are complicit in the religiousification (made up word, but, it is fitting) due to their pandering to the religious right.
I have seen some bumper stickers and facebook posts that indicate we have freedom of religion, not freedom from religion. I beg to differ. I practice freedom from religion and the beliefs that those who subscribe to religion and attempt force those beliefs on me and other like-minded persons.
I remember well the braying from Trump and his like-minded (or mindless) politicians that Islamic factions are establishing Sharia law in some countries. I offer we are doing in this country with a perverted version of their "christian" beliefs.
28
"There ought to be a way for people of good will to join hands and work together to make all pregnancies wanted pregnancies." There surely is, but there is little good will among our army of anti-abortion fanatics. Those who are elected officials trying to impose their religion on people of other faiths are of necessity also hypocrites from the moment of their swearing, so there goes that dichotomy. Gail, you've tried to write a thoughtful column about a thoughtless, transgressive movement. You may as well try to make sense of nightmares.
14
The only person who should be deciding what is right for their self is them self.
17
Of course, passing laws that appeal to anti-abortion zealots is not "identity politics".
10
This is probably more about keeping women quiet, barefoot, and pregnant. They have gained too much voice. We need to put them back in their place. But no mention of men being equally responsible for pregnancy. No mention of men being responsible for providing for baby after birth. This is the patriarchy rearing it’s head against women wanting a voice.
27
While I think this article delves deeper than most into the contradictions of women's reproductive health, I think the point needs to be expanded:
To so many on the right, this is about sex. This is about women showing restraint about sex; not desiring sex. This is about being a "good girl" and only having sex when married to fulfill wifely duties.
This is about control, yes, but well before a fertilized egg comes into the picture.
31
I remember a time, not so distant, when Republicans were at war with stem cell research; now it's main stream research. I remember a time when Republicans fought tooth and nail against marijuana, now they are raking in the taxes. I remember a time when . . Republicans always seem to be on the wrong side of social change. But, like stem cells, marijuana, etc, they will loose the culture war and one day freedom of choice will be as common as stopping by the store on the way home to pick up milk and marijuana.
15
I have a solution. Pass a federal law that requires states that restrict abortion to provide life long support to those mothers and children affected by anti abortion laws, including the cost of educating the childen through college.
Sure, I know this would never pass, but introducing such legislation would at least highlight the hypocrisy and put a spotlight on the consequences of these laws.
Besides the undue emotional burden these laws impose on women, do these lawmakers ever consider the financial strain such laws place on mostly poor women. Perhaps such legislation as I propose would at least make voters in the anti abortion states think twice before favoring candidates who support anti abortion laws without also providing financial support to the mothers and their children.
28
@Dick
What if those states just passed a law mandating that women and men who cannot provide for their child are locked into a poorhouse until they can pay for their medical bills caused by the unplanned pregnancy?
Their children, meanwhile, will be raised in foster homes/adoptive homes by people paid to care for them and teach them responsibility. Win win, and men would stop spilling their seed into fertile women if they know it will ultimately cost them, no?
The same technology that allows babies to be born at more and more and more earlier viable ages can also track whose children these are, exactly...
1
These legislative actions are expressions of profound hatred of women disguising a deep fear of the power of women to control the future through their decisions when, if, how to get pregnant. What confounds me is why there are women who support these unreasonable laws. Are they afraid of their own power? Is it Stockholm Syndrome? Perhaps Pro choice people should be advocating for laws requiring father supported childcare for each unwanted pregnancy that is forced to come to term. And if that mother dies during birth of the unwanted child, the father is at least an accessory to murder. Considering this country's poor mortality statistics, that situation could very well happen, especially for poor women who do not have the means to avoid an unwanted pregnancy. There should be answers to the suggestions of the abusive laws of what could be so that the suffering is spread evenly rather than resting only with the women. Perhaps that could reframe the conversation.
19
Why don't we prevent most unwanted pregnancies in the first place by having the government enact a law which requires all males at age 13 to undergo vasectomies. Then, when they are married and decide they want a family, the procedure can be reversed for procreation, then reversed back again until the next wanted pregnancy. Let's see how men feel about having the government and other people up their hoo-hahs and telling them what to do with them..by law.
65
@Virginia...Exactly!
6
I am sorrowful that abortions occur but will defend the right of all women to choose to terminate a pregnancy for whatever her reason. Parenthood is a lifelong commitment and to be committed against your will is cruel to both mother and child. There is nothing sacred in a fertilized egg. It’s biology not mysticism or religion. Pregnancy is a process of unfolding potential. Every woman has the right to choose whether or not to allow that process to continue to birth. Her reasons behind her choice are none of our damned business.
87
@Schimsa
I agree with you that there is nothing sacred in a fertilized egg, as well as that a woman's reasons to choose not to carry it to term are her own business.
What I don't understand, though, is why you believe it's "sorrowful" that abortions occur. There's nothing wrong with it, and I'm very glad that women have that choice. Yes, it's unfortunate that a medical procedure is needed - no one likes having to get something medical done - but no more sorrowful than needing to go to the dentist to fill a cavity.
16
Compulsory childbirth has so much in common with rape that it shocks the Christian soul to find a major American party demanding it.
49
The GOP loves the unborn. Right up until you are born. Then you're on your own, baby.
46
@dave fucio
Then, you're stuck with the ma and pa who created you. It usually takes until the teen years though for these children to successfully commit suicide. Nttawwt, right?
1
"Otherwise you’re either an appalling hypocrite or an elected official attempting to impose your religion on Americans of different faiths."
In simple terms, you're an anti-woman Republican. The most appalling members of that breed are Republican women, who seem dead-set on reacquiring the chains that females once wore in this country.
50
Given the efforts these hypocrites are using to enforce their so called religious will on all women I have to wonder are the Taliban alive and well in America. How long before women are required to stay home, cook meals, clean the house and raise the kids, even though they may not have the means to do so according to the standards expected by the Taliban, or is that church. These folks supposedly hate govt telling them what to do while at the same time they very much believe that it is okay for them to force their archaic religious beliefs on all. Hypocrites!!!!
35
When you read these policies almost exclusively promoted by the GOP and its leader Trump, you wonder how they get elected.
There are districts and states where a majority electorate happens to support those candidates who endorse those policies however it is becoming abundantly clear, qualitatively and quantitatively, that it is a shrinking electorate.
So how do they hold on to their seats?
Gerrymandering and voter suppression supported by stacked courts. Election commissioners , political appointments , look the other way But these maneuvers still don't reverse the changing demographics.
So how do they hold to their power?
You change the constitution by forcing a constitutional crisis i.e. a national emergency where the power of the presidency is almost unlimited under the current constitution.
A.G. Barr is just warming up with his manipulation of the Mueller Report. Trump selected him for a reason, and Michael Cohen, who knows Trump better than anyone, wanted us that Trump will not leave peacefully.
We are in a slow rolling GOP coup which will accelerate as the election nears and the polls reveal that Trump can not win.
37
If in Florida a pregnant woman is regarded as a
"host body" then it follows that the zygote in her tummy
is a parasite and it should be removed.
F3
36
What's really going on here, is control of women by men. That's the real issue. Women are getting much too uppity for the wussy males on the religious right to have to manage.
36
@mj
There was an old German adage about how to keep women down, translated "Kitchen, church, and children." Women are still paying for Eve's sin, that old myth from Genesis. It's wrong in some legislators' minds and some religious groups for women to experience sex as pleasurable. The morning after pill should be as easy and inexpensive to obtain as male drugs for erectile dysfunction. And while we're on the subject, why are prisoners allowed to have prescriptions for Viagra?
7
@mj
Actualy, it is a male versus male thing.
Responsible men are sick of providing for the poor women who contine to breed the offspring of irresponsible men. Don't kill the children; teach the woman that he life is not going to get better by multiplying her lot...
Bring back the poorhouses. That will stigmatize women to choose better perhaps.
1
No Unwanted Male Sperm Left Behind
GOP 2019
27
Time to start legislating the penis. Lock it up!
62
@Shlyoness...better yet, how about mandatory vasectomies for serial impregnators?
Just kidding, guys!
Seriously, though, we have a culture of institutionalized dehumanization that reduces people to mere reproductive tracts. The great irony is that this started with the sex-obsessed so-called “free love” generation and is now largely driven by sex-obsessed so-called “religious” conservatives.
Wait...does that mean an Evangelical is a Flower Child that got religion?
Okay, now the moral pervitude makes sense.
5
Conservatives have a need for certainty, even when none is truly possible. Hence the insistence that a fertilized egg is a person.
There is no clear line as to when a a collection of cells becomes a "baby," period.
Still, those who can't handle ambiguity will insist trying to regulate it out of existence. They will insist on Day One, because they simply must have a Rule.
In truth, over centuries, we have shown what we REALLY believe: We have not treated the earliest stages of pregnancy as involving a full person: We do not hold funerals and burials for early miscarriages. We do not enter them into the family tree. We do not count them in the number of our children.
30
That's why Pence pushed an Indiana law to require funerals for miscarriages.
Well, this hypocrisy isn't new and in the Republican Party it is hardly limited to reproductive health.
The Catholic Church is much like the Republican Party: No sex without procreation unless you're a member of the "party".
My religion is right and yours is wrong. Duh.
Getting rid of Trump might drive the religious right into the shadows, but they will linger there like a cancer cell waiting.
39
Why bring Kavanaugh into this debate? He has made it clear time and time again that “Roe vs Wade is settled law.” Period. “I believe” Kavanaugh. Blame your state legislators who are imposing laws with which you disagree, and vote them out of office.
6
@Pvbeachbum These laws are not about overturning Roe vs. Wade. There are about making it as difficult as possible for women to access abortion services. Undoubtedly, a challenge to one of them will end up in the Supreme Court. That is why Ms. Collins brought Kavanaugh's name is the debate.
17
@Pvbeachbum
Certainly, you are naive to believe nonsense, Kavanaugh was nominated and placed on the SC to overturn RvW. among other mandates for the Federalists Society.
7
Kavanaugh is just another hyper enabled liar in a nation that tells the truth about itself never.
4
There really should be a morning after pill created for the morning after. Regardless.
11
come up to Canada if you need to, we have pretty good health care.
27
The Nowhere Man chooses not to choose
3
The truth is that these anti-abortion anti-contraception body-snatchers are human traffickers in the adoption racket, and they don’t even care about the health and prospects of the babies they sell to childless couples.
24
Thank you, Gail, for clearly reciting the oft told arguments, albeit uncharacteristically (for you) sober in tone. The juxtaposition of a woman's freedom and the hypocrisy and misogyny that opposes it is so blatant and obvious that I, for one, don't understand it at all. Your reference to the Catholic Church's bizarre sexual mythology is also a clearly understood factor but, and I thank you again, perhaps not often stated. Aren't the right to lifers able to hear themselves and put two and two together to add to four?
I'm told by some that evil in the world is real, that our conflicts are not just a reflection of evolving yin and yang but a higher order of real evil vs. real good. I can believe it when ugly hatred is spewed by neo Nazis in Charlotte (e,g,). It seems that stupidity, pathological fear and sexual obsession are still with us in force, always to be fought with reason and sense. And now is, of course, a dangerous time when we have a President tinged with madness, a mass of the population toting guns and suffering inflicted by an unforgiving climate disruption. Hurricane season is approaching once again. Maybe the only sensible thing to do is to have joyous sex without bringing children into the world until it cools down. And if prayer is an answer, don't bother dragging others into the Church to reinforce your insecurity about God's purposes. We will all be praying soon enough as the ice caps melt -- caused, in part by too many "babies" eating meat.
8
It almost sounds as if Republicans think children are the dreadful consequence —the punishment — for sexual intimacy. “You will not be allowed to enjoy any sexual experience unless you accept the possibility the lifelong responsibility of parenting.”
What a horrible way to think of sexuality and children — as some kind of tradeoff where a moment’s joy leads to a lifetime of regret.
32
Don´t forget the moralists. They know that somewhere, somehow, someone is deriving very real and intense pleasure from a sex act, and they are duty bound to put a stop to it.
12
But, but, I thought this country was already full! He should be tossing contraceptives like paper towels to the faithful at his rallies in that case.
36
Gail, I usually expect a column containing enlightening wit, but this topic is way too serious for that. I think your column today really hit some nails on their heads.
20
That whole fetal heartbeat stuff is such cynical nonsense: if someone insists that life begins at conception (as I do) and seeks to impose that belief on those who don't share it (as I don't) then what, pray tell, does fetal heartbeat have to do with anything? Every fetus has a heart, whether you can detect its beat or not, so why not outlaw all abortions (including those produced by abortifacients) at every stage of pregnancy? OK, that's a rhetorical question: those who are opposed to women's reproductive rights want to present themselves as "reasonable" by allowing women to terminate their pregnancies until such time as an audible "sign of life" can be detected. And once they've gotten their way on this issue, they'll move almost immediately to ban all abortions (except perhaps for situations involving the life of the mother) and then take aim at contraceptives, too. And, ultimately, the law of the land as it relates to matters as personal and intimate as this will be set by a man whose attitude towards women is roughly equivalent to that of your average Taliban member.
Comment posted 4/6 at 2:08 AM
17
The heart is just a pump. Thinking, if and when it happens, occurs in the brain.
4
A woman enjoys the same inalienable natural rights of life and liberty as every other individual and must be guaranteed the right to choose to terminate a pregnancy until the unborn reaches natural viability when those same rights guarantee the rights of life and liberty of the unborn, and those rights can only be superseded by a woman's if and when a family is faced with the terrible choice of choosing the woman's life or the unborn child's.
5
Time to move to a different state.
1
If Georgia is proposing a 10 year prison sentence for women who terminate a pregnancy after the detection of a fetal heartbeat, what sort of “punishment” do they have in mind for men who are caught on tape demanding that their mistresses, girlfriends etc. have an abortion, in order to save them from the embarrassment or reputational damage of “inconvenient” pregnancies? Do tell...
22
My Son-In-Law had his tubes tied. I'll let him and his wife know that sex is out because pregnancy is precluded. Gotta love the teachings of the RC church.
6
In this world, bizarre things do happen!
I read recently that a 61-year (!!!) old mother is carrying a child for her son and his 'husband' !!!!
@Dreamer That's husband, not "husband."
2
Samantha Bee's program cited the statistic that Georgia has the highest maternal mortality in the U.S. Eat your heart out Missouri.
11
These are the folks hollering about “sharia law”- they don’t mind forcing their own bizarre attitudes on Americans who have no interest in their zealotry. Time to unplug taxpayer cash for fanatics and time to scrape off the cynical politicians who use these people to gain power. There is no way the Trump women would put up with Donald’s medieval attitudes for their own lives. It’s the Age of Hypocrites.
13
I find the Florida terminology for a woman with an embryo or fetus... amusing. Calling the woman a 'host' suggests that the thing within her is a parasite.
13
Two things upset me about the Anti-Choice movement:
1- The laws only affect poor women.
2- There is nothing in their original document that even mentions abortion. It is only the opinion of the old men in the Catholic Church. Their document seems to indicate the soul enters the body with the first breath. So, yeah, the fetus is a blob of cells.
5
This issue is not religion. It is simply another form of white male supremacy. The goal of our mostly white male state and congressional legislators is to make the phrase "family planning services" meaningless. The truth lies in Gail's simple sentence "the real plan is to keep you pregnant whether you like it or not".
9
Donald J Trump and the Roman Catholic Church as moral authorities...?
Please.
Joe Biden isn't the only one who needs to come up to speed.
7
I would bet that more than one woman has had an abortion as a consequence of conjugal relations with Donald Trump, possibly at his behest. If only they would come forward or be revealed.
15
Over 50% of Caucasian women voted for Trump. Ladies, you asked for this bill when you chose to vote for Trump to appease your husbands. Now here we are. Think twice about who you vote for in 2020.
5
As with most of the Republican agenda, their anti-abortion crusade has a disparate impact on the poor, and in this case, poor women.
In the 1950s, the daughters of wealthy Southerners would hop on a plane to New York or California or even Mexico and have a “mistake” taken care of. Once the SCOTUS they have packed with the Gorsuchs, Kavanaughs and Thomases have their way and overturn Roe v. Wade, I guess they will be going to have to do so again. Trump wants to go back to the 1950s (MAGA!) and soon they will, at least when they need to end an unwanted or inconvenient pregnancy.
If a 20-year old, white, blonde sorority sister at the University of Alabama who winds up pregnant after a drunken night at a campus frat party can no longer get an abortion, perhaps her Republican parents will have a different view of this issue. But for now, this is a problem of the poor, who don’t have the resources to fly to a blue state to get sexual counseling, let alone an abortion.
Because, you know, the poor make bad choices and have to live with them. But the white coed—well, her evangelical mommy and daddy can’t let her mistake mess up her college life and future.
13
A virulent strain of conservative religious minority that wants to wash away the “sexual revolution”. Better known as women’s equality in the work place, home, and in bed.
6
The GOP position on abortion is basically the “Werner Von Braun” model: what matters is launching the baby; how it lands is “none of their affair”.
5
@DV Henkel-Wallace
"Protect the unborn until the women squirt them out, at which point those welfare-leeching parasites are entirely on this." There seems to be a correlation between wanting to eradicate abortion rights and wanting to eliminate social safety nets.
2
"What's truly going on here, people, is a war against sex without procreation."
Observe America's religious fundamentalists, marshaling their best efforts to coerce all of society back to the dark ages, before rationality , science and enlightened thought weakened their dogmatic authority. It is excessive irony that the current president, a blatant and hedonistic anathema to the fundamentalist's stated beliefs, presents them with their best chances of success.
5
Trump, of course is now Pro Life only because he needs the Pro Lifers to keep his numbers up. They're all swimming up stream because Robert's is never going to vote to overturn Roe. If for no other reason than the huge chit he would have with Liberals to cash in on his real love; Corporate overreach. Robert's wants consecrations to act like people so they can be just as greedy as people.
To those who wish to understand “why” abortion remains an big issue with many swing state voters — check out Abby Johnson’s story in “Unplanned.”
1
As a self-confessed sexual predator and outrageous liar, Trump receives unbelievable and very critical support from hypocritical religious fundamentalists. With Roe v. Wade as a pathetic excuse, these people have abandoned every principle taught in the bible in order to convert the US into a Christian Empire. Shame on those who seek political power in the name of religion and want to do away with the Constitutional separation of church and state.
10
But how will we attain the Republic of Gilead if we let women control their own bodies?
11
These legislators who support Andy pass fetal heartbeat bills are largely male. They are not pro-life as they claim to be, but pro-birth. Once a baby is born, they could less about supporting the baby and his or her mother.
These legislators need to get out of our vaginas and focus on truly important issues for their constituents: education, food insecurity, climate change/sea level rise and infrastructure. Stay out of our bodies!
8
As Gail pointed out, obviously, it's not about being pro family - it's all about punishing women for enjoying sex...
6
Of course, the other and equally cogent part of the ‘all sex must result in babies for the Christian army”, as propounded in 1960’s Ireland, and not referred to here, is abstinence, or the rhythm method! Try imposing that on the male legislators described here. What’s good for the goose.....
3
We also need to ask where is the corresponding welfare for all these children once they are born?
9
I am requesting the Times to print the bills in Florida, Alabama and Mississippi, digitally, so we can download them and pass them around. It would be a public service.
4
"Women as host bodies" conjures up visions of Handmaidens waiting in silence to deliver the "guest".
What kind of person would think in those terms?
7
I am just waiting for the day when women say “We’ve had it with guys regulating our bodies without taking responsibility for your part in our pregnancies. Until that attitude changes, NO MORE SEX!”
Lysistrata, guys?
6
America, Land of the Free and Home of the Brave........but only
if you're a man!
Imagine if a man could get pregnant....... instead of closing
abortion clinics the government would be rushing to build more of these facilities.
For a country that is so advanced in so many ways, how is it that you are so backward on this issue?
3
Ben Franklin advocated sex with post-menopausal women because it is free of worries about making them pregnant.
1
I just cannot seem to understand why Republicans who shriek constantly about government overreach and interference seem so eager to impose governmental control over the choices that women make about their own bodies.
5
Since when can you see a baby smile on a sonogram?
4
Sex+Politics+Religion=Hypocrisy. Always the problem, never the solution.
1
So the Catholic church can impose its religious doctrine on all US citizens - Catholic and non Catholic - but if Muslims wanted to impose shariah law on all US citizens - Muslims and non Muslims - there would be uproar unlike what the country has ever seen.
6
Are pro-choice people handing out vouchers for free contraceptives at every street corner?
2
Make it a state issue..... or continue to lose the White House because of the evangelical and Catholic votes...
I call it strategic.... and minimizing the harm....
1
“Our country is full, our area is full, the sector is full.”
— Donald Trump
The president has spoken. The United States is full. Do why does our Republican government want to force reluctant women to reproduce?
"Pro-life" is starting to sound more and more like "make the poor crack out litters of kids to replace the Mexicans we're deporting." And keep them in poverty and, as Trump says, "poorly educated."
After all, Brett Kavanaugh, our new Supreme Court justice and himself an only child, has two children. Period. This lecherous man is a lector at his Catholic church. Pompous, pious, and phony.
Even Donald Trump, who supposedly chose Kavanaugh (any bets on whether he can spell it?) limited himself to five. Not bad for a guy with three wives.
Hypocrites.
7
Wonderful column, thank you!
1
""[The First Amendment] doesn’t allow [the faithful] to pass laws that make the rest of the country follow their religious tenets."
Well, of course it does. In this case, it's, plausibly, the Fourth Amendment that precludes the kind of legislation that Gail Collins is writing about. If somebody's religious tenets say don't commit murder, then the First Amendment says they can't pass laws against murder? If we oppose legislation against abortion or birth control then we need to use the democratic process and rational persuasion, not appeal to the First Amendment.
Collins is saying that officials who don't support "effective family planning" are "attempting to impose [their] religion on Americans of different faiths." It could be argued that the following is a distinction without a difference, but I don't think it is: the distinction between the establishment of a state religion and legislators being guided by moral views that are, in fact, endorsed by certain religions (and that they may have acquired through religion). Murder and stealing are examples. "Thou shalt not kill" and "Thou shalt not steal" are edicts found in religions, but nobody would argue that you can't detach those moral views from the religions in which they get stated; nobody would argue that a law against murder is an establishment of religion.
We may not share the moral compass of people influenced by certain religions but it is too easy an out to say that they impose religion on us.
It seems to me that the only rational thing if a government forces women to have children they don't want and can't support, is that the government assumes responsibility for raising those children it has forced to be born. According to the USDA, it costs $233,610, or $14,000 annually, to raise a child to age 17. So when a woman seeks an abortion that is denied, the government would have to automatically not only pay that woman for her services as a brood mare and cover all maternity and delivery costs, but also must provide her with $14,000 each year to support that child that they forced to be born. I would extend that beyond age 17, to age 21.
Surely the righteous Christians and authoritarians who are demanding the end to all abortions would be delighted to donate to help the government carry out their wishes, right? And the churches that preach this gospel could be required to pay a child raising tax.
It's only right and just.
12
How many of the politicians proposing and supporting such laws actually understand and believe that the laws are good?
Abortion and gun rights are easy political targets. It is an easy way to get the support of a particular constituency and to distract from the politician’s failure to act on tougher issues.
As for Trump, if his rich televangelist donors told him tomorrow that he should support pro-choice, he’d change in a minute. And tweet that his pro-life stance the day before was fake news.
10
They used to say that men wanted to keep women barefoot and pregnant. A lot has changed, but the evangelical right still wants the pregnant part and probably would like to keep women barefoot as well. This is all about male supremacy, ingrained in Christianity because Christian gods, Jesus and Jehova, are superior,powerful and male. Certainly not all christians are obvious about it, but the basic tenants are still there. Religious beliefs are deeply, strongly, entrenched and once accepted, do not evolve much because they revolve around blind belief, not reason. This has very deep roots and will remain as long as there are zealots to support it.
8
These men strike these poses and vote against abortion access to win votes and elections. Just more of the red vs blue split - soon the urban and suburban dwellers will be the only ones with access to full reproductive healthcare. You get the government you vote for, or worse , the government you deserve when you don't vote.
11
This idiotic system chronically discards votes, so people who don’t vote at all have good reason not to.
The Supreme Court case that the totalitarian Christians, like Neil Gorsuch, are really angling to overturn is not so much Roe v Wade as it is its precursor, a case brought by a Planned Parenthood contraception clinic against the state of Connecticut. In 1879, Connecticut passed a law that had banned the use of any drug, medical device, or any other form of contraception.
In 1965 the Supreme Court took on the case, Griswold v Connecticut, ruling that the states had no right to ban contraception for married couples. Its in this landmark case
that the Court established — for the first time — a constitutional right to privacy regarding reproductive decisions that paved the way for the legalization of birth control for unmarried couples, and ultimately, Roe v. Wade.
Be forewarned; stay vigilant.
31
These states with the heartbeat rule only criminalize the action of the woman getting the abortion and nobody else. She didn't get there alone. It is likely that her male partner conspired in the decision to get an abortion and conspiracy is usually a crime. The constitution grants everybody equal protection of the law. Maybe the heartbeat law doesn't fully pass the smell test.
12
If these states start prosecuting men who aid and abet (they won’t) the public outcry would shut it down immediately.
4
The same folks who claim the mantle of 'pro life' are usually 'pro gun'. That they don't see the mismatch is simple - they are willfully blind, and are not capable of objectively viewing their discordant beliefs. To advance oneself, with respect to education or morality, you must be able to consider that what you once believed or accepted is wrong, or at the least, incomplete. Assuredness of one's own position is not a measure of validity. (I figure most of those folks wouldn't even understand the discussion, painting me as an elite, as if eliteness is a bad thing.)
9
They claim that God created guns in the Garden of Eden too.
2
You have to ask what is behind all this. The majority of folks do believe family planning is the responsible approach.
And why has the GOP latched onto this insane attachment to procreation as the only reason for sex? And sex without that goal should, they think, result in destroying the lives of the mother, the child, and causing social ills?
Yes, why? For some it is pushing their religious convictions upon others, contrary to our Constitution. For others it is pushing chaos that they hope will overturn the Constitution entirely and open the door to despotism.
8
@John Brews. ❎❎❎
It's a money thing, John.
Unlimited sex, like open borders, costs a society.
Open your wallet and start paying if you want to encourage this behavior. The rest of us are trying to prevent it.
Or is that your religion? I can do whatever I like, and someone else will rescue me in the end from the consequences?
1
As I read this a thought popped into my head... Recently I have felt #metoo has been overreaching. Perhaps this is in part due to the overreach of men's wanting to control women's bodies. Men may want to rethink their position on this.
1
Anti-abortion plus anti-contraception proponents are trying to send women back to the kitchen. And what hypocrisy! They’ll be sure to keep their own women working. Basically, they are ensuring more unwanted children among poor women. Is that the outcome they really intended? Women should just have a moratorium on sex if these laws pass. I wonder how long it will take...
4
Good God! Do women in the 21st Century still clutch rosary beads???!!!!
The last, and only woman I knew who did that was my "born in the 19th Century" Grandma, an Irish Catholic immigrant.
She was sweet and good but, she scared the heck out of me as a young child when she sat down to click the beads and mumble those prayers.
She lived her life in fear of her God. I knew at 8YO in Catholic school this was never for me. My Mother left the church at 85 YO....Brave Woman.
And now, in the 21st Century we face a new religion: state-imposed.
I am more scared than Grandma.
5
“There ought to be a way for people of good will to join hands and work together to make all pregnancies wanted pregnancies.” Yes there is, and Bill Clinton coined the formula: “safe, legal and rare”.
Most civilized societies got there over decades, applying comprehensive programs of sex education and welfare. It’s hard but the only way to achieve the goal of making abortions an exception, but keeping them safe and legal at the same time.
American anti-abortion zealots chose the easy way: make abortions illegal, which will hardly dent the numbers but for sure will make them unsafe for the poor women who can’t afford a well trained doctor. Abortion will be like education, professional opportunities, environment and health care: world class for the rich and pitiful for everyone else.
23
The snakes are crawling out from underneath their rocks. Will they suffer any political damage from their virulent misogyny?Apparently not for the wave of legislation criminalizing abortion has spread like a wildfire.
These laws course please the Catholic hierarchy but seem to occur mostly in states where the Catholic church is not the majority domination but where Evangelicals are. These are Trump's and Pences's people. They are the last hard core of their support.
Far too long women have labored under the misperception that the rules that gave them reproductive freedom would never change.
The only solution to these laws is to vote against those who sponsor them and to make them suffer defeat.
Women of the world unite. You have nothing to lose but your chains.
14
Ms. Collins,
The usual humor and lark like writing is less so here today - for very obvious reasons. This issue hits home with me: I have donated to Planned Parenthood for years and insisted on the parental healthcare waiver for our two daughters at age 16 for their privacy - my wife and their Mom? She is owned by the evilandevical "right" and as part of her retirement she will volunteer for a local as you describe, "fake clinics". I will happily forward Ms. Kelley's "America's Leaders Need Sex Ed" and your column. Pro Women's Health supporters must bring up this work of yours:
Here’s the thing: If you want to claim the moral high ground in a fight over terminating pregnancy, you have to support effective family planning. Otherwise you’re either an appalling hypocrite or an elected official attempting to impose your religion on Americans of different faiths.
17
I would be interested in what anti-abortion legislators and activists who support the six-week laws feel about Plan B -- the "morning after" pill. Opposing it would be sheet hypocrisy, in my view.
Anti abortion people are not necessarily pro life, but merely pro birth. Pop that kid out and hope for the best thereafter.
6
@George Sheehan
It's a life, at least. The kid has to play the hand it's dealt, by the two people who created it.
1
At 6 weeks, the products of conception are embryos, about 1/2 inch long. That's this big. .... Many such products are lost before the woman even knows she is pregnant.
6
GOP mission is clear. To roll the clock back of women's reproductive rights back to the Dark Ages. Where one is barefoot and pregnant while chained to the stove. For powerful men fear strong and independent women. Source of a woman's strength is to control her own body. The unborn child is nothing more than a prop for the GOP.
5
"Here’s the thing: If you want to claim the moral high ground in a fight over terminating pregnancy, you have to support effective family planning. Otherwise you’re either an appalling hypocrite or an elected official attempting to impose your religion on Americans of different faiths."
Gail, you're too common-sensical. Logic is not something zealots apply when it comes to women's bodies.
For a party that abhors "big government" yet demands to make legal their desire to control the reproductive parts females only (certainly no laws acknowledging that two sexes are required for pregnancy), the Republicans certainly take the prize for chutzpahpsh.
Punish women only? of course! Ban sex outside of procreation? Sure.
Then why is it that so many Republican men always seem to be getting into extramarital affairs, to the point of paying them off to shut up about it?
9
When you elect reactionaries, you can expect reactionary lawmaking. When you elect lying hypocrites you can expect them to appoint lying hypocrites to the high courts. This is promoted by your voting system, rigged by gerrymandering and created from the start to give equal weight to California and - for instance - Wyoming in the senate.
7
Where are the people who want every pregnancy to deliver a baby after the baby is born?
There’s limited to no support for unwanted children and children born to families who can’t support them.
The Catholic Church used to have orphanages for unwanted babies born to Catholic women. Don’t think they exist anymore.
Don’t see the people who want to stop abortions lining up to have their taxes raised so the government could/would pay to support the children who are born. There’s enough trouble providing food and education for the children we now have.
5
Can anyone honestly believe that "Individual 1" never urged or paid women to undergo this procedure?
34
Sad that an article like this could have been written at almost any point in the last 100 years, even with Catholics were far from America's most respected citizens. Now, of course, by chance (?), they comprise a majority on the Supreme Court.
I'll skip the too obvious points about THAT RELIGION, with its recent history, being guardians of US national morality.
What I will say is that this is bizarre - to an uncanny extent, the people who (as Ms. Collins notes) simply want to see every pregnancy go to term ... are the VERY SAME people who (a) want to restrict access to good medicine (EFFECTIVELY) to middle class and above; and (b) have no problem with schools in poor communities being sub-standard; and (c) complain about crime, high unemployment rates, drug use, etc. - all the cancers affecting those communities ... IN LARGE MEASURE because raising children "conceived in error" is probably injurious on an order of you or me surrendering our left hand.
7
There is a religious test for pubic offices in this nation that tells the truth about nothing.
Sadly even though they despise him, millions will vote the abortion ticket. Why they are pro-fetus and not pro-life is simply beyond comprehension. They need to think.
395
@SW
If logical thought was their strong suit we would not need to have this conversation.
61
@SW
Pro-fetus is a bigoted and vicious slur. It is a convenient denial of truth that the sex without consequences supporters use. People and institutions that are pro-life also support crisis pregnancies, adoption agencies, hospitals, and schools. They support the hungry and homeless and they defend life, even against the death penalty. This slur has to stop, if for no other reason than it is an easily refuted lie.
11
15 or so years ago, I sat in a Cleveland Clinic (Main Campus) hallway waiting for a friend with a brain tumor to finish her imaging. Some of the literature available was from the anti-contraceptive lobby. What I should have done was raised a little h--- about it, but I'm afraid I just thought how ludicrous and unlikely the proposed scenario seemed to be. I was naive.
1
Thank you, Gail Collins. I think you set up a great case: by denying my right to an abortion you are infringing on my religious freedom. My religion is science and says life begins at viability. Your few religions say it starts at conception. You are forcing your beliefs against my beliefs. This is infringing on my religious freedom. Bingo.
6
Thanks Gail, for continuing to point out that opposing abortion AND contraception amounts to "a war against sex without procreation." That's what it's really about.
3
People are prone to promote very strange ideas around emotional issues. In a world where the human population is skyrocketing and the real consequences are depletion of earth resources and pollution of earth, air, water and soil, and the terrible storms of global warming, it is crucial and imperative that we curb the earths human population because it is the source of all our grief in this modern time.
At the same time fundamentalist Christians have decided that abortion is the cause worth making a stand for. Their reason is based on the wish to control all women's bodies. This is a holdover from generations past when women were owned like cattle and had no rights.
This is ignorant and willfully so. It is long past time to move on.
4
Let’s not forget that 53% of white women voted for Trump after he promised to put Conservative judges on the courts and he did exactly what they wanted him to do.
5
I totally support woman’s right to choose. I love Planned Parenthood but I hate the word abortion.
I’ve always wondered how these anti-woman zealots can be simultaneously against both abortion AND birth control. It would probably be far easier to grasp if, after these babies are forced into the world, conservatives stood at the ready to support their healthy development. Instead, growing up becomes a minefield: cuts to the social safety net; undermining public education, no paid family leave or affordable day care.....and - of course - abstinence only sex Ed, to perpetuate the vicious cycle.
5
I will support the right of legislatures to control women's bodies when there is parity among the sexes.
Compel every young man to bank his sperm and then undergo vasectomy at age 15. We might even deny sperm banking to those men who are known to be carriers of genetic diseases as our DNA testing improves in time.
All pregnancies would then be wanted pregnancies as they would require access to the frozen semen.
Since this Brave New World is not coming any day soon, with the exception of the Equal Rights Amendment, legislatures should pass no laws which only apply to women. Full stop.
6
For those who believe that life begins at the moment of fertilization, and even call the resulting cluster of cells a "baby", there is a question that they should answer;
Imagine a burning hospital, in that hospital there is a container with 5,000 human embryos inside it; There are also 5 three year old children; You only have time to save the 5 children or the 5,000 embryos; Which do you save? The answer is easy for rational people.
16
@rich
Just considered from all sides as a logical challenge:
Yes, the three living beings have priority for sure in this scenario, but do the embryos not have any value?
Surely, they do. In this fraught case, the implication is that they aren't worth saving. Is that true? I think not.
Shades of gray exist, not just black and white.
@rich I love this "problem" you've set up. I think it should be posed to every presidential candidate out campaigning.
3
Welcome to the beginning of "The Handmaiden's Tale" when women are objectified as host bodies for fetuses. Can this really be happening in the United States. And under the watch of a man so far removed from Christian values it boggles the mind.
11
Years before Trump race-baited and conned his way into the Presidency, Congress was already notorious for being too sensitive to the desiderata of the moneybags who bought them their seats, and essentially deaf and blind to the needs of their putative constituents.
This anti-democratic status quo will not change until Congress places limits on political contributions.
Ay, there's the rub!
3
Congress is the most interest-conflicted collection of liars in this paradise for liars.
1
“Pro-Life” is the wrong term for these people. They are “Pro-Birth” and anti-life. One has to notice that the states that are most strident in regulating “host bodies” have the worst statistics for neonatal mortality, maternal mortality, and early child education and health. These legislators are pathetic hypocrites. See George Carlin’s routine on abortion.
6
They love the fetus and hate the child.
4
According to the Department of Agriculture, the current cost of raising a healthy child from birth through age 17 averages out to $233,610. Let’s see the politicians who demand that women be forced to give birth against their will put their money where their mouths are, and issue checks to the pregnant women to defray the costs of raising an unwanted or permanently handicapped child. And please, let these power-crazy politicians try to convince the husbands/fathers to put their wives at risk. That’s a video I’d love to see.
As for the crackpots in the Religious Wrong, I believe the eminent archeologist Dr. Indiana Jones put it best: “Ghost stories and fairy tales, kid.”
1
I have been indulging lately in watching a TV show called Snapped, which is about women who lose their grip and kill someone, usually their husband/boyfriend, occasionally their kids. Most of these women got pregnant in high school, had the kid, maybe had another or two, and struggled to keep a roof over their head ever since. Every episode I wonder how sex education and birth control, including safe abortion, would have changed these sad people's lives.
Another thing - Donald Trump used to say he was firmly pro-choice and he used to say his Vietnam was getting through the eighties without getting HIV. Anybody think he did that without birth control and abortion being available?
5
Knowing Trump, he means that he did get HIV and his doctor promised to keep that secret. .
Within all this there is the perversion of the word 'freedom'.
In our congress there is The Freedom Caucus, for example, that believes that white men are free to impregnate as many women as they like. as if it were a biological imperative. These men then suffer not at all, not even as a matter of conscience. They are not responsible for the consequences.
The women bear the burden. Religions sanctify this.
And this always reminds me of the Deepak Chopra statement "God gave us spirituality, the Devil gave us religion". Well said Deepak.
3
The very concept that “people of good will” can arrive at a solution is pie in the sky. There are no people of good will on the side of ‘women are host bodies’. Face facts, the anti-abortionists are hostile to other women, and if one of their own women want an abortion, they are very willing to fund a quiet, safe abortion in some state or country where it is legal.
5
I have discussed this exact thought for years! If republicans don’t want us to have abortions AND they don’t “allow” us to PREVENT them, what are they really after?? Women cannot win in this situation.
8
Rebranding is needed. Pro-control of women's bodies versus Pro-it's my body so keep your government's hands off!
3
Those whose claim is Pro-life constantly reveal their evil hypocrisy in their total distain for that life as soon as it as out of the womb. Their opposition to health care for the poor, basic social services to support the family, funding for decent childcare, and even SNAP to assure the life they “cared” so much for in utero has food to eat now is not part of their agenda. The life of that child, now born, means less than nothing along with the Mother, who never had worth as far as they are concerned. Pro-Life actually should be called, “Control and Punish Poor Women’s Lives for their Sin”. A little long, title needs work, but accurate.
4
It is the women and families at the bottom of the socioeconomic pile that will suffer the most. The wealthy can always afford the airfare and hotel bills to fly their wives/daughters to a clinic in a liberal state to take care of the problem.
GOP policy consistently punishes the poor and favors the rich.
Funny how they hate big government until it can be used to force their religious convictions down peoples throats.
8
The ignorance of 21st century citizens in the US is remarkable.
6
When one thinks of the untold misery that those who will not support broad access to contraception bring to millions of innocent lives, one hopes for a just God in heaven to finally bring them to account for the wide hurt and harm they do. As for the politics of it, the Republicans will never ban abortion access because it’s too good a campaign issue. And meantime the world melts.
5
They will do their utmost to criminalize abortion and them focus on doing the same with contraceptives
2
This isn't trying to stop abortion for all women, just the poor. If you have money and live in a Red state you travel to a Blue state and get a safe legal abortion. Everyone know this, even if they never say it. All this anti-abortion laws will only affect POOR PEOPLE!
Let's punish all those poor people for having sex! If they are going to have pleasure they need to pay the price!
Of course we must not think about the consequences: more unwanted poor babies. Why Conservatives would want to have more unwanted poor babies; especially since a lot of them will be "of color", is beyond me. But, then again, Conservatives rarely seem to think about the consequences of their "moral" actions.
Sad.
8
A man have no right to say what a woman can or cannot do with her body.
Women of the US, tell men they have to use a condom otherwise the answer is NO. Produce a male contraceptive pill that they HAVE to take daily. No pill, the answer is NO.
Lastly, a vasectomy for all men over 40. Don't have kids by then, tough!
How do like those onions men?
4
I agree with this article 100%. Well done, Gail Collins.
4
I’m sorry. I didn’t even read the article. I’ve read so many. I’ve commented on so many. I’ve read so many comments.
I’ve had so many thoughts. I’ve been thinking and thinking. I’ve had too much to think.
Donald Trump, and the GOP, are just terrible. That’s the long and short of it. No more parsing and thinking. Just beat them at the polls.
729
It seems that keeping women "barefoot and pregnant" is part of the "Make America Great Again."
For some (white men mostly) America was "greatest" when the little woman was home, having babies, taking care of the family, and having supper on the table when the man of the house came home.
But if the country" has no room for migrants fleeing violence,"
does the republican party really want a baby boom?
3
Good article, but I suggest dropping any references to Kavanaugh on this or any other Court issue. As the latest Trump justice to be confirmed, he'd probably make the difference in any Supreme Court decision to overturn Roe v. Wade. However, had he not be confirmed, an equally and possibly more right-wing anti-abortion Justice without his "negatives" would have been quickly proposed and confirmed. This might well have caused far worse right-wing partisan decisions on other issues and really ruined the Court's now-fragile reputation for judicial impartiality. This is a weak reed for Kavanaugh, but at least it's there.
Here's a very simple, very fair approach:
1. Every citizen of voting age must register as in favor of either (A) allowing women to make their own decisions, or (B) forcing women to carry unwanted pregnancies to term.
2. Every woman denied an abortion may register the resulting child for public support.
3. At birth, children registered for public support are provided an annuity sufficient to cover all their needs from birth to age 21, or for their lifetime if serious medical conditions are present. Annuities to be funded by the (B) group.
Let's see how many people are willing to back up their convictions with their own money.
6
When my son was in sixth grade and he and his friends had been through the school’s organic plumbing system version of sex ed, he and his friends had gotten one message. Don’t get a girl pregnant until you’re married and can support a child.
Given the goofiness and inquisitiveness of boys that age, they then went on a treasure hunt to find all the places in town, (population about 7,000 in northern Illinois), that sold condoms.
They were diligent. Searched gas stations. Searched the grocery store. Searched the pool hall. Searched for a non-existent drug store. Searched the bathrooms of the few taverns.
There were no, zero, condoms to be bought anywhere.
One of his friends had an older teenage friend whom he asked how guys got condoms. Oh, well you gave money to an older teenager to buy some for you when that person drove to the larger town 12 miles away.
How could this total absence happen? The Christians in town had a group that acted as condom police, (and house-party-with-drinking police) who’d report anyone selling them. The town whisperers would then threaten to shut down the business.
Also, no birth control pills.
I’d characterize all this as petty, jealous, old people with no natural sex drive creating impossible situations and laws for people with a natural abundance of sex drive. (Cynically motivated to energize older Republicans to the polls.)
In the case of my son and his friends, it created an abundance of laughable contempt for churches.
652
@Liam Jumper: You're right. Conservatives want to prevent sex. But even more, they want to punish sex.
Their vengeful rage is driven by frustration as well as envy. No matter what they do, young people won't stop having sex. And women won't stop having abortions.
I think le mot juste is "impotent."
87
@Liam Jumper
And why does the Catholic Church NOT condemn the use of viagra by unmarried men. Remember it is a sin to have sex outside of marriage.
112
"If you want to claim the moral high ground in a fight over terminating pregnancy, you have to support effective family planning."
Practically, yes; theoretically, no.
Pro-lifers want all pregnancies to go full-term. It's the sole responsibility of the pregnant woman to take care of herself and her offspring at all stages of its life, they insist.
It's not society's responsibility to do any of this. Adults, their argument goes, are in charge of their lives, but if they choose to get pregnant, they must step up to the plate, not take their glove and go home, because they weren't or won't be bailed out by others. The Lord helps those who help themselves, I guess the thinking is.
Interesting theory, that. But in reality, populated with fallible human beings, things are different: We all need help, every day, in virtually everything. Yes, we can do a small part of the work. I can drive myself to work, but I can't build or fix a car. I can't make a highway, but I can pay taxes to get it built. Etc.
Society, it seems to me, cannot nor will not work unless we have a villager's mind-set: How can I help (so you can help me later)? We're all in this together, or should be, if we want civilization, a decent society.
5
Of course they are anti-choice. If they were pro-life, they would care about medical care for mother and baby after birth. They would care about child care, schools, clean air, clean water and living wage jobs. And they would be for gun control.
It's all about jamming their religious beliefs on everyone else.
24
"There ought to be a way for people of good will to join hands and work together to make all pregnancies wanted pregnancies."
It appears to me that the right-to-lifers and their Republican enablers gave up being "people of good will" long ago.
16
“What’s truly going on here, people, is a war against sex without procreation.”
That’s not what’s going on at all - after all, men are still applauded for scoring, the more the better - and those pushing these laws in private have no problem with their wives and daughters using contraceptives as long as they are quiet about it. What’s truly going on is the further institutionalization of white supremacy and of inequality. What better way to preserve and build white male privilege and power than to pass laws that allow and encourage them to keep their boots pressed down on the necks of poor and minority women?
375
@Meghan Reader Not just poor and minority women, but their own willingly complicit white wives.
59
The bottom line for those attacking abortion is fairly simple, supporting religion and the suppression of women. The first shouldn’t be allowed in our government because of the First Amendment. The second should not be allowed by most interpretations of the Fourteenth Amendment (but should be explicitly stated in a ratified E.R.A.)
I remember an old line from 1971, “If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament.” Perhaps more of us need to think about walking a mile in other people’s shoes.
(While the attribution of the quote is somewhat in doubt, Florence Kennedy is considered the person that first popularized it. One article later in 1971 attributed it to a woman cabdriver. When I first heard it back in the early 70s, the first image that came to mind was a pregnant Richard Nixon, and it stayed with me forever.)
Excellent editorial!!!
30
@AS Pruyn
“If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament.”
A Gloria Steinem quote back in the 70's, which she attributed to an elderly Irish woman taxi driver in Boston.
It was true then, & it's still true now.
5
Do anti-abortion folk hold to their position as a real theological
belief, or more as a badge of identity as believers, sort of like
the way sports fans treasure the jersey with their favorite team's colors? Either way, it's still a religious tenet, and it shouldn't be inflicted on the rest of us. As Ms. Collins notes only in passing, the First Amendment says so.
28
I greatly resent having religious beliefs that I do not share forced on me by my government. This is an unconstitutional imposition of religion on those who do not share its tenets. It is also a blatant misuse of power to reverse decades of legal precedent because a minority of Americans choose to impose their will on the majority - women. Men, of course, are exempt from the consequences of their actions.
Given a Supreme Court which finds it acceptable to discriminate against Muslims and to torture people the law puts to death, I have little reason to believe it will actually follow and uphold precedent in this arena.
32
It's all part of the reactionary right's constellation of efforts to end our Democratic Republic and replace it with a theocratic autocracy run by the plutocrats, for the plutocrats, and of the people.
The rich, the powerful, and the religious fanatics all, all, HATE the idea that people can decide who rules them, who makes the laws, that they can legally fight those laws, and that the people can hold them accountable.
For millennia, a principle way to control people is to control their sexuality: When, how, why, and with whom they can have sex. It' is only in the last few decades that one institution, the Catholic Church, has acknowledged that sex can be used to express love between a married couple, and not just to procreate! (and that's leaving the scandals for another discussion)
Fear and ignorance, of the "other", of "change" always lead to repression.
Benjamin Franklin warned us that those who give up liberty for security will soon lose both and deserve neither.
13
Until there are laws that guarantee protection for all unwanted children who are the result of draconian anti-abortion laws then we should stop the assault on Roe v Wade. Protected fetus are abstracts until they no longer are. Where is the legislation that protects these fetuses from birth to 26 years old?
Who is making sure that these kids who were not planned or wanted are being fed and receiving adequate medical care? Who is paying for their daycare and making sure they get access to the best educations? Who is making sure they are thriving in environments free of drugs and gun violence?
Let’s not stop the conversation about when an fetus has a heart beat and talk more about what happens to that human being when he is actual and no just a bumper sticker.
We have an administration that has disdain for Medicaid and snap programs. We have an admistration that does not fund daycare programs or family leave programs. We have more homeless children then any developed country in the world.
The mortality for children from guns is the highest in the world.
Let all anti-abortion laws talk about not when the obligation to that human begins but rather when it ends.
Not all pregnancies are planned and when they are not, the mother has the right to say she is not mentally, financially or physically not prepared to care for that child. Without society’s lawful commitment to that unwanted child, the mother should be the only one left to decide that fetuses future.
46
@Leslie I have been puzzled by this for years. Why is a person's life only valued before birth?
5
The anti-choice people will have miscarriages be declared "involuntary manslaughter". There is no other legal option. If a woman becomes pregnant, goes to her doctor for confirmation, they will have the doctor report the pregnancy to some government agency for tracking. If the woman then miscarries, she must be investigated regarding the circumstances of the miscarriage. Did she cause it? What precautions did she take to ensure she protected her fetus? Did she destroy the evidence (dispose of the fetal remains)? Will she be interrogated/questioned? Will the DA press charges and jail the woman if he (most DA's are men) decides he feels she committed a crime causing the miscarriage? These are all legitimate questions the anti-choice people refuse to answer in their blind, twisted crusade to take away a woman's right to choose what she does with her own body.
41
I agree with most of what is said here, except for the "minor" detail that Gail Collins is assuming that the voting public and the elected officials of our government are solely in charge of these bad decisions.
Somewhere, in various institutions, behind all this is a very rich and very powerful oligarchy that allows these "decisions" to be made.
Perhaps it's a good thing, for America's business is always business, and endless social debate might be too much of a distraction.
6
@Al Mostonest
Not more complicated than divide and conquer, oldest political trick. Fight over race and abortion so you don't notice how much money they are stealing.
1
@Al Mostonest Does not "allow" these decisions. Directs them.
Leonard Leo. Federalist Society.
Between Lauren Kelley’s well said Editorial Observer column and your usual thoughtful column, the alpha and omega of reproductive rights are laid out. It shocks me as a man the amount of ignorance and outright lies perpetuated by my gender it this debate. These are tough decisions to be made by personal choice and not by government fiat. Sexism is alive and well in the USA And must be fought for the betterment of society.
18
What's amazing is how evangelicals are joining this anti-birth control movement. Like anti-abortion ideology, this used to be exclusively a Catholic idea. Evangelicals used to be pro-choice but began to adopt Catholic anti-abortion thinking around the time of Reagan. Now they're slowly becoming anti-contraception, too. What unites this way of thinking, despite past differences? Misogyny and anti-feminism. "Keep 'em barefoot and pregnant," is the watchword.
42
@Ron Your kind of thinking kind of minimized the agency of women, as if we are just something to be acted on and have no control whether our bodies are impregnated or not...
Great message to be sending to young fertile women! (Whether you reproduce or not, and when, is determined by big bad men in society playing with forces beyond your control... Wrong. The truth is women have the power to prevent conception and pregnancy; they always have. Empower them, don't try to convince them they have no agency here. Nobody believes that in the 21st century with so many CHOICES and options that women have today...
This all about religion, and an attempt to impose a State religion. The problem is always theocracy. The banning of abortion, contraception and sex education is the conduit for the establishment of a State driven religious moral code.for the subjugation of the People, especially the female people.
Imposing limits on people's sexual freedoms is the most effect way to subjugate them.
23
Strongly seconded.
1
Remember that everything about Trump is how things affect him personally. He was pro-choice in his 50s because he was having lots of...shall we say....women. Now that's he watched by the Secret Service and Melania, his options are more limited.
18
@Ken L Exactly. He's fine with letting women suffer, because they don't matter to him, except maybe Ivanka. And she has enough money to go to Canada to get an abortion if she needed one.
@Ken L- Yup. It's the usual "morals of convenience."
Democratic presidential candidates, are you listening?
“Let’s make all pregnancies wanted pregnancies?”
Progressive think tanks, are you listening? For once, get out a unified message - every candidate, every state and local official, everyone canvassing - make this the universe progressive message and you’ve stolen the most potent, irrational, nonsensical far right scam.
7
@don salmon
There is a very easy way to do this...
“Let’s make all pregnancies wanted pregnancies?”
Stop with the promoting idea that sex is not something sacred, and is just a "fun time" activity for boys and girls to play together.
"Let's make all conceptions planned conceptions!"
Easy peasy, eh?
Ms Collins uses the term "people of good will ". Of course the anti-abortionists are hardly people of good will, just look at the pictures showing them demonstrating at abortion clinics: they exude nothing but hate. It is abundantly clear their main driver is the insistence that everyone follow the tenets of their religion.
The "choice" people say "it's your body do as you will." The anti-abortionists say "we'll tell you what you can do with your body, we will mass together and intimidate you to do our bidding, we will shame you mercilessly, as only the church can."
11
When we legally force someone to do something against their will, as in carrying a child, how is that different from slavery? The woman receives no pay. No free health care. The father can conveniently remain out of the picture and avoid all responsibilities...legal and financial. Meanwhile the woman can bear the full burden of this forced action. That seems to be sexual discrimination to me. I thought that was illegal too.
If states are going to outlaw abortion, they ought to concurrently pay the mother, provide healthcare and force the father to share in those expenses. Will that happen? HAH!
26
Incredibly shrewd - I wish all the family and friends that tour their republican punch lines would read your last three paragraphs. I don’t claim to fathom all they stand for - but they can at least read this and understand a liberal’s perspective. Thank you for sharing such clarity on an otherwise convoluted subject.
8
If women in these anti-choice states want to prevent their bodies from being subjected to danger against their will, there's a very simple way to prompt men to liberalize the laws: simply refuse to have sex with men until the laws are changed. After all, there are ways to deal with desires and hormones other than intercourse.
7
One has to wonder why the right-to-lifers don’t protest against American supported bombing in Yemen etc.
13
While the article covers all my arguments against making abortions illegal, it doesn’t touch on how anti poor these laws can be. People with money will be able to buy condoms and other birth control devices while also being able to go to other countries to get one done, if it becomes necessary. The hypocrisy of these laws are mind numbing. All these lawmakers are neither women nor are they lining up to adopt unwanted babies! Most people think just because we are against making abortions illegal, we are advocating abortions. Let me hasten to add, we are not. We advocate free sex adulation and birth control devices. However, there still maybe circumstances where a woman needs to get an abortion. Making it illegal will only put her in jeopardy. We have to care about women too!
11
@Arati
A correction please. I meant to say sex education and not sex adulation. Thank you.
Nearly half of women voters voted for Trump.
I just don't understand.
17
@Lew Alessio
Lol. Nope, I don't suspect you do...
Believe it or not, not every woman needs or votes solely on the abortion issue. The economy, jobs, national security, secure borders, ending wars... these are all things that are better under President Trump than all the airy promises of the gentlemen politicians Bush and Obama.
Trump knows how to win, and he has been good overall for the country. Most people will tell you that. Women too.
1
James Comey creeped them out about Hillary with Anthony Weiner’s computer.
"Of course a man has the right to change his mind"
I could say, "What mind" and leave it at that. But, everyone already knows that.
What this is about is the same ole, same ole. Power, control and tribalism. Shame, guilt and threats of being charged with murder are quite effective. Religion is really irrelevant it's another ploy, another means of corralling the masses and crusading them against those that offend the, Corrupter In Chief.
It's a universal tactic not confined to any one particular religion, but Catholic means universal, doesn't it?
5
Republicans would change our nation's name to the United States of White Christianity.
Outlawing abortion is just one white Christian front. Others include banning sex education. Outlawing contraception. Supporting Christian prayers and symbols in schools and government offices. Requiring Christian faith to hold government office. Why? Because Republicans fear our nation is turning brown, too science oriented, too secular, too liberal.
In the United States of White Christianity other religions are unwelcome. Republicans don't just want to ban Muslims from entering, they want to ban Islam. And that's just for starters. Making Christianity the national religion will take time to amend the Constitution, but Republicans are all in. They are patient and militantly diligent as they have shown in their long fight to overturn Roe v Wade.
Ultimately, in the United States of White Christianity Americans will be required to attend a Christian church. Every Sunday. Punishment will start with public shaming, but lead to fines and jail time. Why? Because a state religion is worthless without indoctrination. Belief in White Christianity will be mandatory. Enforced.
The goal? A pure white Christian American identity. With Republicans in control. Of everything. Especially women's bodies.
7
Well done!!!
Let’s remember that that is the first thing to defend against. Beware of wanting a constitutional convention to rid of the Electoral College. This is what you’ll get.
2
@JABarry Sounds like China but with communism rather than Christianity in control.
Why do we care what Trump thinks? He is provocative for the sake of being provocative. His thoughts have no merit. Why do we care what the Catholic church thinks? Sexual abuse is rampant in their organization. Let's turn this argument on its head and look at the men who are a big part of the women's rights equation. Let's make a law that says, if a woman develops an unwanted pregnancy, the man must be given a vasectomy. I think men would think about reproductive rights differently, reproductive rights would become a political non-issue.
10
@Skidaway More important than making the man have a vasectomy is requiring him to be financially responsible for the child he has already fathered.
1
@Skidaway
You can't force anyone to have a vasectomy any more than you can force sterilization or an abortion on someone.
You can only teach, educate, demonstrate, and help people to better understand that the choices they make today have consequences for tomorrow. Not every mistake can be easily erased.
Without invoking religious doctrine, Pro-lifers cannot refute the science that sperm and unfertilized eggs are living. (They are certainly not dead.) Could the issue then be when does personhood begin? Not really; the law places the start of personhood at birth because, before then, the fetus is not separate from the mother. Could the issue then be wanting to use laws to control women's bodies? If a so-called Pro-lifer wants to refute that suggestion, they need to show that they are actively opposing those fellow pro-lifers who are against abortion even when the fetus is too young to be born and become a separate person. And opposing their fellow pro-lifers who are even against contraception.
2
I’m with you on this. Just realize the return argument that that the Zygote is unique and different than sperm and egg will be used.
The simple truth about these 6-week "fetal heartbeat" anti-abortion laws can be summed up in Sen. Kamala Harris' question during the Kavanaugh hearing:
"Can you think of any laws that give the government the power to make decisions about the male body?"
Kavanaugh was stumped by the question because he could not cite one case.
The legislative push to limit availability of contraception under the ACA, along with this "fetal heartbeat" madness makes it abundantly clear that the GOP sees itself as the arbiter of what women are permitted to do with their own bodies.
And all of these laws being introduced and approved during the #MeToo movement! How completely oblivious the GOP is to the importance women's issues these days, and they will pay dearly for it come 2020.
542
@wysiwyg if the white male dominated govt is going to impose laws preventing women from getting abortions then I purpose the govt also force all men aged 50 and older to have vasectomies. Tit for tat. I can’t choose and neither can you. Bet that would stop them in their tracks.
61
Gail. thought your headline "Trump Chooses No Choice" referenced the immigration issue as Trump declared a few hours ago at the California border wall that "America is full, can't take any more people.That's the way it is." ...no choice. Didn't realize for a sec that you were detailing Trump's pro-choice stance in his 50s, which is now anti-choice in his 70s.
As president Trump knows from his experiences, sex doesn't always mean procreation. Roe v. Wade is the law of our land and women have rights over their own bodies. It doesn't mean men have dominion over womens' bodies. Until that law is overturned, women will have the right to choose or not choose. Sex education, Birth control and family-planning information is key to helping women all through their baby-bearing years.
4
roe v Wade, unfortunately, is not a law, but (merely) a SC decision implying what laws regarding abortion would be considered constitutional. As such it can be changed willy-nilly by the SC. I wonder if the people who vote for Republicans consider this.
3
An illuminating discussion yesterday on NPR's A-1 show in which a woman discussed her decision to have an abortion at 8 months when she discovered that her unborn child had holes throughout her brain. She and her husband wanted the child very badly, but it would not be able to swallow, would never sit up, never hold its head up, and never be able to sleep because of constant discomfort, She said, "I had a choice between giving my baby life or giving my baby peace. I chose peace."
She and her hushand had to pay over twenty thousand dollars for the abortion, take a week off of work, find someone to care for their child, and travel to Colorado because there were insufficient clinics in her home state.
No one but the woman involved has the right to decide what is right. Trust the mothers.
29
How many babies, have these pro-life, anti-abortion proponents, fostered or adopted? Keep asking that question,over and over. The answer is zero. They will tell you that they have contributed to charities to raise them,and on and on.
17
If abortion and/or effective contraception is not available or hard to get, many young women will just choose not to have sex, especially not with men who are not financially secure. We are not going back to days of four kids by 20. Men are shooting themselves in the foot with this one.
6
Back to 1960 when any form of contraception was illegal in both Connecticut and Massachusetts and a doctor could go to prison for even advising women about the 'rhythm method.'
6
@Julie Carter
Correct! And that all changed in 1965 with the landmark Supreme Court decision "Griswold vs. Connecticut", in which the court ruled 7-2 that Connecticut's law banning even married women from buying contraceptives was unconstitutional.
I wonder if that ruling will be upheld by the current Supreme Court? Time will tell.
What a novel idea...giving religion the right to convince people they have the answer.
When did "religious freedom" become the right to impose their beliefs on everyone else?
13
@Rob When did "religious freedom" become the right to impose their beliefs on everyone else?
----------
When it became clear that the sexual revolution meant that men could impregnate women and walk away from caring from their families with no stigma, and society was asked to bear the costs of hundred of thousands of "single mothers" and their allegedly fatherless children.
If you don't want to involve society in your sex life, don't. It's not going to be: abortion or you owe me because I'm pregnant now with another man's child. And then, they want "head start" funding because their fatherless, State-supported child is behind?
Be nice and maybe the charities will help. The State owes these "families" nothing. And when the money for social programs runs out, perhaps we will see more responsible sexual behavior, or maybe we will see more babies adopted out into responsible homes into families prepared to sacrifice, pay, and fully care for them?
Well, President Frankenstein was a "ladies man" in the old days; wondering how many abortions he funded, or demanded.
The gop then, I assume, will ensure that these children and their mothers will be provided with all the help they need? Prenatal care, nutrition, and postnatal care. Of course they will care for the born as much as the unborn,right?
14
It would not surprise me at all to find out, through the Mueller Report, how many Playmates/strippers/porn stars had abortions that Trump paid for or arranged for his buddies. There was talk of three such women who benefitted from these illegal acts of money laundering, but I’ll wait until the full report on Trump’s adulteries, abortions and other sexual escapades is released to the public.
3
Forgive me for intruding into a unique American problem, but I cannot understand why, when a law like this is being contemplated, funding for birth-control measures are being cut.
Have these strange people actually spoken to their wives and daughters about this?
14
Many religions recognize the difference between the body and the soul. In my religion, the soul incarnates very late in the gestation process and sometimes even after birth. There is no separate person inside the fetus yet. Not only is abortion not murder, it is not even death.
Abortion doesn't affect the potential person. That potential simply continues on and takes another incarnation with other parents or waits in the timeless realm until conditions are conducive to embodiment. It is no big deal.
These abortion laws are aimed at poor women who do not have the means to travel to another state for an abortion. They will compound the cycle of poverty by trapping some poor soul in a terrible birth when they could have otherwise waited for an advantageous birth.
Life is hard enough. A compassionate society creates as much advantages as it can for those born into it.
8
A person’s soul is made from their experience of life after birth.
1
The rosary beads and shamrock in the pic make me shudder. There is no rational argument against such ignorant sectarian tribalism. But there's more, I'm afraid. Take Gail's prescription: "Effective sex education in the schools." This sums up a large part of America's problems. Sex Ed should not be dumped on schools--or left to The Bachelor. But more and more of modern life is dumped on teachers. Parents too often are ill-prepared to deal with issues in the modern world. But sex is older than humanity. What may be new is the way sex is hyped in the media and used as an adjunct to never-ending consumption. How are parents to talk in every-day language about the role of sex in their lives and its waxing and waning? How do they address the reality that teenagers think that they, themselves, were begotten in some sort of antediluvian cave ritual, while they, the savvy teens, have found S-E-X? And the problem with GOP regression to the Middle Ages has more to do with paternalism than with sex: so long as they have one, they'll always get the other.
4
"Pregnancy is the punishment for having sex; anything that helps someone avoid that punishment is wrong." No, I don't believe that, but I have come to the conclusion that opposition to both abortion and birth control grow out of a shared opposition to recreational sex and, to my shame, for the first time in my life, I have just stopped listening to folks on the other side of an issue.
2
No choice for poor and middle class women, not no choice for rich women. They will continue to have all the access to services they need even if they have to travel to NY, CA or the UK. Just like pre-1973.....
7
What ever happen to person's right to make an informed decision regarding their body? Is it wrong to enjoy sex with another partner?
The legislatures are violating our innate human right to enjoy life and ourselves and to make responsible choices.
They are playing God by forcing their legislative agenda on others without having any say in the outcome.
3
I was 9 when my family fled Iran, due to the Islamic revolution & installment of a totaletarian regime - a regime that to this day, oppresses the Iranian people. The Shah's regime wasn't much better, and change was definitely needed. But this wasn't the answer. I witnessed an entire country regress to something unrecognizable in a very short period of time.
It's hard to believe, but I see parallels between what happened in Iran & what's occuring now in the U.S. under trump and the tyranny of the far right. Instead of Islamic extremists who think they've a moral authority over others, we have evangelicals who think they have a moral authority over others. We have far right judges who'd gladly role back women's rights, not to mention gay rights, minority rights, etc. Instead of the Iranian "Ministry of Information", we have Fox news & trump's tweets. Instead of mass executions, we have mass shootings. Instead of a crazy ayatollah who jailed, tortured & killed his opponents, we have a vindictive thug who threatens to "lock up" his critics. Instead of taking American hostages, we take immigrant children hostage. Instead of angry anti-American demonstrations, we have trump's hate rallies. Instead of imposing marshall law, we have a president who seeks to impose his vanity wall. I could go on. Young Iranians today resent their parents for letting the events of 1979-82 happen. But their parents didn't have a say. We do. Will we allow our country to regress, or will we fight?
26
I am not afraid to say that the photo which accompanies this op-ed piece is quite appropriate to complement Trump's position on abortion. The Roman Catholic Church and the Trump presidency are two ethically bankrupt institutions incapable of mastering the subtleties of a complex and rapidly changing society. Makes me wonder what is the pretzel logic of certain Catholics who support Trump on this issue, whilst turning a blind eye to his crudeness towards women in general….
10
Trump just goes where the political wind, and the cheers of his anti-science crowd, take him. If we really want to stop abortions, we need to fund education, anti-poverty, and, of course, Planned Parenthood, so that it can expand its contraception services to the poor. Many Republicans assume Democrats want abortions. I hear the term pro-abortion on radio shows. No one wants the discomfort and horror of abortion. We all know that this is how Republicans sell misinformation to its voters: fear.
5
Unfortunately the fixation on abortion by Ms. Collins and the anti-abortion politicians blinds them to a more pressing issue for 2020. All of the unborn little girls and boys need to be counted in the upcoming census. How else can we follow Art. 1 Sec 2, which requires counting the whole Number of free Persons?
Congress will, of course, need to delay the census until February 2021 to make sure everyone is counted. Six weeks, remember.
Why is it, I wonder, that our Founding Fathers didn't spell this out more clearly in the Constitution? Why does this important issue continue to be overlooked?
2
I think there are parallels here to the alt-right's belief that if we take automatic weapons, we will take Grampa's deer rifle, too, If they take our abortion rights, you can bet all forms of contraception will be taken next. That is the way these people think...
2
Abortion should be provided for all at government expense. I will assert that any women who can't afford an abortion and who doesn't have family who can give or lend her the money for an abortion ($500? 1000?) ipso facto probably cannot afford to properly raise a child ($50,000 minimum?)
4
Remember when Republican Rick Santorum ran short-lived presidential campaigns in 2012 and and 2015 on not just an anti-abortion platform but really on the idea Gail talks about here, that “sex without the possibility of pro-creation is sinful,” (at least for women.) With his extremist religious take on “sex,” he was considered an outlier at the time, even by many of his fellow Republicans. Fast forward to 2019, with Trump kowtowing to the Evangelical fundamentalists, and it seems that a Bible-thumping politician like Santorum was just ahead of his time.
4
@Susan They never take this stand to its logical conclusion. No person who is unable to procreate (too old, impotent, no uterus, etc.) should be allowed to marry or have sex. Old people should be forced to divorce and live in separate quarters. There should be a fertility test before anyone can marry. If a marriage does not produce a child every two years an investigation should be called for.
1
its not only politicians who are confused or ii informed on abortion and contraception. The author is unaware that the Catholic Church sanctions sexual intercourse when pregnancy is not planned by the use of natural family planning within marriage. The Catholic Church opposes artificial contraception and abortion in any circumstance.
One function of the coil is to prevent implantation of the fertilized ovum. Whether or not this is an abortion is open to debate.
There are around 50 million abortions per annum worldwide. This represents a failure of women and men to take control and responsibility for their fertility. A plethora of contraceptive methods are available and there are few circumstances in which contraception is inappropriate or dangerous. An unwanted pregnancy is only one of the dangers of casual unprotected sex. Safe sex is still a valid mantra.
Promoting contraception is necessary to reduce the abortion rate. Medical termination of pregnancy is not without its complications. Pregnancy following rape,incest and the sexual abuse of vulnerable women are a few instances were abortion may be the only solution for the victim.
The abortion rate in young Scots is falling as they become more aware re contraception and the morning after pill.
More abortions is not the answer. Control of fertility is.
1
There isn’t really much pro choice right now for those wishing to have families either. I don’t want to get into a debate about population control here, but I am a grandmother who knows several women my daughter’s age who would like to have children but cannot afford to during the best biological time frame. Between the enormous amount of dept they carry from school and the dearth of maternal care options there is little opportunity to have a family where one can be assured of decent health care, schooling, etc. That is almost as sad as being forced to endure an unwanted pregnancy.
5
The Supreme Court already ruled on abortion and found the right embedded in the constitution, just like the right to drive a car. We had to wait for cars to be invented for that right to be actualized and we had to wait for medical practice to make abortion possible. The only recourse anti-abortion activists have now is promoting and passing a constitutional amendment against abortion. But they don’t do that because it’s really hard and the majority of the nation votes the other way. But they have no problem in corrupting the senate, the presidency, the whole political process so that they can pack the court and re-ask the question. But the Supreme Court doesn’t do Mulligans.
3
The US Constitution does not list any powers reserved by the people whatsoever. It is strictly about the limited powers of government.
1
Collins writes: "What’s truly going on here, people, is a war against sex without procreation."
No, it's not. It's a war against women. Why else is the focus on forcing women to carry pregnancies to term and on cutting birth control, without putting any responsibility - other than what the woman herself might be able to force with her own money, via trying to get an order for child support - on the man? Most of these so-called "pro-lifers" don't care about fetuses, babies, or children either, or else they'd also be in favor of strong environmental protections, support for families, and public education. Let's focus attention on the real problem here: discrimination against women and an attempt to roll back all the gains women have made over the decades regarding their independence and self-determination.
31
Kamala Harris during the Kavanaugh hearings:
“Can you think of any laws that give government the power to make decisions about the male body?”
That pretty much sums it up. The answer is there are none.
The most vocal proponents of laws making decisions about women's bodies are men.
64
@NorthLaker
Yes sir. How many women who find themselves pregnant are persuaded by the other party to terminate the pregnancy, sometimes quite harshly. My guess is quite a few. I know such women, I read about them, see movies about them. It’s a common theme. Men should really take some responsibility. To use an old saw”it takes two to tango”.
4
@NorthLaker -- well, I'm old enough to have been subject to the draft in Viet Nam, and when they can grab your male body and send you to be maimed or die in a foreign country ... I'd say that counted.
Continuing on though, the woman I love is age appropriate, so to those crazed loons with their views that sex requires procreation ... we're supposed to abstain now? Really? Seriously?
There are lots of people who are infertile... no sex for them?
And as far as the question goes, it's not either-or. It's a war against sex without procreation AND a war against women's autonomy and equity on just about every front, women's bodies are just the starting point.
The only broader point I'm trying to make is that women shouldn't see these attitudes as all men against women, rather that most men are just cannon fodder and most women are nothing more than factories to produce them, to maintain an elite in power and fight whatever crazed ism they promote to justify their control.
How long do you think it will be before the wacky right introduces an American Mutterkreutz or Hero of Soviet Motherhood?
6
Holding men accountable is the way to call the politicians bluff - and support children. DNA testing means the father can also be identified and bear the same consequences. Attach a lifetime lien for financial support and responsibility for that child. And then let’s see what decisions get made and truly honor that the supposed concern for protecting these unwanted children . If logic prevailed the only reason not to do this is misogyny (which is what I believe)
25
@Cynthia -- you seem to be unaware that paternity testing and judgement of child support is already the law in most (perhaps all?) states, certainly in NY.
1
Criminalizing abortion does nothing to stop the practice. Abortion rates remain the same, regardless of the law. As we are now seeing in this country, as laws restrict access to legal abortion, the main result is that maternal mortality rates rise. If these staunch right-to-lifers were really concerned with reducing abortion rates, they would promote the only two things that have consistently shown to be effective - comprehensive sex education and access to contraception. The real force behind our current anti-abortion hysteria is unscrupulous politicians who have seized apron it as an emotional issue they can ride to power.
24
I would add a third thing. Economic hope. Takes more work. Easier to take a mother away from her children and put her in jail.
1
If only there was similar levels of pro-living among our pro-life citizens. Are the pro-lifers pushing for better childhood nutrition, schools, affordable medical care?
I must have missed that part in the papers.
33
Just a question
Where do ectopic pregnancies fit into this.
And yes, while some anti’s are against IVF. One would presume that if abortions are outlawed, so would clinics offering IVF. Even if you don’t destroy the embryos, how does a frozen eternally fit in.
10
See Lauren Kelly’s op-Ed. Male legislators are ignorant of the most basic of biological realities. Understanding an ectopic pregnancy pregnancy would be a bridge too far. Vote for women everywhere
4
This is what happens when the "every sperm is sacred" crowd is in charge. We also seem to be the only western nation in which a person looses rights after birth such as the ability to control one's body, if she is born female. Even Margaret Atwood could not have anticipated the fulfillment of her dystopian dreams to such a degree in modern America. I greatly fear that after the Right bans abortions all the way back to conception that they will begin to criminalize miscarriage by subjecting women who ask for medical treatment following miscarriage to undergo blood tests to see if there is evidence of a chemical abortion. One of the currently used abortifacients can be detected for up to a week after use and you can bet it will be monitored and its use prosecuted---obviously only in women, not in the male participant. After that, the Antiabortion extremists can focus on people like me who have had their ovaries removed due to a chronic medical condition. I am sure that it will eventually be considered a crime to remove the means of becoming pregnant even if it saves the life of the woman who serves as the host for the organs. We are on a very slippery slope.
16
The question is and has been: why all this noise about abortion? Is it the right of the state to rule over the right of a woman, her personal beliefs and her ability to provide for a newborn? Where does any government have the right to play God? And let's acknowledge that these religious "laws" were created by men. And no one knows for sure where God stands on the issue.
A woman who gets pregnant because of rape or entrapment, or is medically unable to deliver a healthy baby should have the right to decide. While the men skate free.
I thought we were past the abortion issue, that we finally recognized the woman's right to decide. Family planning is great, but it should come down to the woman as the chief decider, not a bunch of men who make the whole thing into a political football, not a religious one. And even if a religious concern, who says they're right?
Maybe we can pass a law: no more anti-abortion laws. Enough! Let's move on.
30
With Gorsuch and Kavanaugh now on the Supreme Court, Roe v Wade undoubtedly will be overturned. They owe their seats on the bench to their opposition to abortion.
But that action will not prevent individual states from enacting pro-choice legislation.
The sum effect of this scenario will be to further exacerbate the already bitter and increasingly fraught divisions within the United States. You think those divisions are deep and nasty now? Just wait.
28
While I'm a Catholic who doesn't believe in abortion, the Church does occasionally ignore the separation of Church and State doctrine which I also believe in. Read paragraph 2273 of the Catechism where the Church states that the "the law must provide appropriate penal sanctions" for apportion. Failure to seperate sin from crime reflects Church politics more than it's moral authority. Engaging the State to impose our believers on others is a step back into the middle ages.
10
What is seldom mentioned in the debate is how economically regressive the anti-choice, anti-contraception movement is. If a couple has a good income, they can support more children than they might chose to have; if a couple is poor, another child might mean not being able to adequately feed the ones they already have. That leaves the former free to have marital intimacy when they wish, but forces the poorer couple into risking a pregnancy they cannot afford thereby putting their current children's well being at risk.
Even when anti-choice forces work to limit women's access to birth control whether by fighting the ACA mandate or defunding providers, they truly hurt the poor. Often they then blame the poor for "having babies they cannot afford" thus suggesting that the best option for poor women/couples is no sex even within the context of marriage.
Then, too, of course, if the poor couple gets pregnant and does not terminate the pregnancy, those same moral crusaders usually vote against funding for programs to help and support that family in raising that child to healthy adulthood.
164
We need a religion that as dogma states abortion is a good thing and the mother has primacy. Politically icky but only then can we defend not only freedom of religion (or from it) but also force a Supreme Court to rule for choice as a religious tenet. It will come to that. It shouldn't have to but it will. I suspect that if the Supreme Court rules against Roe then you will see a real test as to whether the U.S. will hold together or split.
20
@poslug Yes, interesting idea. And, it might help, but for the majority of Catholic men currently on the Court: Kavanaugh, Alito, Thomas, Roberts, Gorsuch (raised Catholic).
2
Well these are the simple facts:
Common abortion (over 90% of the abortions) occur early term. Later term abortions are very rare.
Early term medical abortion is LESS risky than carrying to term. Insisting women carry to term is insisting women subject themselves to a statistically riskier alternative medical path - pregnancy and delivery and after effects - a riskier path not technically necessary.
Later term abortions are rendered because of serious medically necessities. Doctors and women/families DO painfully consider a lot when they decide on necessity and alternatives. Such serious consideration is structurally baked into the system and our normal psyche.
Despite the straw men and red herrings the anti-choice army spews no valid medical facility does them cavalierly or without reverence.
Late term abortion is an emotional straw man the anti-choice machine uses to discredit abortion in general. I am not going down that rabbit hole.
Almost all abortions occur within 16 weeks. What is aborted most would not equate to say my living young grandchildren - I know I would not.
Think - burning building - 1M "test tube" babies - ONE 5 year old girl - only think fast options - save 1M or save ONE 5 year old. I know what most humans would do.
In this framework a woman has a right to uncontested body autonomy.
Denying women normal early abortion option degrades them as MODERN FREE COMPETENT EQUAL persons and denies them access to a SAFER MEDICAL PROCEDURE. Period!
58
@MegaDucks Yes. And, I suspect that's the intent of the patriarchal religious right.
4
There is no reason for laws concerning whether or not a pregnancy goes to full term or not. If your personal belief is it is against
Your value system to have an abortion then don’t. It really is that simple.
This question is a personal and private issue, not a Government issue.
If your religious beliefs tell you abortion is wrong you must keep in mind that they are your religious beliefs not everyone else’s.
Common sense and respect for others choices are what this issue is about.
Maybe it is time to do a better job of Sex Education and make contraceptive measures available for all.
Of course those for no choice would probably not like this solution.
Instead of this issue being discussed rationally by both sides too many people get overheated emotionally
By the way, what do you think would happen if we banned Viagra?
95
@Jean That is the best point yet. Instruct our legislators to demand that any legislation restricting either abortion or contraception also ban the manufacture and sales of Viagra. Problem solved. Btw I could not have countenanced having an abortion myself but not can I countenance making that decision for any other woman. Even Church doctrine states that your actions cannot be considered s “sin” unless you know/ believe that it is. Little known but quite true. Check out the three conditions outlined for determining what is a sin !
2
Another aspect to this story is that a condom cannot head off at a young age to die in a senseless war or work flipping burgers for the rich. We should not overlook this plot point.
An abortion is not something that anyone should want to experience. Young men should be counseled that it is the woman's right to choose. If they do not want to go through the pain of an abortion, they need to engage in abstinence and/or the use of contraceptives. That is the best way to avoid the prospect that others will wind up making life-changing decisions for them.
19
I thought Republicans believed in freedom and minimal government intrusion into our lives? But they seem perfectly fine with regulating a woman's uterus and, of course, never having the male take any responsibility except to say, "you will have this child, and then, I'm leaving!"
A bundle of cells with no ability to feel pain or to think is no more a person than a houseplant. If you don't believe that, then don't get an abortion. Otherwise, mind your own business.
117
Republicans ever since Reagan, with few exceptions, have cynically used the public trust again and again placed in them to victimize marginal people and demonize women looking to terminate unwanted pregnancies. That they do this not to satisfy any deeply held philosophical or ethical ideal, but to provide cover for feathering the nests of the wealthiest, the only base that matters to them and that realizes any benefit whatsoever from their 'public service', is a crying shame all around.
15
The argument that those who oppose abortion on religious grounds should not "impose" their religious values on others is silly. If my values come from my religion, and yours are different, we jockey over political power to see whose is reflected in civil law. BTW I am an atheist, and strongly pro-choice. I think the anti-abortion values pushed by adherents to certain religious value sets are wrong-headed, hypocritical and cruel.
14
@Nancy Brockway
"If my values come from my religion, and yours are different, we jockey over political power to see whose is reflected in civil law."
This is wrong. The Constitution provides freedom of religion and protects all against the government establishing a national religion or creating laws preferring one religion over another.
Everything is not up for grabs. There are certain things the founders put off limits. These things are designed to protect the dignity of all Americans, irrespective of their beliefs.
Anti-abortion advocates fail to recognize this. Their relentless campaign acts to undermine the Constitution and does America a great disservice.
38
@Nancy Brockway
Sorry but the first amendment, incorporated to the states by the 14th, preserves the right to free exercise of religion and freedom from the power of the majority to impose their religious beliefs on others by using the mechanism of state law. This is why state legislatures, in attempting to enact more severe restrictions on abortion, have always attempted to justify those restrictions on the grounds of protecting the well-being of the woman. But now, with new restrictions such as “heartbeat” laws, the issue of religious freedom and freedom FROM another’s religion may play more of a role in the courts, if the “privacy” framework of Roe is rejected. The constitution was meant to protect the rights of minorities and those holding minority views, from the tyranny of the majority.
@Nancy Brockway We atheists have fewer rights because there is no recognized dogma or clear religious standing. We are a "philosophy". Unsaid is that we are also a hate target of the evangelicals and Rome.
1
I would also point out that the anti-abortion folks do not really want to decrease the number of abortions. It is a fact that when family planing services are readily available, fewer abortions take place. So the pious hand-wringing about murdering fetuses is hypocritical, and probably often self-delusional, or politicians telling for votes.
So what do they really wan? My answer is they wan to control sexual activity. Sexual activity by other people, that is. Clearly, most of them do not restrict their sexual activity to a temped procreation. The sales of contraceptives, the reports of high levels of unmarried sexual activity, especially among college age folks, and the numbers of divorces citing infidelity testify to that. And while many must surely enjoy sex themselves, they want to make sure others do not.
24
@Paul W. Case Sr. It is women's sexuality they want to control. Men are free to indulge their libido at will. Women must behave.
1
They sell unwanted babies to childless couples. Caveat emptor!
1
Until women wake up and stop electing misogynistIc Republicans to positions of power over them, not only will their right to choose become illegal, their access to contraception will be eliminated eventually. And they can thank themselves for their predicament.
43
@Katherine Kovach
Not just women, men. They should also have a say in whether they are forced to be a father of a severely handicapped child, a child incompatible with life, a child they can't afford. Men are not innocent bystanders in this. Unplanned pregnancies affect both men and women. Unplanned pregnancies, contrary to what the deluded right wing believe, occur INSIDE of marriage. Dangerous pregnancies occur among the married as well. Are men so uncaring for their wives that they believe the government has the right to decide if they live or die from a pregnancy gone horribly wrong? Do men believe that government should have the right to force the anguish of having a severely deformed child, a child which suffers until it dies, into their lives? Is that what government is for? To force agony and unbearable grief into our lives? Or force us to be parents even if we are emotionally unequipped to be one? They are so "concerned" with the fetus but turn their backs on the homeless children, the hungry children, the abused children. The homeless pregnant women! This isn't about the "sanctity" of life. This is about power.
1
Just a very few years younger than Gail, I am also dumbfounded by what is going on. In the late 60s it abortion was non partisan. Now it is fiercely partisan and driven by ignorance. For example, abortion was as common before Roe as after (at least by some accounts). And since women learn to lie about having had an abortion, the truth is that abortions exist is all states and among all groups. Even in fairly moderate NJ, our governor defunded Planned Parenthood and guess what, STD rates went up.
It is all so shameful.
36
So glad you mentioned the Catholic Church, Gail. I was of the era when if we kissed a boy longer than 10 seconds - with our mouths closed - it was a mortal sin. Hard to believe, but true. As a young mother and wife, we were told no birth control. At that point I said, "Adios." (The word "abortion" was never spoken.)
Well, the Catholic Church must be thrilled - in spite of its pedophile priests - that their breed of harsh judgement has spread so far and wide. The recipients include fanatical evangelicals who most likely have unsatisfying sex lives, and misogynists who can't imagine life without domineering their female counterparts. Then there are the politicians...from the local and state levels to the Oval Office and halls of Congress. They are probably the most hypocritical of all. For you see, it is not about saving the unborn while they take away decent health care for the living and hand guns to the unhinged. It is certainly not about being pure of soul. Trump et al are straight from the ilk of Rosemary's Baby. It is about those votes, keeping their power. It is using their own constituents for themselves alone.
42
Hypocrisy is rampant among pro-lifers, particularly among politicians who declare to be pro-life. Given the number of abortions in these country probably every one of them knows some one who had an abortion although they may not all be aware she did. In some cases they may even have paid for one.
It is all about getting votes and little to do with any deep seated belief.
16
Whatever happened to separation between church and state?
Pro-lifers claim religious beliefs. But, what happens when religion and state are one and the same -- as it is with Christian evangelicalism and conservative lawmakers?
This is classism at work. All one has to do is look at the practical effects of these laws, in fact, all laws targeting women's health, and on whom.
Since the South took over the GOP, the Constitutional values in this country have been slowly and systematically replaced with a belief that the framers' intent was that the country is to be ruled by the privileged and the Constitution was written to protect their privileges. (This was based on property rights, typically land, and, for the South, slave holdings -- not coincidently also considered 'property.')
Can there be any more fundamental way to control a society than through people's ability to procreate?
Then, is it really so far-fetched to wonder if sterilization will be next? (After all, these are many of the same people who have the imagination to equate homosexuality with bestiality.) We don't need the Middle Ages. All we have to do is go back the last world war.
Meanwhile, those of us who believe the Constitution is to protect and promote citizens' rights are telling ourselves this is the stuff of history books -- while the country is changing right under us. We are just getting a glimpse of the implications of this view. It can get much worse.
19
We can thank my foolish Senator, Susan Collins, for Kavanaugh, the latest Catholic man on the Supreme Court.
I am 60 yrs old and I am so tired of trying to convince political men that I am a fully human adult person who can make my own informed decisions. And I am even more exhausted by the ramming of religion into public life. It is now up to the young to decide what kind of country they want to live in.
86
You hit the nail on the head.. The religious right wants to impose their extreme morality that sex is only justified if it is done for procreation. Thus, there should be no birth control pills, no sex education, no morning after pills, and of course no abortions. It is ironic that Trump, the lewd sex braggart of Howard Stern fame, is now a fanatic and rigid advocate of this so called religious view of sex. This is hypocrisy at its most obscene and reveals the utter depravity and moral vacuity of Trump and his anti abortion obsessed followers. How do they get citizens to vote for their absurd and bizarre notion of sex?
28
Remember when Bernie’s babies and bullies were saying there was no difference between Trump and Clinton? Yep.
28
Democrats will forever worship at the alter of abortion. The procedure is like a sacrament to them. Gail and fellow progressives want more of our tax money to help women avoid pregnancy by ‘expanding family planning services’. Hint: condemns are cheap and require no planning other than a quick stop at the local pharmacy. Abstinence is free. Please stop insulting level headed people with nonsensical arguments.
@Once From Rome
Yes, condemn (ation) is rather cheap. Perhaps Democrats, or women, believe that control over our bodies--not a procedure that most of us never have and really no one ever wants--is sacrosanct. And I don't know, this is likely my hysteria talking, but I didn't hear Ms. Collins ask for more tax money, only that the tax money currently distributed is used for evidence based practice. But please, tell me more about those level-headed people who are insulted by nonsensical arguments.
13
@Once From Rome: Freudian slip, there? It’s “condoms”, not “condemns”, my friend. At least spell it correctly. And Republicans will always continue to worship non-realistic, abstinence based family planning, which anyone with half a brain will realize fails most of the time, due to the vagaries of human nature. Get real, and get with the program. Against abortion? THEN DON’T HAVE ONE. Otherwise, mind your own sex life - you have no business in mine.
2
Republican politicians are against abortion until they are affected by an unplanned pregnancy personally.
Remember Representative Tim Murphy of Pennsylvania? He pressured his girlfriend to have an abortion when he thought it would ruin his family life and congressional career.
Or Elliott Broidy, of the Republican National Committee, whose Playboy Playmate had an abortion. Michael Cohen, Trump’s lawyer, fixed that mess for him. It only cost 1.6 million dollars to make sure his family and the public didn’t find out. That didn’t work out very well.
It makes you wonder how many Republicans have participated in someone’s abortion we don’t know about. At the same time Republicans try to eliminate others from obtaining one.
20
I’m infuriated by those with the audacity to think they can dictate how a woman should manage her life.
17
Anyone who finds all this upsetting can send a donation to Planned Parenthood, who care for the whole family and try to ensure that those who are not well off have access to care (including fathers and mothers).
A human being spends most of its life outside the womb. That means they need families, jobs, health care, and a host of other things.
They also do better with love and a family.
That means, fetuses are not more important than everyone else. Criminalizing women who lose their babies is one appalling consequence of this. Fetuses suing for murder? Really?
If you want an improved more civilized society, then empower women. That means birth control, health care for the whole family, family planning, jobs, property rights, etc. For the health of the whole family, in the US Planned Parenthood does the job.
The first thing Republicans in office do is remove access to contraception (let alone abortions) abroad.
This is not connected, but it reminds me that there was a furore when the Pope went after condoms in Africa (Angola, I think it was). Fact is, husbands/fathers were bringing AIDS home after they consorted with prostitutes. Sickening, in every way ...
In general, women are more connected with survival of the whole community than men in places like that.
13
There are so, so, so many damaging, health-threatening and, ultimately, life-ending things which people are permitted to do to themselves that it seems strange and paradoxical to single out abortion as something to be outlawed. That's before highlighting the misogyny associated with it.
Alcohol, tobacco and firearms each threaten life, and yet, they are easily available. Why? Because their industries subsidize political life, and the tax revenues they generate subsidize everyone's life.
That doesn't even begin to reconcile conservatives' anti-abortion efforts with nascent attempts to curtail health care benefits for tens of millions of Americans, proving that political hypocrisy knows no bounds when it comes to protecting life, or at least life after birth.
So, for now, drink yourself to death, smoke yourself to death, and shoot your guns. But don't touch the unborn, or you may find yourself unfree for a very long time.
10
Gail is making the mistake of using facts and rationale to argue against a matter that is entrenched in belief. Add to that the bitter partisan hatred that the Religious Right has ginned up against "the liberal agenda" and viola: Brett Kavannaugh and Neill Gorsuch are Supremes.
There is no rational answer to an irrational question.
I am convinced that eventually the regressive's will get their way and women will once again have to turn to back alley solutions to one of the world's oldest problems.
5
Exactly. The anti-abortion efforts we are seeing are not about preventing abortion, but rather about preventing women from enjoying sex without procreation.
24
Women can also change their minds on abortion. Women often decide against having an abortion once they see their babies on a sonogram. I recently read that when the mother saw her baby smile on her sonogram she decided she wanted to keep her baby. This was so powerful to her that she knew she could not abort. And these are young women. They also do not want to regret later that they ended their child's life.
Abortions can never be undone. They are permanent. Some women just cannot end the life of their unborn. Life is sacred to some and something to be cherished. And for them that will always remain the same. Life is too precious to just have it come to an abrupt end. That is what abortion does.
3
And an unwanted, unplanned for birth can never be undone either, resulting in widespread child neglect and abuse. These unwanted children too often are shuttled between various foster care homes, once the abuse is discovered - and that is if the child is somehow fortunate enough to survive the neglect and abuse. Many don’t, and you hear about them on the news. These unwanted children will in many cases never know the love of a caring parent. They grow up to become adults, and the cycle starts all over again. Teenage girls have babies “to have something to love” - hardly an appropriate reason to bring a child into the world. See how this spirals out of control? If you can’t sanction being pro-choice, then you must at least strongly advocate for adequate family planning practices. Otherwise you are a hypocrite. Forcing a woman to bear a child she doesn’t want is in itself a barbaric act, because both she and the child will likely never get over it. P.S. How many unwanted children have YOU adopted lately, or ever?
6
@KMW Absolutely true (though I believe that fetuses can't smile in actuality -- i.e. express delight or good feeling -- until past the legal mark). So long as women are not being coerced into these sessions, they have every right to exist and may make life better for certain women. It can be offered. It can't be mandated, that's all.
1
@KMW Where id you recently read that the mother changed her mind upon seeing the smile. Be careful of sharing "fake news". You are entitled to your opinion, but you are not entitled to impose your opinion on others.
3
"There are plenty of good strategies: Effective sex education in the schools. Affordable family planning services for all."
Right, and DNA testing to hold the biological father responsible,
sharing the societal penalties for unplanned pregnancy,
in a world where safe-sex should be as easy as...
well, safe-sex.
34
@Bruce Don't bet on those outcome. Might as well have taken the 64th seed in the NCAA Tourney.
2
@Paul
...at least we can hope can't we?
@Bruce It's funny (and not in a "Ha ha" way) how nobody is talking about fathers paying enough child support for the child to actually be supported, or how we ought to go after deadbeat dads. It is almost like, gasp! we let men, who are, apparently, mindless slaves to their libidos, do whatever they want without paying their any kind of penalty at all! Who makes up these rules? Oh, yeah, right.
2
I could never figure why men carry pro-life signs and are ring leaders in the anti abortion movement.
Can you imagine women carrying signs demanding men to use contraception. Even getting violent about it?
I am pro choice, Having said that, I can sort of understand women, whose bodies carry unborn, being maternally protective, to a point. But men?
For men to protest just seems like one more way of trying to control women period. I look at those men as trying to control every aspect of a woman’s life. Can you imagine that type of man who finds his wife’s oral contraceptives hidden somewhere when he forbid the use? It’s like that type would never relinquish any right to a woman, psychologically or physically.
That type of man may be sitting on the highest court of our land. And guess who voted for the man who put those court sitting men there? Many women. Now that is a real mystery to me.
108
@MIMA
Religious belief explains many otherwise inexplicable things. I would assume most of those sign carrying men believe they are doing god's work by "protecting the unborn." I would assume their religious belief also tells them that contraception runs counter to god's plan. Either way you look at it, a belief in god sure makes for a lot of misery in this world.
8
That’s probably why free thinkers, secular humanists and the otherwise unchurched are growing in numbers while churches, especially Catholic churches, are closing down. They simply are no longer relevant to today’s American citizens, and efforts by corrupt evangelicals to drag people back in time always fail. There’s a reason religious fanatics flock to support Trump—their doctrines are just as ignorant and pointlessly cruel as Trump’s.
8
@MIMA
It’s called “brainwashing”!
9
Perhaps women in states proposing draconian anti-abortion laws should withdraw from sexual engagements with all men supporting such laws - particularly those women in relationships with anti-abortion legislators.
112
@Tony Pratt
Great idea. In Aristophanes’ brilliant work written 2500 years ago, that is the strategy women used to put an end to the endless war between Athens and Sparta.
Strict implementation here will end this war very quickly
57
@Tony Pratt Do you think women could be that disciplined and in control of their own bodies to deny men? It seems to me, that is what contributes to a lot of the difficulties on this issue: the women aren't really in control, the impregnating men are...
2
@Bullhornymous
......except that it never happened. Aristophanes was just being wry, and ironic. It won’t happen here and now, either, because men can’t get pregnant and can’t be held responsible. What’s a gal to do, if she’s not well-insured with a friendly and accommodating OB/GYN?
1
I was a JHS public school teacher experiencing the heartbreak of infertility. Having decided that the best option for us was adoption, I began letting everyone I knew to keep their eyes and ears open. I had stayed friendly with a few of my former students, and contacted one of them, a girl who was now attending a Catholic high school. She said knew of a couple of girls who'd gotten pregnant, but that they'd had abortions. Middle class, NYC. It speaks for itself.
5
@Times Rita
What’s your point?
@Times Rita meaning what?
@Times Rita
I'm sorry you had to struggle with infertility. I'm also sorry that you wish you could have forced those high school girls to bring their pregnancies to term.
2
The two main problems that the pro choice side has made for decades is first, not admitting that they are terminating, not just a pregnancy, but a human being. The second mistake they made was not stating explicitly that women get very stressed when they become pregnant or worried they might, and the days of yesterday were ones with infections, death, and sterility. It wasn't that women weren't trying to not be pregnant, as my grandmother told me that they were trying to abort themselves with knitting needles. My grandfather, a doctor had to deal with women who came to him after the fact. We have a free society, in that people are free to smoke, and get lung cancer, or emphysema, people are free to drink excessively, and get cirrhosis of the liver, people are free to become overweight, and obese, and get diabetes, and heart disease, and women can get an abortion to legally get rid of a potential human being. The fact that no legislature is making laws against any of the other things that people do, shows volumes about who is singled out, and it is women.
32
@MaryKayKlassen
I am a man who supports a woman's right to an abortion, but I have a hard time finding equivalency between "not trying to get pregnant" and "trying to abort" one's self with a knitting needle.
I also cannot fully agree that people are "free to smoke" considering the taxes levied on tobacco products and the fairly recent limitations on venue and the social stigma attached to same.
There are federal laws against people 'damaging' themselves with marijuana. Hard liquor production and sale is federally sanctioned and taxed.
All of these statues are limitations on the actions of either sex, and involve only the party in question.
Males cannot get pregnant. Rape is against the law.
What would you have us do?
3
@Skeexix Right now, it seems, we are in a standoff that pits women against babies, mothers against children. Most people's sympathies would lie with the innocent, growing child. This columnist errs in thinking that being anti-abortion is anti-women, and those who are anti-abortion are foisting their religion on others. Science tells us this is a growing organism that will become a baby is the body does not spontaneously abort -- it's not just a clump of cells to be removed like a cyst or boil. If men impregnate women, and all taxpayers are called on to support the offspring of those men who fail to support their own, this is indeed a family issue currently spilling over into society, and it is one where all voting voices deserve to be heard -- women and men, including those who believe abortions should not be available "on demand". Perhaps the answer to educating women and equipping them to take better control of their bodies including preventing unwanted children does not belong to the government? Perhaps, all those pink-hatted women could work privately -- or rather, openly in the private and philanthropic sectors -- to be abortion escorts, if needed: to take the place of family members who would care one-on-one for the mother and (aborted?) child's needs before, during and after the medical procedure? I think with this type of nurturing and education, such a young women could be equipped not to be pregnant again or to accept if she is going to have a disabled one.
2
@Midway
@Midway - " If men impregnate women, and all taxpayers are called on to support the offspring of those men who fail to support their own . . ."
You are conflating two issues without offering statistical support. Are we talking about single moms? Deadbeat dads? Young women? I did not see that language, and therefore did not respond to those conditions.
Am I allowed to detect a bias in your "pink-hatted women" reference? Liberty taken.
You will have to explain to me how one would go about taking care of an aborted child's needs.
My wife was 39 years old when we eliminated a trisome-18 fetus. Nobody paid for the procedure but us. I am not a receptive audience for your presumptive position.
2
Not only is this bill absurd on its face - most OBGYN’s won’t even see a woman until she’s 8 weeks along because hearing the fetal heartbeat beforehand isn’t a given, the “Heartbeat Bill” will have a hugely negative impact on Georgia’s economy. We have experienced a boon due to the filming industry focused on Georgia (filming moved here because of Jindal’s nonsense) that if our politicians continue down this path it will be destructive to so many hard working people in Georgia. When (?!?!?!) will we start to put common sense ahead of ideology???
44
For those who say it's an unscientific and ridiculous belief that an unborn baby, at any stage, is a human, I have to remind that all posters, all living people, were once an embryo at the beginning of their unique life. Genetics, much of the personality, and definitely the sentient part of that person, is there at conception. No other embryo, person, will ever be replicated. THAT life is lost when aborted, period. A newborn just out of the womb (often surviving at a stage it could have been aborted) is the same life it was just moments before in the womb. If that baby drew breath, it's a precious baby with rights, any time before that, it is nothing. In the words of Reagan, "I have noticed that everyone who is pro-abortion, has in fact been born."
4
@Trish What gives you the right to dictate and impose your opinions about life on others? Many of us have opposite and equally valid beliefs. Live your life the way you see fit and I’ll do the same. This country was founded on the separation between church and state. This is a religious issue. Period.
212
@Trish You address only one of the issues discussed by Gail. The demand for abortions would diminish significantly if women had easier access to contraception and family planning advice. Opponents of contraception share the responsibility for abortions because they reduce the options available to women who, for whatever reason, wish to avoid a pregnancy.
Nor does your argument deal with pregnancies which threaten the life of the mother or involve a seriously handicapped fetus. What about a pregnancy arising from rape or incest?
There are many reasons why a woman might resort to an abortion, and forcing her to carry a fetus to full term might be considered cruel and unusual punishment. But she would have to make that decision far less frequently if she had access to affordable and effective contraception.
94
@Patricia Gallery It's not her beliefs, it's science, what she wrote. With technological advances, more and more babies are viable outside the womb at earlier and earlier ages. Your defensiveness shows that you would like to cling to your beliefs, or scientific ignorance, and deny that this "mass" being aborted could be a living baby one day. You need to make the argument, hard as it is, that the woman takes precedent over the child's needs here, and the woman has the right to take the life of that child so long as it is in her body.
It's really not fertile young women vs. big bad old white male politicians holding them back. It's the scientific progress of late v. women's rights, really. Society can limit a lot of things we are allowed to do to/with our bodies: sell organs, take lives including our own, consume drugs, etc.
Religious people are part of our society too, and religious people have always helped to shape our American society. You can't deny their voices in wanting to foist your own values, or lack thereof, on the rest of us.
There's a price, we are already paying as a society, for not respecting the value of human life. You saw it, and see it today, in the internal fallout from the war years, and the idea that power and dominance determine more than creativity, thought or reason. Some day, we will link the wars and the current influx of refugees across the globe, but that would mean admitting our own contributions to the decline of pro-life values...
1
As an escort at a clinic that provides pregnancy terminations, let me assure all the "pro-life " people that abortions are not all about birth control. There are several states that are seeking to make it illegal to terminate a pregnancy under any circumstances, not even to save the life of the mother, not even to spare a child untold suffering because of a birth defect, not even in the case of rape or incest. In Alabama such a bill will trigger the moment Roe vs Wade is overturned. This is wrong, and it is cruel. Why on earth should women be subject to laws that make them virtual slaves of the state with no right to self determination? If you cannot make free decisions about your own body, then you are not a free person.
Being pro-choice does not equate with being pro-abortion, it equates with allowing a woman the right to make decisions about her healthcare and her own body which should be hers and hers alone to make. Further, I do not understand why the HIPPA rules do not apply to the privacy rights of a woman going to a clinic which provides pregnancy terminations. Why should a woman have to run a gauntlet with escorts providing what privacy they can with umbrellas to shield her from screaming protesters?
As for Donald Trump, he chose Kavanaugh to appease his hypocritical evangelical supporters. He is a political chameleon with no moral compass.
1391
@Diana
Excellent response - while I believe that abortion is morally wrong, I strongly support a woman's right to make that decision for herself. It should be between her and her conscience, not determined for her by state laws.
93
@Diana
Well said. How is it that college age women are not hitting the streets en masses over this? Or at least the voting booth for the love of Pete?
87
@Diana
Thank you for your good work protecting women at your clinic. You are on the front lines of the war on personal freedom being waged by people who feel that they have the right to impose their ideologies on your clients...and the rest of us.
130
Since Trump apparently doesn’t believe in using barrier methods for contreception when he has sex with his mistresses, I understand his being pro-choice in his 50’s. Of course, this was before he became dependent on the voting bloc that is the Christian Right.
The idea that Roe vs. Wade could be overturned was never ever on my radar screen. I thouoght it was a done deal and that women had agency over their own bodies - period. That we would go back to the olden days, where women used whatever means necessary to abort, is now a horrible possibility. Dear Lord. Let’s rid ourselves of electricity and soap while we’re at it,
123
@Kathryn
The electorate needs to remember to vote for past progress in every election, because there is a party that wants to go backward. You need to vote for Social Security, abortion, voting rights, National Parks, Medicare, etc in every election. Even if none of these are a campaign issue.
7
“If you want to claim the moral high ground in a fight over terminating pregnancy, you have to support effective family planning.”
The moral high ground?! This is a street fight with knives, chains, and most of all very large guns with banana clips.
The idea that women have sexual agency and a sexual agenda separate from the men in their lives - in simpler language, women can decide for themselves who they want to have sex with - both strikes abject terror in these politicians and is frankly, beyond their ken or imagination.
We are talking the Stepford Wives and a Handmaid’s Tale here. There is now technology for a digital chastity belt that can be controlled from a guardian’s smartphone.
38
As Gail Collins says about America's anti-abortion zealots, including the fake warriors who'll say anything to advance their political fortunes, "you’re either an appalling hypocrite or an elected official attempting to impose your religion on Americans of different faiths."
It doesn't have to be either-or, and usually isn't.
29
@John LeBaron
Sadly, you left out this bit:
"If you want to claim the moral high ground in a fight over terminating pregnancy, you have to support effective family planning. Otherwise ..."
It's important these days not to take things out of context.
1
Re. "I wonder why more women in these states aren't fighting back. "
--------
Maybe they are, in their own way...
Maybe they are using birth control, or doubling up (pill for her, condom for him) to prevent conception in the first place. Maybe they are abstaining from sex, and educating themselves about their most fertile monthly times to avoid pregnancy?
Just because working women aren't visible to you "fighting" for their right to an abortion doesn't mean they aren't working in a million little ways to control their own destinies, which might mean postponing sex until -- if they do become pregnant -- they've got a plan for themselves and their child?
49
@Midway
Can we agree on a universal goal: Make all pregnancies wanted pregnancies - even if we disagree on how to get there?
Can we drop the sanctimony and walk on the same side together?
77
@Midway There are probably an increasing number of young college-educated women who are choosing not to have sex, not to get married, and not to have kids. They prefer the uncomplicated life of owning their own bodies and having control over their own lives.
33
@Midway How utterly naive! When we make it harder for women to acquire contraceptives (by de-funding Planned Parenthood, e.g.) how are the women you speak of supposed to "fight back?" As for "educating themselves about their most fertile monthly times to avoid pregnancy," I will recall a quip from a doctor I know: "There's a name for people who use the 'rhythm method;' they are called 'parents.'"
118
What is the end game here? Why do republicans want more unplanned children? They don’t want to adopt them, that is clear.
77
They don’t even want to feed them or give them healthcare. The Republicans oppose Food Stamps, CHIP funding, the ACA which gives kids the right to stay under parents health plans til 26. They think it’s ok to take away safe environmental protections. They won’t even raise minimum wage which would help kids and parents. Don’t play into “protecting” kids. Just ain’t so.
11
@organic farmer
Because they are hypocrites. They care about the unborn but not the already born - it's cheaper that way and requires less responsibility.
8
@organic farmer They want unwanted people for their armies, for their wars.
5
Years ago, I warned a pro-choice friend of mine that abortion rights would rapidly diminish over time.
“Why?” she asked.
Because there is nothing in it for men. Men’s reproductive rights before and after Roe are exactly the same. If a man doesn’t want a child and the woman does? Too bad, so sad, should have kept it in your pants. And pay up. And if he wants a baby she does’t? Too bad.
Pro-choice is meaningless for men. And only a slight majority of women support abortion rights... so only from that quarter of the population can you draw dedicated pro-choice activists.
On the other hand, the pro-life crowd is composed of both men AND women. They have a larger base and are deeply committed to the cause.
The writing’s been on the wall for decades...
10
You are implying that without there being "something in it" for men that they would not support women's right to control their own bodies. I, for one, believe there is something in it for men, supporting every person's right to make decisions for themselves. History has shown repeatedly that a class in power today will not always be powerful, and allowing someone's rights to be taken away today could lead to your own rights being limited in the future. We all have a stake in these decisions whether we think so or not. Freedom to choose is freedom from someone else limiting your right to choose, with all the responsibilities that come with that freedom.
Why does the so-called party of personal responsibility relieve all men of any responsibility for getting women pregnant? Is there any issue at all about which Republicans are not dyed-in-the-wool hypocrites?
82
@John B Sorry, but men who commit to a woman, keep their own lovemaking/babymaking confined to a marital bed, and who indeed raise their own children with no taxpayer help are not the ones to be lectured to. They are giving their children a head start... Why do they have to support the irresponsible men, and womens's, offspring too? Because otherwise the woman will threaten to kill her child? You've got your responsible parties and your hypocrites all mixed up...
1
"Although obviously the real plan is to keep you pregnant, whether you like it or not."
Silly Women -- YOU don't 'own' your bodies.
Men do.
Perhaps it's Time to Pass the Equal Rights Amendment. And take them back.
56
@Willy P
Well of course you men own womens bodies! If you weren't sprinkling your seed randomly into these fertile young ladies, there would be no potential children created as problems for the rest of society to decide what to do with! IF women want independence, they should understand where their choices really begin: choice of mature sex partner or "hit it and run"; choice of when to have sex; choice of contraceptives used for her and him (insist on it!)... etc. If you do learn you're carrying a non-perfect, potentially deformed fetus, you have choices there too, but not if you procrastinate in your decision making...
Women have plenty of power in pregancy production and prevention. The Willys of the world might not want them to understand that as they continue to fully spill their seed at random.
2
Just more of keeping women in their place.We have the 2020 election.
17
If republicans hate poor people why are they insisting that
so many be born.
RICH republican women can determine
and regulate their own fertility.
After the babies are born then the politicians COMPLAIN that
they have to be housed, fed, clothed and educated.
48
It's ironic that all these bills are promoted mostly by conservative white men. It's also ironic that a number of these conservative white men are bemoaning the fact that white folks will be a minority in this country in the near future. It's also ironic that these conservative white men want to eliminate aid for these women who are forced to give birth when they cannot afford the costs of raising a child. What a great country we live in!
40
Those who oppose women’s right to control their own bodies are the same people who want to limit public education for our children and help for families in need.
53
I firmly believe that Trump has absolutely no conviction one way or another on the question of abortion. He only sees it as one of the partisan issues that he can use to manipulate his "base." His views, and generally the views of Republicans are devoid of science, devoid of biological reality, and utterly devoid of compassion, They reek of misogynistic desire to control female bodies.
But mostly their postures and posings are tools to cement political power. We are in the thrall of cruel thugs who care nothing for their fellow human beings--only for their own selfish ambition.
1108
@William O, Beeman, absolutely spot on!
61
@William O, Beeman. Yes, no ideology behind anything Trump does. It is all about manipulation and winning. The GOP seems to be about winning above else, and leave critical thinking or compassion to someone else.
52
@William O, Beeman
I agree, 100%. The tragedy is that Trump's "base" (what an appropriate term) either don't understand or don't care that they're being manipulated, that the whole abortion issue is just a convenient way for Republicans to get votes. And what if abortion is outlawed? Will that really improve the lives of the "base"? Why do they care so much? Is it because their church tells them to care so much?
51
Pro-choice people give you an option. You can have an abortion if you believe it's right or you can steer well clear of abortion if you think it is wrong.
Pro-life people, as they style themselves, are for forced birth. Irrespective of conditions and of the beliefs of the mother they want to use the power of the state to make the woman carry a fetus to term, even if the mother may miscarry and no child is ever born. (Presumably a miscarriage will be legally classed as a self-induced abortion and be punishable.)
If we are going to have forced births we should also have forced castrations for men who make women pregnant against their will, whether in the confines of marriage or by violence. Let's see if the enthusiasm for forced birth pales a bit.
Typically the people intent on forced births have no interest in supporting the child once it is born. Nor do they have any interest in preventing unwanted pregnancies (and hence abortions). And, worst of all, they do this in the name of an imaginary god.
92
@Rheumy Plaice The people acting in the name of their "imaginary god" don't come with their hands out to society asking for help with their "problems" though. The costs of people who procreate, then change their minds and don't want to accept the costs of their choices, behaviors and decisions force their "problems" onto society: we must set up and tolerate medical procedures that take the lives of another? We must fund the tools necessary to keep you safe in your private sex life? We must bear the cost of raising your boyfriend/baby Daddy's child because you were too short-sighted to deny him a minutes pleasure that will create "problems" for youself and the rest of society?
I pray to God you can understand what independence is, and work to free yourself so that others are not forced to bear the costs of your choices and decisions. Don't undertake an activity if you are not educated and prepared to deal with consequences, with or without society's help. It's not just about sex, it's all about living a healty and independent life where others don't need to approve your choices and prepare for them.
1
Your update revealing men's hypocritical stance is a welcome reminder that the choice of what to do with any pregnancy pertains to women, given that we men, after the impassioned contribution with our' seeds', tend to wash our hands about it, co-responsible as we are in the act, irresponsible thereafter. Not that we are eager about women having an abortion, but we are not the one's to draw judgment. Can't politicians be more responsible in representing us in improving our infrastructure, and the goods and services available, once we get rid of the deep inequality in this capitalistic society? Let abortion remain legal, available and safe, and hopefully rare...by offering contraceptives freely. And keep religion out of it, enough violence in it's name already...and in the name of an all-loving god.
20
People on the "right" want to de-regulate everything -- except women's bodies which they want to control through their draconian policies.
What happened to separation of church and state?
What started as the "moral majority" has morphed into the "evangelicals" who have proved that hypocrisy knows no bounds. Those who condemned Clinton for a consensual, albeit unseemly, affair are the same ones who praise a twice divorced, three time cheater-in-chief because he panders to their narrow minded beliefs.
I don't remember reading about the moral superiority of one group over another in the Bible.
41
"If you want to claim the moral high ground in a fight over terminating pregnancy, you have to support effective family planning.
Otherwise you’re either an appalling hypocrite or an elected official attempting to impose your religion on Americans of different faiths."
You have to do a great deal more than that if you want to call yourself pro-life. Such as call for programs that make sure no child goes hungry, no child gets abused, no person lacks for health care physical or mental, no family lacks for support in caring for a special needs child. And acknowledge that more guns = more deaths due to guns and do something about it. Otherwise, you are simply pro-fetus, not pro-life. It would be like calling everybody who resisted the draft for Vietnam a pacifist.
Many people in the pro-life movement are simply pro-fetus. And it is definitely related to their religious beliefs.
32
@Debbie R
Well said! Pro-fetus and anti-woman. They don't trust women and would rather let them die than have an abortion to save their lives.
As long as churches continue to identify Eve as the Original Sinner, women will be regarded as second-class citizens subject to the will of men, their betters.
In this regard, the ministers, priests, and pastors are no better than distant mullahs and imams who preach their own versions of misogyny.
26
I've always enjoyed your humor Gail but your serious writing shines more than anything. This is a terrific and timely piece. Keep at it.
35
Why is it that all these legislators and anti-abortion activists are so eager to demonstrate and pass legislation against abortion clinics, but you never hear them say a word about fertility clinics. What do they think happens to all those "babies" who are not implanted? Hypocrisy is hypocrisy, but when it is accompanied by tunnel vision and ignorance, it really does take on a dangerous dimension.
11
the truly unfortunate thing about all of this is that it only affects poor women. middle class educated and wealthier women will always find a way to end a pregnancy if need be. it is only the poor who will suffer under these medieval ways.
31
Imagine, if you will, that everything in this world was exactly as it is now, except that men got pregnant and gave birth. Now ask yourself: what would be the odds of abortion being illegal or restricted in any way whatsoever?
As even the most clueless rubes among us know, the odds would be exactly zero. Indeed, male legislatures would be falling all over themselves to assure that access to, and state funding for, abortion would be available on demand, everywhere and at any time.
I'll admit to being a white male who tries from time to time to remind the white male legislators in my woebegone state of Tennessee that the days when women can be considered chattel are well and truly over.
It remains a sad fact, however, that down here in Deliverance country the fight against the medieval mindset is a tough uphill battle.
32
I’ve never believed it’s about sex, per se. Men are clearly free to have all the sex they want. It’s about controlling women. Being anti-abortion or anti-leggings, it’s all part of a singular strategy.
41
If the Supreme Court ruled abortion is illegal, I bet more pro-choice women who are between 18-44 will vote in 2020. Also, it will be a catalyst for increased fundraising and volunteering for Democratic candidates.
8
Gabrielle Blair, a Mormon mother of six, wrote an interesting series of tweets late last year declaring that men are responsible for 100% of unwanted pregnancies. Interesting way of looking at the issue, eh (as our Canadian cousins might say)? One of her statements really rings true: " If you actually care about reducing or eliminating the number of abortions in our country, simply hold men accountable for their actions."
https://twitter.com/designmom/status/1040363431893725184?lang=en
32
Last time I checked, about 75% of the American people support a woman’s right to choose. This slew of cases meant for eventual SCOTUS review now that Kavanaugh is on the court is meant to overrule that majority.
In this issue as in a number of other issues in which the large majority of the American people favor progressive positions—health care and environmental protections, to name just two— a minority of backward looking legislators, as well as the White House, are flouting the will of the people. 2020 is the year to get rid of the rest of the Neanderthals, from state level to President.
35
Can't help thinking of "The Handmaid's Tale," of course, and the wry comment -- was it first directed at Pres. Reagan? -- that, as far as he was concerned, life began at conception... and ended at birth.
33
"If the people declaring they’re “pro-life” in legislatures around the country were only concerned about stopping abortion, they’d be handing out vouchers for free contraceptives at every street corner."
Exactly. And it would be natural that "pro-life legislatures would be supporting legislation for free prenatal care for all mothers along with paid maternity leave, free childcare for those who work and healthcare from cradle to adulthood wouldn't it? That it's not, speaks volumes.
Time to retire the term "pro-life" because it's meaningless if a fetus is abandoned once it becomes a living human being.
78
@Mary Scott
Let us also consider how many of those “pro-life” politicians also favor wars without end, endless proliferation of guns, and capital punishment. They are all brass plated hypocrites.
5
To be blunt, most supposedly “pro-lifers” aren’t. They are actually holier than thou people who need to condemn other people to satisfy some weird need to feel superior. Most could really care less about children and since most are on the political far Right they consistently vote to attack programs that actually help children. So please don’t attempt to convince me that they are passionate about the welfare of children..no matter what stage of development they’re in. They aren’t.
190
to out a diner point on your argument, it's not a pro-life position but a pro-birth position.
10
National groups, associations, athletics teams, etc., should stop having conventions and meetings in states which are outlawing abortions. It worked for LGBT rights in North Carolina. If enough economic pressure is brought to bear, maybe states' policies will be reversed.
96
Several comments:
About equal percentages of men and women oppose abortion.
Trump does not care about abortion.
He sees opposing abortion is a means to throw red meat to his base and maintain their support as he fights impeachment.
At least in the 1st trimester no women should be told she can not have an abortion and no women should feel she has to have an abortion for economic reasons.
Concern for the unborn includes making sure the born have adequate care.
34
During the late-term abortion debate in February, I heard an odd comment from a woman interviewed on NPR. It was something to the effect that after they've successfully banned abortions, then they can turn their energies toward reducing unwanted pregnancies and caring for poor mother and children. Talk about putting the cart before the horse. When the abortion rate once again rises under a Republican administration, will they still fail to make the connection?
35
Why is it that anti-abortionists never go torment IVF patients at fertility clinics? If life begins at conception and terminating an embryo is murder, it's happening every day at these clinics. Why aren't these state legislators shutting down or putting burdensome regulations on fertility clinics in their states?
Could it be that many of their supporters avail themselves of these services? Or that those seeking IVF treatment are more likely to be at least middle class while many women seeking abortions, particularly at PP, are poor and working class and less likely to vote?
Or could it be that for many of them that restricting abortion is much more about restricting women and their autonomy over their bodies than it is about a religious belief of when an embryo become a human?
37
Actually here in Louisiana they HAVE tried to come for IVF. Among things they have done to make the process more complicated is pass a law saying that embryos created during the process have “personhood” including the right to doctor-patient confidentiality and the right not to be destroyed. So parents going through IVF in Louisiana do not actually have rights over their own embryos. We are also not allowed to terminate a pregnancy based on the results of genetic testing. Louisiana has a highly toxic mix of conservative Catholics and evangelical Protestants. They, as is typical of these people, also care nothing for children once born.
30
While I am definitely pro choice, having lived through a period when abortion was illegal, I can understand the ethical concerns of those who oppose abortion. However, I see very little correlation between those who insist on bringing unwanted pregnancies to completion and actually caring for those babies once they are born. The very same politicians who scream the loudest about killing babies are the same people who consistently vote against the safety net provisions that would help sustain, educate, and care for those very children. The irony is that no one on either side of the argument thinks abortion is a good thing. So it would seem to me the first step by both sides is to support sex education, medical care, and free contraceptives for those who want them. The bottom line is that sex happens, and it is time to do whatever we can to prevent unwanted pregnancies in the first place. Let's strive to make abortion rare, but also safe. And let's leave that terrible decision to those most affected.
120
@KASPA
Exactly right!
6
Abortion is not about abortions. Being against contraception is not about religion nor religious strictures.
The overriding desire is to trap women in biology and make them, force them, to once again assume the traditional roles of women as practiced a thousand years ago or, even, just one hundred years ago when women were bound to a destiny that saw them mainly as a helpmeet to their husbands and therefore tied tightly to marriage and ever so busy with childcare and household duties.
If one were to draw lines showing the emergence easy access contraceptives and more readily available abortions and the rise of full social and work participation by women, they would show a dramatic divergence starting in the 1960s, the age of The Pill. As the fear of unwanted pregnancy went down, the rise of the women's movements went up. This was no accident and, indeed, was likely tied to cause and effect as clearly as any major social change.
If America's Christian faiths were so deeply concerned about the murdering of innocents, why are they silent as numerous wars with many civilian casualties are waged all but constantly around the world? Why are they largely silent as racial minorities are subjected to low wages and often desperate economic conditions? Why are they silent on so many issues but make ceaseless noise about the unborn? It suits their purposes.
As a cause, no one takes pride in abortion, but it is clear that women were entirely right to insist on freedom to decide.
253
Religion plays a significant role in this issue and I do have great respect for people of faith, however I start to distance myself from that respect when people of faith impose their views and beliefs on others. People have different definitions as to what constitutes life and circumstances can vary significantly. This is a deeply personal decision for any woman who is in this situation. None of us should pass judgment on that decision. To those of faith, won’t God judge us all as we pass? If so, have faith in your faith, let God be the ultimate judge and limit your judgment to your own actions.
48
The United States is moving quickly – very quickly – from a democracy to a theocracy, because of zealots who want to eliminate the right of a woman to terminate an unwanted pregnancy for any reason and to eliminate the right of a woman to use any form of contraception other than abstinence.
All right, let’s be more precise. America is a republic in which every citizen regardless of gender, race, ethnicity, place of birth or religion has the right to vote. That right and all other rights which citizens possess are set forth in our Declaration of Independence and, particularly, in our Constitution.
Not only does our Constitution not show a preference for any religion (for example, one which forbids abortions) anywhere in its text, it specifically forbids favoring any religion over any other or over atheism.
So, how do these mostly Republican politicians justify imposing their religion and their newly enacted statutes and rules about sex and procreation on every woman in America?
They don’t even bother to justify themselves.
They’re men, they can muster the votes in their particular neighborhood and either they already bought the judges or the judges share their religion and are eager to impose that religion on every woman of child-bearing age.
I wish that I were exaggerating.
137
@sdw
Ironically, as the US edges toward theocracy, Ireland moves determinedly away from it.
When I was an exchange student there 40 years ago, not only was abortion illegal, so was contraception, including condoms.
Now, by referendum, abortion is legal there, as is marriage equality.
Maybe I need to return...
35
It’s illogical that men would oppose abortion and that woman vote against their own interests in support of pro-life politicians.
In fact, if woman would unite and protect their legally granted pro-choice right this would stop being a topic every time a conservative male politician campaigns. Then those politicians would talk about what they really care about; defending the right to keep semi-automatic weapons.
Really think about this for a minute; conservative politicians haven’t said a word about a public education program during this administration. But, they do talk about keeping folks armed to the teeth. Thus showing that they don’t really care about our children.
10
Gail is exactly right that "if the people declaring they’re 'pro-life' in legislatures around the country were only concerned about stopping abortion, they’d be handing out vouchers for free contraceptives at every street corner" and lobbying for health and sex ed classes in schools. And genuine pro-lifers should also support more funding for healthcare, schools, daycare, and tuition breaks for college to help women choose to have babies because they are confident they can raise those babies with the financial security to become healthy, gainfully employed adults.
131
@common sense advocate
You’d think that “pro-life legislatures” would also oppose capital punishment and favor rational regulation of guns.
That they don’t exposes their hypocrisy.
15
If the state denies women the right to decide for themselves whether or not to have a child, the state should provide money to pay for the child’s, upbringing. That would include all living expenses, medical care, and educational costs.
The money would come from all right to lifers who would happily fund the program.
We’d quickly see how much the pro-lifers are really committed to their position.
416
Exactly how forced births ought to be handled: Let the anti-abortion crowd foot the bill for 21 years for all those children.
84
@Bruce Stasiuk And don't forget about providing financial support for the mother-caregiver of these children. She will also need nutritious food, decent clothing, transportation, safe shelter, furniture, furnishings, and quality medical care since she will be responsible for taking care of this child or these children 24/7.
61
@Kathy Sounds like you want a return to the poorhouses of old for unwed mothers and their children? Bruce is talking about other men, and women, paying for a man's offspring. You do understand, society does not have to provide for the unwanted children, and their mothers, the same way a man does for his own child and wife, right? Be careful that you understand what you are advocating for: perhaps not conceiving would be better than 21 years of taxpayer-raising of your child if you are then confined to a poorhouse? Resources are finite, and with open borders, I don't think you and the child will be taken care of in a manner -- monthly check -- that will be very pleasing.
3
The right to an abortion rests solely on a Supreme Court decision. When Obama first took office as President, Democrats could have easily and quickly made laws allowing abortion nationwide. There was no way Republicans could have prevented it. So why did Democrats squander the opportunity? What were they working on instead that was so much more important?
8
@Richard Winchester - Affordable childbirth?
Pediatric care? Health and medicine?
24
@Richard Winchester
"There was no way Republicans could have prevented it (Democrats allowing abortion nationwide)"
This statement is so far from the truth it is not even wrong.
6
@Richard Winchester
Health care for the entire nation that included birth control?
7
When did the abortion issue get so important? So central to the conservative identity?
While this issue rivets our attention, and Trump’s shenanigans keep us grumbling, far more relevant problems are being silently exacerbated: global warming, economic disparity, nuclear proliferation, the decimation of our healthcare and education systems.
It’s a clever, and evil, strategy.
136
@Mark
It's all about control, mutual control. The Pubs are controlled by the Anti crowd for votes and yet the Anti crowd is controlled by the Pubs for hopes of instituted religious law.
4
I don't doubt that for some anti-abortion people there is a sincere conviction that abortion involves a murder--the taking of an innocent person's life. The problem, though, is what constitutes a "person".
"Person" is fundamentally a legal term, and implies rights that stem from the fundamental evidence of human status, which involves consciousness. Those familiar with both psychology and metaphysics tend to recognize that full personhood requires evidence that the entity upon which it is conferred shows recognition of its own individual identity, which is the foundation of agency (and, in criminal justice, culpability). Before birth, it is difficult to argue that the entity possesses this. Indeed, those familiar with the "ego-organizer" research of Renee Spitz may argue that until a baby shows that it knows it is a separate entity from the environment--usually, by voluntarily responding to others with smiles after a few months--it is existentially equivalent to a fetus, and not yet a person.
This is why we don't talk of "murdering" animals. Not that we wish to be cruel to them, but murder is something only done to the existentially conscious.
So the argument should examine at what stage this living clump of cells is existentially deserving of the legal protection that a "person" would have. The problem I have with most pro-life positions is that they tend to deny this to pregnant women, who can easily demonstrate consciousness, in favor of an entity that cannot.
48
English common law recognized the right of the unborn to inherit land. Read more, please, before you write.
Tomorrow I will be joining over 100 people to participate in a pro life vigil in front of Planned Parenthood in Manhattan very early in the morning. I would never get up at the crack of dawn if this was not such an important cause. Why do we do this. Because we believe abortion is the taking of innocent human life. We find this appalling and very disturbing.
The pro life people have been keeping a vigil for a long time and it has only grown larger and stronger. We are constantly seeing young people join in. One thing that has made a difference in our numbers is the movie "Unplanned." Since the movie's release, there has been a significant increase in our numbers. It has had a profound affect on many people. We only hope we can keep this momentum going and one day abortion will be a thing of the past.
7
@KMW - your passion comes far too late in the decision-making process - please encourage your people to lobby for more health and sex education classes and schools, and more freely available contraceptives, because that will help prevent the need for more girls and women choosing to have abortions. Please also lend your voices to the national rape backlog crisis so that rapists will be arrested instead of impregnating victims.
And for women who desperately wish to have babies, please encourage your group to lobby for low cost maternity care, healthcare, daycare, maternity leave, higher minimum wage, more funding for public schools, and reduction in state college tuition- so that many more women can feel financially secure to raise a healthy child in this uncertain world. And on that note about an uncertain world, also encourage your group to back efforts to reduce our reliance on fossil fuels - because climate change threatens all life - and the thousands of people dying from tsunamis, hurricanes, drought - we need to be pro-life for them.
173
@KMW
Pro life vigil? More like stand around and harass women who work during the week and try to pick up their birth control on the weekend.
There are far more effective ways to prevent abortions than self righteously pestering people you don’t even know who are trying to get services that, more likely than not, prevent abortions.
Most women who get abortions cite financial problems as one of the reasons they get abortions. Why not do something to make the lives of single mothers and their children better?
Or is preventing abortions not really the point?
75
@KMW I am delighted to be honoring the work of Planned Parenthood this week, and looking forward to the circus outside.
27
In the pursuit of outlawing all abortions, anti-abortion forces want to give the State the power to determine non-scientifically when “personhood” begins. They should be careful what they wish for. If one accepts the precedent that the State has the power and authority to define when life begins and to force pregnancy on all women, then in the future, why couldn’t the State under changed circumstances (as a hypothetical, severe depletion of resources due to climate change and over-population) arrogate for itself the power to prevent and terminate pregnancies in the name of the continuation of “life” as the State then chooses to define it?
Personal medical, religious and moral reasons underlie contraception and abortion decisions. It is wrong, dangerous and misogynistic to give that power to the State.
68
At this point is there anything left to be said that would change the minds of anyone in America? We have all chosen a side and we're sticking to it.
Of course, people on the anti-choice make "exceptions" when it is THEIR daughter, or wife, or girlfriend. But they go right back to being opposed as soon as that little problem is taken care of. (Because their case is different.)
So, I guess we'll just have to see how the chips fall, and what happens after that.
190
"Some religions, notably including the Catholic Church, believe sex is sinful if it precludes the possibility of producing a baby."
This lapsed Catholic who was graduated from 4 Catholic schools during 19 years of attendance thereat.
Betchya anything at least 90% of those who would describe themselves as practicing i.e., in good standing, dues paying Catholics today, do not believe such sex sinful and therefore wouldn't think of mentioning it in seeking the sacrament of Reconciliation, previously known as Penance and as going to confession. Moreover, add to the bet that at least a majority Catholics have not believed it for decades.
So? So, they practice and have practiced artificial birth control without another thought. Stated differently, the American Catholic laity has excised artificial birth control as a sin. What about the clergy? What about it?
Betchya anything. Open the bidding with Fort Knox' gold.
27
@Jethro Pen
If the Catholic Church believes that life begins at conception, why is there almost never conferred rite of Christian burial to miscarried fetuses?
6
Remember President Clinton's formulation that abortion should be "safe, legal, and rare." It is shocking to me, a 71 year old woman who remembers that bad old days when contraception was illegal, that somehow we have gotten ourselves to this point of utter regression.
A good starting point would be to insist that male lawmakers are barred from voting on issues affecting women's bodies.
767
@Shoshana Halle
Nice to hear an inspiring word from that particular president quoted here. Or anywhere, really. People seem to forget Bill Clinton was our most popular president, worldwide, for 2 decades. The GOP successfully created a kind of national amnesia about it but we haven't all forgotten.
Great comment, too.
75
@Shoshana Halle By contrast, 74% of religiously unaffiliated Americans say abortion should be legal in all or most cases, as do two-thirds of white mainline Protestants (67%). Men and women express similar views on abortion; 60% of women say it should be legal in all or most cases, as do 57% of men.
29
@James Maybe all men should practice Bill's method of sex, to avoid abortions. Is that what you're saying?? (We working women haven't forgotten, James...)
2
I agree - but many don't. Resistance to legal abortion is a very deeply held conviction on the part of many Americans. We have two choices: maintain a national policy they very strongly oppose, or preserve a pro choice policy in those states that support it. State by state choice worked in the case of prohibition. It could work again for abortion, with a constitutional amendment similar to the 21st Amendment.
3
@Cal Prof
And add an underground railroad so that women from theocratic states who seek freedom can go North or West or to Canada as necessary.
13
@Cal Prof
No, it cannot. The Georgia law includes substantial punishment for a woman who has an abortion. So if a Georgia resident travels to Delaware to have a legal abortion, will she be prosecuted when she returns home? That sort of legal jeopardy is why the laws governing abortion need to be nationwide, not state by state. A woman’s right to control her own body should not be subject to her address. Certainly she should not have to fear jail in her own state because she had a legal procedure in another.
21
@Cal Prof This would take abortion access away from the women and families who most need it. Red states, poorer states, states with less economic opportunity for all, especially women.
8
It's all about going backward by making women barefoot and pregnant. I wonder why more women in these states aren't fighting back. Maybe because middle class and rich women have always be able to get abortions.
The poor will good back alley abortion, like my grandmother in the 20's and almost died.
I don't underwent why they are also against family planning and conception.
96
@Beverley. For the same rationale that the Taliban is "against family planning and conception." The Handmaid's Tale daily becomes less and less far-fetched.
22
@Beverley I think the typo error in your last sentence is telling...
The Church leaders ARE for conception, in a marraige sanctified by God and designed to bear and raise children within a committed family structure.
Using contraceptives defeats the purpose they say God gave us as men and women to use our bodies to glorify him and to be fruitful and multiply... When you have sex, you should be thinking of making a baby and continuing life, that's how the thinking goes.
In the same way, the Church believes condom use encourages sex for non-procreating purposes. By denying condoms in places AIDS was rampant, the thinking goes/went, people would not think it is ok to have sex if they are "protected"; abstinence is the best protection of all...
In reality of course, people aren't as strong as the Church leaders might think, and their baser sexual instincts often take precedence over procreation-only sex. Also, not everybody fits into the designated Man/husband/father and Woman/wife/mother roles. That's where the sacrament for the clergy came in -- as an alternative to family life. +
2
Thank you for shining a light on the most important issue for females and away from the distraction of whether a 70 year old man greeted a woman with a kiss or innocently massaged her shoulders. We don’t have to win every issue, when trying to risks losing important ones.
132
Ms. Collins, setting aside the blarney and baloney we are hearing spew these days from the mouth of our president, or what is left of him, perhaps it may have occurred to you and some others that Trump is a formidable presidential 'Front' to divert, disperse and disrupt us, while an ill-measured and malignant undercurrent is seeping through our States, with far more dangerous and serious repercussions.
If you receive from a long-time acquaintance married, but childless, one of those simple minded messages circulating the web, a reminder that Beethoven would not have been born if his mother had died first of a long series of illnesses and child-bearing, you might reply 'Roll over Beethoven, but a preference for Bach here with an edge'. Silence.
The M.A.G.A. where children sporting red bonnets are seen howling with glee at an age when this is still their first introduction to any country, let alone America, appears to be designed to keep us in a rallying and raging frame of mind, when there is a prevailing sense in our growing midst that we had better look sharp, and Eve to take the lead over Adam, who foolishly took a first bite out of the forbidden fruit.
As for Judge Kavanaugh in his explosive interview, some of us are still wiping the stale scent of beer buds from our soul, knowing that something is not quite right in this latest irreversible choice where angels fear to tread.
Our president is out of choices.
61
@Miss Ley
This letter has an interesting voice. I hope you write more.
20
@Miss Ley, I agree with Denise...your writing voice is interesting and powerful. Keep writing!
9
@Denise,
Thank you for your encouragement and wishing you a fair spring in Phoenix, Arizona.
Thank you, Ms. Collins, for keeping us updated on the latest assaults on women's reproductive freedom, health and lives, but there is really nothing else to say in the abortion debate. Now it's down to exercising political power and some economic power too. The same corporations that take a stand when states like Georgia pass anti-gay laws masquerading as "religious liberty" laws should take a stand when they pass fetal heartbeat laws, too. The management women and board members in those corporations should force the issue on the inside. There is nothing that scares a Republican more than getting a call from a big league corporate CEO with an HQ or big factory in his state who says "This law is bad for our employees and bad for our corporate image."
276
I rather suspect that this is significantly explained in what, here in Spanish America, is being called "the Bergoglio" effect.
Even before Pope Francis began his firm actions against sexual abuses, he pulled the plug on the hierarchy's cash cow (especially in the US), abortion, by ordering a more balanced approach to challenges and by removing prelates who were resisting his orders.
"Down here," we see changes more clearly because the RC Church is deeply ingrained in our societies.
I'm a discretely observant Spanish-American Jew and yet both my personal and professional life is affected by what happens in the relations among RC Christians, Evangelical Christians, generic Christians et al. and ex-Christians, anticlerical Christians and so forth.
We can feel growing schisms between RC-oriented and RC-similar Christians and pretty much all of the rest who are visible parts of our societies.
Clearly, the flow of money has slowed. Also clearly, by Francis' exposing, punishing, and even jailing abusers, anti-RC Christians have lost a "selling point" that swelled their ranks and enriched them.
The social forces who want abortion to be a police matter and a political bludgeon seem to feel (and they may be right) that it's "now or never" for their social engineering gambit.
They're burning their candles at both ends, I think.
20
@Harold
Ireland, overwhelmingly catholic, has recently legalized both abortion and marriage equality.
When I was an exchange student there 40 years ago, all contraception was illegal.
The Republic of Ireland is proof that theocracy can be rescinded.
18
@Harold
Pope Francis has not been exposing and punishing "abusers" for very long, only recently and only a few. It has been courageous parishioners who did the hard work and the exposing of evil. These brave people had to fight the entire heirarchy of the church for decades. Many priests got away with their crimes and retired. If you study Roman Catholic church history, abuse of children by priests has occurred over hundreds of years.
The true problem here is that all people should be able to control their own body, women included. No one should be under the thumb of a person with power and forced to have sex or forced to be pregnant.
6
Perhaps there is correlation between the states that pass laws to penalize women and the education level.
Mississippi, for example, is last at #50, per Wallethub. Kentucky is #45. Alabama is #46, Tennessee #41. Florida, however, is at #28 and Arizona #36, probably because of people from other states moving there for the warmer weather.
Education, including sex education, is one way to avoid unwanted pregnancies. Since education is not a priority in some of these states, they resort to legislation to control women's choices, usually by legislatures controlled by men. The only way to end this is to vote the rascals out. The sooner, the better.
372
@RK
Education is not a sovereign answer, more is needed, including medical procedures such as abortion, morning after pills and birth control. All four are under siege and require support to continue to exist.
14
You have missed Trump's strategic economic thinking regarding abortion and contraception. Since he just proclaimed that the US is "full" and can accept no more legal or undocumented immigrants or refugees, he must increase the birthrate of native US women. Otherwise, he won't be able to keep the economy growing at "4%" with all these retiring baby boomers. The Democratic party should see Trump's pro-life policy for what it is and explain why the US quickly needs to adopt pro-economic growth pro-immigrant policies. That way we can shut Trump and the pro-lifers up.
45
Perhaps Roe was decided correctly for the wrong reason, privacy, when in fact if the real moral objection to abortion is rooted in religion, the basis for the next decision affirming the right to choose perhaps should be the separation of church and state.
233
@Mark
freedom of religion was identified as one of several constitutional commitments (including no unreasonable search and seizure, no quartering of soldiers, etc.) that are best explained and justified by inferring an underlying "right to privacy"; recall that the Bill of Rights itself says that the specification of rights in it should not be taken to be exhaustive; there are other rights too; and the right to privacy was inferred (by the young Brandeis, and much later by Justice Douglas, Justice Blackmun and others) to be implicit in several Constitutional provisions
36
@Mark Especially since the "defense of the fetus" approach doesn't seem to extend to "help for the mother and child" once the fetus becomes a baby. Which makes the "moral objection" look pretty limp.
8
If women in Kentucky or Mississippi want to have the option of an abortion it's up to them to vote for the candidates who will allow them to keep that choice.
If they want others to make the choice for them, they can continue to vote as they have in the past.
I'm a man and pro choice, and I vote accordingly, but they're the ones who will truly be affected by these laws, so if they want to retain the right to a safe and legal abortion they're the ones who are going to have to do the heavy lifting.
123
@Louis
They can't do the heavy lifting by themselves. They need allies. Allies who will help in donating funds, appearing when needed, contacting representatives over and over again, and other needed activities.
Then we need to carefully watch the voter registration process, the voting process, and related matters in each of these states to defend voters who wish to vote.
70
@Louis
Men must be deeply concerned.
If precedent is set on erosion of a right for one part of the body politic, the rest of the body gets sick too.
12
so the declaration of Independence only applies to some people? depending upon where the live?
3
Great column, Gail. Maybe one of your best ever, and could not be more timely.
People do not realize how much this an an attempt to impose a speific religion on the rest of us. We think of privacy and women’s rights, quite rightly.
But the imposition of religion goes against the very foundations of our country. That is why it is in the first sentence of the first Amendment.
Perhaps Roe v Wade needs to have an even stronger grounding in the 1st Amendment.
531
@Terro O’Brien I still think it's an attempt to impose a specific economic policy on us (trickle down) but in order for those people to keep getting elected, they have to keep throwing out the red meat of abortion, religion, racism, etc.
37
Bingo.
Freedom FROM Religion
is Freedom OF Religion.
It's A Choice.
Not a Requirement.
25
Thanks for raising that issue, Terro O’Brien. I think your concern has been an implicit part of these court fights.
Without citing many cases, the decisions on admitting privileges, etc., seem to turn on whether the state can show its restrictions offer public health benefits, especially for women. This seems like a specific version of the secular purpose test under 1st Amendment Establishment Clause precedent (aka part 1 of “the Lemon test”).
If the law does not advance public health but restricts access to medical care, it looks illegitimate, even if no one proves the legislators had a specific religious intent in drafting it.
Lots of legal tests follow this pattern because it’s difficult to prove inappropriate intent. Why not just show any good intents are mistaken? Focus on the facts of the impact and avoid that proof trap (intent).
These tests can still sidestep a difficult issue: states can legally regulate what their citizens deem immoral, even if more voters define “immoral” based on their churches’ hierarchies of value. How to let states represent their constituents’ values without excessively burdening women’s rights, therefore, becomes part of the test.
If courts follow precedent, our balance may hold, otherwise, we could slide back 50 years in some states. Women may benefit from modern medicine and human rights without fear their neighbors’ religious convictions will decide their destinies. I guess we’ll see whether America is more state or church in court.
9
The close relationship between authoritarian political ideologies and religions is not a coincidence. Religions are by nature authoritarian, their beliefs do not flow from an investigation of the natural world and discovered truths, but upon received wisdom and the downward transmission of supernatural authority by its temporal proponents. Despite their rhetoric, personal freedom and individual autonomy are anathema to both the pious and the patriotic.
604
@Peter Aretin
The Republic of Ireland, long a virtually catholic theocracy, has been so appalled by the abuses by that church hat it has turned its back on church strictures, legaluzing first contraception, then marriage equality, and, most recently, abortion.
There is hope, but maybe not for this country.
100
@Peter Aretin
Well said.
Never forget that America was founded by the Puritans, religious extremists, so unbearable in their own countries that they were encouraged to leave and be dreadful elsewhere. In spite of the Founding Fathers "illuminated" guidelines for the Bill of Rights, etc. (thank you, France, Voltaire and Rousseau) the poisoned apple of Puritanism has always been at the bottom of the tree.
87
@cynthia Correction. America was not founded by Puritans. The first to land here were Quakers. The Puritans came the following year. Both groups left England to escape the religious intolerance there. The Quakers were also known as Separatists because they wanted to separate themselves from the Church of England completely. They believed everyone was good and equal. The Puritans on the other hand wanted to preserve aspects of the Church of England and were intolerant of those who didn't hold similar beliefs.
31
Democrats, please keep this in mind: Republicans are chipping away at abortion rights on every level they can, and will pay any price for Trump to stack the Supreme Court in a second term.
So, while liberals are issuing purity tests about whether someone is not worth supporting because they ever expressed ambivalence about abortion, touched a woman’s shoulders without permission, are a male competing with females, or have not proven themselves sufficiently ‘woke,’ the other side is busy working to take away crucial women’s rights for generations.
1152
@NM I wouldn't get too upset. Most Dems I know will vote for ANY Dem come 2020. We all just want who we think is the best candidate. Nothing wrong with that. That's what the process is all about.
52
@Susan
I hope you're right.
Because if 2016 taught us anything, too many people felt they could "protest" vote for a 3rd or 4th party candidate just because Bernie didn't win the nomination, or stay at home because both major party candidates were "equally bad". I really do hope they learned from that episode....
151
@NM,
And you can be certain that the GOP will be spreading lies and misinformation about the Democratic candidate, whoever that is, in order to deter Democratic-leaning citizens from voting. Voter suppression by the power of suggestion.
It worked in 2016, and they will crank up the volume in 2020.
67
Trump and other Republicans pretend that they stand up for freedom and against ‘big government,’ yet it is they who use their political power to encroach on our bodies and on the most personal choices we make.
853
@NM They have been doing this for decades, which is largely why I switched from being a Republican to being a Democrat in 1974.
54
@NM
And there is the giant among hypocrites: Mike Pence.
16