It's interesting that when an adult goes to a hospital, and his or her heart stops... we determine that that person has passed from life to death. But with a fetus, somehow, many people believe that the beginning of the heartbeat... isn't a life, isn't a human being. When does life begin? When is the fetus truly a human being? That's the ultimate question, so easily dodged by our politicians and by our self-interested desires.
9
I had a law professor who decades ago who explained to the class that the states are the ultimate protectors of constitutional rights. Indeed, there are states with broader protections under their state constitutions than under the federal constitutions. So if these new laws are sustained by the U.S. Supreme Court then we will have balkinization of the states on this issue and women will have to travel to another state for an abortion. The poor wont be able to do so as readily so we will have an increase in illegal abortions and the adverse consequences of same and/or more babies born to poor families and the government expense that goes with same. And all of this in the name of a "morality" by which some people impose their views on some other people who bear the most immediate consequences. Oh, and by the way, I would guess that most of these babies will grow up to be democrats.
12
Goodbye, Ohio. You’ve returned to mysogynistic times. You have no right to control women or their bodies. Keep your hands off. Abortion is legal. If you don’t believe in it, don’t get one.
27
This makes my head explode.
16
If an abortion is 'murder'...why isn't -
a stillbirth also 'homicide'?
miscarriages looked upon as 'manslaughter'?
'disappearing twins' seen as infanticide'?
using birth-control equal to 'dispatching'?
More importantly: Why is the collective morality the providence of the most superstitious sectarians among us?
9
"At some point in the pregnancy process we become a being..." This seems to be the rub. When is this? At the moment of conception, which is what many anti-abortion proponents believe? In which case an identical twin is only half a person. When a heartbeat can be detected? This is certainly before consciousness. Or when the brain has become developed enough to contain consciousness(a soul, if you are religious)? This would be much later than the presence of a heartbeat. As for me, human consciousness is what sets humankind apart from other plant, bacterial, viral and animal life. This should be the standard. Is this an easily identifiable point of gestation? No. But the current RvW law is conservative enough to assure the presence of human consciousness, so this seems a good standard to keep.
5
Back room abortion cases will return with this kind of law.
19
"Fanaticism and bigotry is forever busy and needs feeding, and soon your Honor, with banners flying and with drums beating, we'll be marching backward, BACKWARD, through the glorious ages of that 16th century — when bigots burned the man who dared bring enlightenment and intelligence to the human mind."
From "Inherit the Wind," by Jerome Lawrence and Robert E. Lee (1955), Act II, Scene II.
"Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful."
— Lucius Annaeus Seneca (Seneca the Younger, 4 BCE - 65 CE)
19
The early abortion ban, together together with attempts to severely hobble availability of morning after medicines essentially amount to a total ban on abortions!
5
"A Defense of Abortion" is the most widely reprinted essay in all of contemporary philosophy. And pro-choice advocates need to study it. In it Judith Thomson grants for the sake of argument that the fetus has a right to life, but defends the permissibility of abortion with a thought experiment:
"You wake up in the morning and find yourself back to back in bed with an unconscious violinist. A famous unconscious violinist. He has been found to have a fatal kidney ailment, and the Society of Music Lovers has canvassed all the available medical records and found that you alone have the right blood type to help. They have therefore kidnapped you, and last night the violinist's circulatory system was plugged into yours, so that your kidneys can be used to extract poisons from his blood as well as your own. [If he is unplugged from you now, he will die; but] in nine months he will have recovered from his ailment, and can safely be unplugged from you.
Thomson takes it that you may now permissibly unplug yourself from the violinist even though this will cause his death: the right to life, Thomson says, does not entail the right to use another person's body, and so by unplugging the violinist you do not violate his right to life but merely deprive him of something—the use of your body—to which he has no right."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Defense_of_Abortion
23
These people believe that life begins at conception and ends at birth.
21
"Mainstream"?!? No, no, no. Still extremist, and always will be.
8
What happened to the Ms. Porter interview? "... but when... only if she was allowed to videotape it." What's wrong with that? Seems entirely prudent. ".... but when..."? There is some kind of bias in there.
7
What business does any man have telling any woman how she should control her body?
18
Only in America do we continue to move backward while formerly hard core catholic countries are moving forward. The right to life movement is a ploy to drive ultra conservative voters to the polls. They are a minority that vote and they are easily manipulated via emotion. By identifying a fetus as a "baby" they pull at the heartstrings. They are making their play now before the political pendulum swings back to the left.
16
"Our time?" Does that mean that science has finally found a way for men to become pregnant and see what all the fuss about abortion is about?
24
The Republican party will never allow abortion to be outlawed. It is the one steady issue that keeps a large portion of the population voting republican. If abortion were no longer an issue, some of their base would start looking at their lesser priorities, and they might decide that fair wages or protecting the environment are more important than corporate tax breaks and unmitigated gun rights.
10
Apart from everything else that is wrong with these laws, are any of these people out there women? Have they ever been pregnant? Unless a woman wants to run out and take a pregnancy test (which perhaps the man should be required to pay for,) each time she has sex, (undue burden, anyone?) she may not even know she is pregnant for several months since there are other things besides pregnancy that stop a period.
Natural miscarriages happen mostly within the first three months of pregnancy. That is the time a body gives itself to end a pregnancy that might be trouble. It also can occur later.
Many women and men are woefully uneducated about the facts and physicality of pregnancy and how a woman's body works in general and the makers of these laws seem to not only NOT want to educate women but to purposefully misinform them of their options, and facts.
Until the sole purpose of these laws is to help a woman protect her own health and that of her child, then they are only being created to make women subservient to ideals which may not be her own.
121
@Risa
you wrote the perfect reply to this article.
18
@Risa
Subservient to men. That actually is the root of all of this. Toxic American misogyny. Look at the rate of single motherhood in this country, very often coupled with men not paying for the children they help create.
Until such time that I see men bear the principle burden of raising children, they do not get to dictate the reasonable decisions a woman makes regarding bearing children. Roe v Wade is about the right to privacy and the right to have constitutional control over one's body, not anything else.
All this other stuff is just meant to confuse and distract from the real issue, which is men getting away with dictating a woman's life, once again.
52
Does this mean that they want to pass laws that declare/ define people with LVADs as not alive, or 'not worthy' of having rights?
I think someone didn't 'keep up' with modern medicine, and it is not the authors of reproductive rights legislation.
3
Pro life position, at least as I see it, it's not only about baby's life. It's (or I think it should be) mainly about the idea that it's not good for a society to go ahead with the conviction that one has a "right" on other human being's life.
Human beings are subjects of rights, never objects of others' rights.
3
@Just me Agree with your last sentence, which is why a woman is not enslaved to have her health and life risked by fetus if she doesn’t wish it.
7
We all are here, free to read and to type comments because we were not aborted. That’s a fact. At some point in the pregnancy process we become a being and removing us from the environment of the mother at that time or later before we are born leads to death. There are animals, like kangaroos, that have two stages of pregnancy, first inside the mother then outside in the mother’s pouch. Would the removal of the little kangaroo from the pouch and discarding it be considered a personal medical decision or would it be seen as killing of the little kangaroo? Say there are two pregnancies, one ending in very early birth, many weeks prior the term and the child being provided care in the hospital in order to survive. The second pregnancy is terminated at the same week due to personal choice of the mother. Of the two initial similar outcomes one child lives, but there is no second child. Do we still want to see it as a personal medical decision?
Also, since the pregnancy requires a father, why is it that most abortions do not require farther’s decision, his permission. Since the pregnancy and the future child was created by both the woman and the man, why is the man completely removed from the process of deciding whether to proceed with the abortion or not? If the mother wants to abort to avoid the childbearing consequences, shouldn’t the future father at least be given a choice if he wants to take care of the future child himself?
4
@Martin Because the woman bears all of the risks of pregnancy. We are not brood mares. My body, my life, my choice. It is very simple.
75
@Martin
You are seriously comparing women to kangaroos?? When men want to take on the carrying of a pregnancy, let's talk again. Or - more to the point - when men are willing to have the government override their bodily autonomy, you may have a more convincing argument.
58
@Martin Abortions do not require the man's permission because women are people, not property. It astonishes me, not in a good way, how many folks ignore this. The person facing all the risks of gestation and childbirth gets to refuse them. Full stop. The man needs to control his own behavior and body.
75
What angers me most about the anti-abortion movement, which has always been more about controlling sexuality than about preserving life—what angers me most is that these fetus warriors involve their innocent children in these efforts to control the lives of women. The photo that accompanies the lead-in to the article shows several children, none of whom are old enough to understand the issues they have been forced to support. Of course, they were very likely frightened into participating by the old canard about abortion killing “children.”
24
I grow more optimistic every day that a rising generation of Americans will be “pro-life for the whole life” - advocating for an end to the ghastliness of abortion, alongside increased supports for children and young mothers, paid family leave, protections for the elderly, and all who are marginalized and at risk of having their humanity trampled upon at the whim of those in power.
7
@James Women are “at risk of having their humanity trampled upon at the whim of those in power“ with every piece of Forced Birth legislation. I recommend spending more time with the younger generations because, I assure you, the young women coming of age have no intention of being treated like breeding stock.
15
"Mr. Gonidakis said he was cautiously optimistic.'We haven’t won but we are winning,' he said. 'We are winning a battle that we always used to lose.'
Mr. Gonidakis doesn't understand that it's not his battle to win because it's not HIS war. If his zealot fervor is based on his religion, it will fail in the courts because here in America, we are guaranteed religious freedom. It's also not his war because HE will never be pregnant. And it's definitely not his war because in 2019, women do not need, nor have they ever really needed, a man to tell them what to do.
40
@g3
yup, don't 'believe' in them don't have one. How about no one dictating what medical procedure I choose or don't choose to have.
What amazes me is how this is one of the very few instances where only a certain group can have or not have a condition but everyone else wants to dictate the medical decision.
If we became majority Jehovas Witnesses in this country would we criminalize blood transfusions?
Of course not, because this is about a very small minority of people that are so messed up they get off on dictating what someone else does with their body. These bigots always assume when they try to impose their beliefs on others that their beliefs will always be in the oppressive majority.
14
I read a friend's strident Facebook post recently about how pro-life she is. She told me years ago that she terminated a pregnancy when her marriage was falling apart. Go figure.
21
So many pro-choice people out there, but having an abortion is a still a dirty little secret. Why is that? What needs to go mainstream is openness and honesty, story telling. I had an abortion, and though a hard one, best decision for me/us and have no regrets. I was too young and immature, and from what I know now, it would have ruined us. I got a do-over on my terms. There you go - your turn.
38
Re Photo_Caption: “Now is our time,” said Michael Gonidakis, president of Ohio Right to Life in Columbus. “This is the best court we’ve had in my lifetime, in my parents’ lifetime.”
I'd LOVE to say, '...I came to my senses, 'N decided', to avoid voting Republican from here, on in, secondary to Mr. Gonidakis's calculated, (if 101% unconstitutional), legislative cruelty!
However...
I've been voting since 'Jimmy Carter'; I've NEVER encountered a Republican / Republican party plank that passed the smell_test!
9
All these men obsessed with making control of a woman's body into a civil right should be firmly shown the door.
35
@Tired of Sleeping
It's not just men....it's women too that value human life Try "controlling" your own body by not getting pregnant and using abortion as your morning after pill.
I'm a progressive, educated, financially stable 52 year-old woman and I think abortion is heinous.
You just like to blame it on men trying to control you because then you feel justified.
7
@Ivy - I find abortion appalling as well and while personal responsibility needs to be emphasized I doubt that many people use abortion as a morning after pill. It's expensive and traumatic and not something anyone wants to go through.
10
@Ivy A woman can't get (accidentally) pregnant without a man, yet, you imply it is solely the woman's responsibility to prevent a pregnancy. Why? Why, in an act that requires two people, does the woman bear both the brunt of the responsibility, the entirety of the consequences, and the least decision-making power?
Do we really want to punish women who end up with unwanted pregnancies for a huge variety of reasons-- from the innocuous (birth control failure, antibiotic use) to the abhorrent (rape) to the simple reality of human fallibility-- with potentially life-threatening pregnancies, with a lifetime of financial insecurity, with motherhood?
You're right to say that women value human life, which is why I fight for the right to control my own-- and for the right of all others to control THEIR own, and no one else's.
13
If you believe these anti-abortion zealots wish anybody well except for fetuses, you are deluding yourself. They are pro-life in the same way a bank robber is pro-capitalist.
And the zealots' tame Supreme Court will not only eliminate legal abortion, it will make sure that "criminal" doctors and "criminal" pregnant women are made to suffer as much as it is now making those on death row suffer. Torture is new virtue.
To the court and to the zealots, only fetusues are worthy of saving. The rest of us are murderers.
13
I agree with the multiple folks here who have taken issue with the word "mainstream" - not in any poll I have seen.
Most importantly, this law is just stupid, and hugely discriminatory towards women.
How is any law able legislate regulation that takes into account all of the many twists and turns of pregnancy. For centuries it was the #1 reason for female death, speaking to its innate risk to the woman. If you want to diminish the number of abortions, do so by creating a societal framework that supports women. Do not try to legislate medical decisions!
13
@P Dunbar
exactly. Financial independence, full pregnancy/ early childhood leave, government and workplace creches, universal healthcare- there are a million ways to make having a baby safe and make the greatest possible number of pregnancies 'wanted.' Abusive boyfriend and spouse domestic violence laws etc.
Not to mention better healthcare access and environmental relations would both be pivotal in reducing medically necessary abortions, birth defects, and spontaneous abortion (commonly called miscarriage)
5
No country can call itself democratic when half the population has to continually fight for its rights. No woman can call herself free when others control her reproductive rights. We are human beings, and not brood mares. The laws being passed now restricting abortion to the first six weeks have nothing to do with pro-life; they are all about control of women. Men have always wanted to control women and the women who go along with them are truly despicable.
51
Our time? Excuse me, you're male, so please stay out of this issue - and my body. Thanks.
37
How do "pro-lifers" being hypocrites justify the killing of another living human being?
5
Abortion ultimately boils down to two questions:
1. When does that unique human life begin?
2. How much do you value human life?
A direct abortion is NEVER needed to save the life of a mother. If the child dies as an indirect result of an attempt to save the mother, then that is acceptable. ie removing the "infected" tube in an ectopic pregnancy and the chemical cocktail used in chemo kills the unborn these are all acceptable. So yes, abortion boils down to the two above questions.
4
Human life begins when it’s conscious of its own being a human. These kinds of questions are very silly. Women have the power and right to give life, they should also have the power and right to take it away should they choose. We only value human lives who are aware they are human beings.
8
@MSS No. The only question abortion boils down to is:
When is a woman no longer a person?
25
@Ana - "human life begins when it's conscious of its own being human"....??? Infants and babies are not conscious of its own being human. Silly and incorrect definition. At what age do you think a child has this self awareness? OK to kill them up that point?
Do you realize that babies in utero move away from intrusion, feel pain, like/dislike specific foods, already like/dislike sucking their thumbs, are active or laid back (ie their personalities are already forming and being exhibited), are already left handed/right handed, already have music preferences? Infants in their mother's uterus have personality because they are individual people.
6
All this fetal heartbeat noise and when is a fetus human is just a smoke screen for forcing the beliefs of a minority on everyone else. The majority of voters in all the states mentioned probably support choice. And I agree with everyone here who stresses that involuntary pregnancy is slavery. It was one of the most oppressive and disgusting aspects of the history of slavery in this country. I don't want to argue about fetal heartbeats; the important time in each bundle of joy's arrival is when it becomes the responsibility of society to provide it with health care, food, shelter, education, tender caring, and emotional support for at least 18 years. The heartbeat we should be thinking about is the heartbeat of compassion.
29
A pregnant woman walks into a clinic, the father of the child in her womb coming with her. She takes the ultrasound test showing the developing baby. As she turns to the future father standing by she says the following to him: Look at it, here is the leg, here is the arm and it is moving. Isn’t she lovely?
Then two weeks later they both have a terrible fallout. The woman is not sure of their joint future, she thinks about the unborn baby and after a difficult back and forth she decides to break the relationship and abort the pregnancy. When the father reaches out and begs for reconciliation and keeping the pregnancy going she says no. The father asks but what about the baby? She responds, this is my body, to which you have no right until the child is born, until then I can decide to discard it and you have no say in it.
At which point and why the lovely child from the time of the ultrasound later on becomes just a body part to which the future father has no claim? And how we justify it?
Isn’t it about having it both ways depending on the circumstances and the mindset at the time?
4
@Martin - Cute story. Guess what is more likely to happen? The couple has a falling out, the guy takes off and leaves the woman alone to deal with the pregnancy and the next eighteen years of raising a child.
He doesn't pay child support and doesn't suffer any consequences for it. She's stuck with hundreds of thousands of dollars of medical bills, rent, utilities, food, child care etc.
I know this because it happened to me.
43
I completely agree. It’s up to the discretion of the mother and it’s possible she changes her mind multiple times during the pregnancy. But they always and justifiably so have the final say. They might make the wrong call, but it’s still their call to make. Bottom line.
20
Males who cannot accept that their sexual partner may choose abortion should not be having sex.
41
Oh yay. As a neighboring state I'm thrilled to hear this. I mean it's not as if we don't already have throngs from Ohio coming across the border for medical care. Now they'll come to terminate pregnancies.
I apologize if I seem harsh but it's just more conservative nonsense that makes the blue states pay.
18
In 1992 John Grisham published a thriller, The Pelican Brief, about the assassination of a Supreme Court judge to influence an upcoming court case.
The Trump family's involvement in encouraging Justice Kennedy to resign last summer, in order to place a political operative on the Court, is eerily similar to that plot.
Just another example of trumpian "ethics".
22
A number of years ago a family member living in Maryland was informed that the brain of the child she was carrying was forming out side the skull. There was absolutely no chance, none at all, that the child could survive even for minutes outside the womb. So, the woman sought an abortion and was denied under Maryland law. Carrying the child to term would also endanger the life and future reproductive capability of this woman. Needless to say she was heart broken and deeply distressed.
Right to lifers fail at all levels to consider the consequences of their self-righteous laws and rules. This woman, suffering the anguish of knowing that a child she was carrying the last several months would not survive, could not be consoled. To add further injury and harm the laws of Maryland precluded late term abortions.
Finally, after exhausting all options in Maryland she made arrangement for an abortion in New York.
Anti-abortionists have no answer and certainly no regard for the welfare of any woman facing the necessity of abortion. They will not allow abortion under any circumstances including rape and incest. Worse, if a woman's body becomes septic from infection because a fetus is fatally infected or has died in utero there is no allowance for want of a woman's health.
The cruelty imposed by anti-abortionists is predicated upon the belief that cruelty is imposed upon a fetus that has rights above and beyond that of all women regardless of circumstances.
This is warped mercy.
57
@Jay
Because those medical realities and complexities are nothing that these nutjobs want to acknowledge exists. They just want to control someone else's life and body.
16
If we’re going to make women have children we better start collecting child support from EVERY man intimately involved in procreation. DNA testing at hospitals, attaching fathers’ wages for 18 years, IRS collects like social security, no choice. See if THAT curtails “prolife” hypocrites.
64
@Barbara Grob I think many conservatives would be very agreeable to this. Every child born deserves to be loved and supported by both a mother and a father. I think it would be great to DNA test every male who a woman claimed was the father and absolutely enforce child support! Can't think of too many conservatives against father's being held accountable.
1
Welcome to the old era, where fundamentalist religion and the oppression of women, people with lower $$ assets, religious and ethnic minorities, disabled kids (and adults), and the elderly TRUMPS all, including the US Constitution.
15
Ohio Tourist Board:
I don't care how much I want to visit the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, this draconian and 1st-Amendment-violating bill is reason 18 NOT to bring my tourist or business dollars to OHIO.
And Rockers/Celebrities/Producers: You too should stay away until this sexist and religious-freedom-obliterating bill goes back to the shredder where it belongs. The public may be watching and purchasing our music, movies, and merchandise accordingly.
151
If human life begins as soon as a heartbeat is detected, the fathers if embryos should be required to pay child support as soon as that heartbeat is detected. That, in conjunction with strict enforcement of child support laws, might change the minds of some "pro-life" parents of teenage boys.
51
@David Friedlander - I think that is an excellent idea and would be embraced by pro life conservatives. Absolutely have the father's support the mother and child from the time of conception forward. However, it would be fair for any and all men that are later proven to not be the biological father to expect repayment from the women who made false/mistaken claims. Shocking how many women have multiple sexual partners and do not even know the father of their babies! Great idea and, yes, men need to be 100% accountable to their sex partners.
@David Friedlander
if politicians want to start 'defining life' instead of the medical community, and that definition becomes a heartbeat, what do I do with someone with an LVAD or in cardiac arrest?
Also, do they mean cardiac cells or a fully developed, chambered, heart?
2
All of these so called religious zealots have no problems with putting children in cages. They have no issue walking by homeless individuals who were evicted from their homes. They have no issues with children going to school hungry. They have no issue with telling other people what to do with there bodies and act as if they are stewards of God..
The outright hypocrisy of this country of old white and young men is applauding. Why don't these men use birth control instead of putting the burden on women
Very simple,women should not brother to live in Ohio, spend your dollars in Ohio attend college in Ohio or have anything to do with this state. Move out because money talks when they begin to feel financially strapped cant balance there state budgets these religious zealots will have no one to blame but themselves.
There is a reason people live in progressive cities because they don't want to be dumb downed by people who wouldn't even give a person on the street a meal if they were starving to death. All these so called religious people and all this poverty in our streets and Ohio is not an exception.
There are plenty of children who needs good homes why worry about someone else heartbreaking issues and make them choose the choice that works for you vs them.
Feel good about yourself now because change is coming and it is going to be with your female population growth.
God loves everyone not just the special people who pretend that they speak for God.
31
Dear New York Times.
Please be more thoughtful with your headlines. I see nothing in the text of the article to justify your use of the word "mainstream."
Also, for balance, you should have covered the same "pro-lifers'" opposition to birth control and sex education.
I'm not sure how they feel about the duty of wives to "submit" to their husbands.
Barefoot and pregnant is apparently the only acceptable condition for women.
29
The non- Christian arrogance of those who wave the Bible like a weapon, who get off on telling others how to live and what to believe. They should all hang their heads in shame and please with God for forgiveness.
15
These laws violate the First Amendment. The same people who are so vigilant about protecting (Christian) religious freedoms are seriously impinging on the accepted doctrines of other world religions and trying to have the government dictate to and overrun the religious freedoms of non-fundamentalist Christians, Muslims, Jews, Taoist, Wiccan, Hindu, etc. Americans.
Indeed, some religions traditions morally require a pregnancy be aborted if it is placing the woman's life in danger. In other words, It would be a greater sin to allow the already-born woman to perish in order to (try to) save the embryo/fetus -- at whatever the stage of pregnancy.
Are US state governments (and perhaps the SCOTUS) going to force health care professionals and women to sin by forcing them to maintain a pregnancy that their faith says is wrong?
19
It is my sincerest hope that ANY woman who is prevented by these laws from having an abortion, to sue both the State that passed the laws as well as the groups who supported it. Let them sue for child support, health insurance, school tuition and every single cost of living expense needed to take care of the child.
What an absolute disgusting display of ideology at the expense of all women in this forsaken country, or what's left of it.
35
@Charlotte - you are thinking in a binary choice mindset. The choice is more than kill or raise the child. many loving adults will be happy to adopt the child. One does not need to raise the child or murder the child. One can let the child live a full and happy life.
4
Please, please stop granting these groups the title 'anti-abortion '. There are NO people out there clamoring for women to go out and get pregnant so that they can get an abortion to increase the number of abortions being done. THAT would be a 'pro-abortion ' stance, and the opposition would be 'anti-abortion'. These people are 'anti-choice' or 'anti-self-determination for women' PERIOD! Just call them what they are.
42
the blatant hypocrisy of the so called "Pro-Life" movement.
Let's call it what it really is. Control Over Women movement.
Do any of these states have comprehensive sex education? low cost or free birth control? free prenatal care? low cost day care? of course not.
37
So, protect a fetus with your life until that child is born & then lose interest.
Don't feed,clothe,vaccinate,educate,protect,nurture,
house,inspire,enrich or love it.Take the tiki torches out,keep the death penalty legal & put guns everywhere.~ With pro life, it's all about the timing.
34
I will never understand why men are so bent on controlling a woman’s body. For all conservatives’ talk of freedom, they’re certainly intent on limiting women’s freedoms.
44
@The Pattern
because they are rejected mates or very sad/ conflicted closeted individuals. A mixture of sadism, self-hate and jealousy.
7
I have seen since the 1970’s how men (esp white men) have felt threatened by the empowerment of women in the workplace. Upon my first big promotion in 1976, the men in my new office (in socially conservative Upstate NY), made it very clear to me that I had “stolen” the job from the white man whose “turn” it was. As I advanced through the remaining years of my career, this happened several more times even though I had moved to the supposedly more liberal west coast.
I believe that anti-choice men are using these laws as a tool to wreak revenge on the women who threaten their prestige and livelihoods, whether they are conscious of this motivation or not.
9
Of course, if you are not poor just go to another state. If you are poor too bad. Your child will now have inferior schools, poor housing, little or no medical care, and grow up in poverty. The wealthy need someone at the bottom to cut their lawns.
14
If these cases get to the Supreme Court, their champions will be disappointed. John Roberts will not be on their side. Besides, be careful what you wish for. Overturning R v W is political kryptonite for the Republican Party. Low voting populations like disaffected young women will be galvanized, while one-issue Holy Rollers will become complacent. And in the end, abortion reality will change very little in either Red or Blue States. Countries like Chile and El Salvador ban abortion under all circumstances, yet incidence has increased in both due pharmacological technology.
13
I'd be a lot more inclined to buy the "pro-life" argument if it didn't come from people who support executions, wars, gun killers, "stand your ground" laws and oppose maternal care, child support, and taxes to fund schools.
43
The Church should be taxed. They want these children born, sao they should be forced to contribute directly to society to support these children. Not through their charities where they can control who has access or through their private medical services, but through state run programs with mandated access. It's only fair that if churches can change these laws, chruch members should be expected to pay individually and the church as an organization to provide financial support for laws they have imposed on others.
I was once a Christian but I will never support Christianity again. As an adult it is so clearly about controlling other people and reacting to fear.
46
@KStew We need to reform statewide child support collection systems—better yet make collections national and administered by the IRS. If the feds can find your money to pay taxes, they should also attach the wages of millions of men who readily cheat their kids out of support now. Disgraceful.
16
@Barbara Grob - Interesting fact. Failure to pay child support doesn't impact a person's credit rating.
6
@KStew Then do churches get to keep all of the money gained from taxes once these "economic drains" reach working age?
FYI the US has lost over 50 trillion in GDP by future tax payers that were aborted.
I wish the Ohio Right to Life would put even 1/2 of the energy it puts into banning abortions to actually helping the millions of living breathing babies and children who live in poverty in this country.
113
@Sallie
But that would require the RTLers to acknowledge that they have responsibilities to others and that would cost MONEY, and we can't have that can we?
15
@Sallie - Even better how about working to provide sex education and affordable contraception?
15
They expect women to operate without a safety net?
There are consequences to forcing women to take a fetus to term. People will change their behaviors in ways that will hurt these regions.
One effect is flight of young people to regions where they can manage their lives without interference. Powerful people in these states may be find with that flight but eventually it will bankrupt the state's economy and its culture.
Ohio chose this week to be backwater. How do I recruit tech workers? How do I convince my child to stay and start a family here if we ask them to shoulder high unmanageable risks?
138
@cleverclue I thought contraception was the "safety net?"
2
@MSS Contraception fails, even when used conscientiously.
24
Heartbeat as in alive? Time for every pregnant woman to sue for all state and federal benefits, tax and otherwise, afforded to every US citizen and by the state's passing these laws.
You can't have it both ways.
33
The true colors of the authoritarian "pro-life" movement are now on full display.
Their position is simple: You get pregnant, you stay pregnant, by order of the state.
33
Outlaw miscarriages! And gravity, too, while you're at it.
30
Does Mr. Gonidakis have a daughter? If so, how would he react if she were assaulted and impregnated by her assailant?
18
He would force his daughter to bear a child.
6
@stu freeman Don't you know? The "body has a way of shutting that whole thing down." As if.
16
You can bet she would have his full approval to terminate
10
Lies and misogyny are winning. Sad.
17
If any of these people spent as much time helping poor, sick and neglected kids as they do trying to regulate a woman’s body I would at least have a small level of respect for their beliefs. They don’t and so I call them what they are: religious imposters and hypocrites.
50
@SPH
I seem to recall their religious idols as having no offspring
Didnt Jesus come to the defense of a prostitute set to be stoned? Are we to suppose she had no abortions? Since abortions aren't outlawed in Judaism then of course additional instructions came from Jesus, right? And yet they aren't even mentioned in the bible.
Using their supposed 'faith' is nonsense.
2
According to the right, women are nothing but a vessel for procreation.
25
No, it's not mainstream - please revise headline to read "Extreme-radical white men are succeeding in an underground strategy to keep women barefoot and pregnant, against the law of the land and the rights of the individual."
That should be followed by "recent increasing death rates for women in childbirth, which have spiked up, are expected to continue their dramatic upward trend, as all of womens health is being affected by these extremist groups."
49
I've tried to figure out why there seems to be such eerily little political pushback on this issue. It feels like women have been essentially abandoned by the many groups and people who should be women's allies, and even by women themselves. Young women of means seem to think that even if stringent restrictions are put in place *they* will always be able to acquire a medical or pharmaceutical abortion *somewhere* they can travel to. That may or may not be true when the dust settles. And that still leaves poor women trapped, of course, with no rights at all.
Even more concerning are those situations, later in pregnancy, when something urgent and frightening occurs. These medical events are typically intimate and unexpected, and sometimes constitute medical emergencies. They happen to people on both sides of the abortion issue. Make no mistake, women's lives will be put in danger by the actions of the current anti-choice political action, and it will happen quietly in hospitals all over the country. Private family decisions will be obstructed by people who will not have to live with the catastrophic consequences. This is what is coming, maybe to your family member.
155
Unfortunately looks like these draconian laws will have to go into effect before pro choice side becomes as vociferous as “right to life” side
10
@Madeline Conant
I don't understand why physicians are not more vocal about this issue, particularly those who must care for pregnant woman who find themselves faced with no good options in their 2nd or even 3rd trimester, for any number of reasons. It seems to me that those doctors (Ob-Gyns and more specifically Maternal Fetal Medicine specialists) would want to be proactive about protecting both their own rights and those of their patients.
29
@irene
Did you see the photograph of the Republican side of the Ohio legislature? They are all white men and one white woman.
This bill is about men legislating what women can and cannot do with their bodies. No men have to carry a foetus. No men risk their lives to carry a pregnancy. No men should vote on abortion or anti-abortion laws.
32
One would hope that, since the "Right to Life" people are forcing women to go through the pain, discomfort, medical procedures and generally being forced to bring up the unwanted child, that they would A) pay for all medical bills B) pay for all expenses in order for the child to be provided for C) pay compensation for the pain and distress in being forced to undergo an unwanted procedure. Of course I realize this won't happen since the "RTL"ers are only concerned about forcing their beliefs upon the unfortunate mothers and care nothing for the child produced or the parent.
18
@Tony N-Of course not Tony, to these people life begins at conception and ends at birth - they don't care about babies after they leave the womb
20
I won’t believe these smug zealots care about “saving lives” until they put their money and efforts into properly raising and educating these children. “Life” as an unwanted child is not good.
23
Why does any man feel like they have a right to weigh in on women's reproductive rights?
23
@susan
Even in support?
These restrictions only hurt the poor. Women like me can travel to blue states or countries where abortion will continue to be legal.
If abortion rights are over turned, many of us will be working with organizations that help poor women gain access.
25
@Nina which organizations are those?
No Republican president will ever appoint a SCOTUS justice to overturn Roe v. Wade. In 2003, John Roberts (who can count to five) said that “Roe v. Wade is settled law.” With winks and nods, justices may vote to tinker, but it will never be overturned.
Because Roe v. Wade holds their party together. Republicans can be “pro-life”, never having to take an impactful vote. Without Roe, we would see a combat shred the GOP.
The party knows that their shrinking electorate can be mobilized by Roe v. Wade. And they are not going to let it go.
Again: wink-wink, nod-nod.
5
@Padonna "settled law"? Slavery was once "settled law". Settle law is commonly overturned. Abortions being illegal was settled law for decades but it was changed. Don't fool yourself about "settled law"
1
My question is, what will be the fundamental Christian's ideological issue after Roe/Wade is gone? Will they stop harassing people in their personal lives, or is there a new "burning" issue around the corner? Perhaps a dress code for women............
18
@Tom Clemmons They are equally opposed to contraception. So, there's that.
8
It's not mainstream, NYT. Your headline editor may have chosen the term to attract attention and clicks but it is not mainstream. The article confuses mainstream with "now possible because of who is on the court." Who put the new justices on the Court? Trump, who was not elected by a majority of Americans. Speaking as a former newspaper reporter in small towns, I wrote perfectly factual articles only to see the headline editors go for drama that was not there just to sell papers. Now we get clicks and eyeballs. Same thing. You are not doing any good for the truth that the NYT likes to talk about on its tote bags.
The anti-choice crowd is deathly afraid that their efforts will eventually fail because more and more abortions will be medical (via medications), not surgical, and they cannot interfere. Unfortunately, making abortions illegal will hurt most those women who need abortions too late in the process to use medications, and they generally are poorer, more rural, younger, and also those with fetuses with terrible problems or the woman's health is threatened by the pregnancy. Gilead is coming, women. Wake up and take to the streets. Don't just sit there. Too late for me personally to worry about pregnancy but where are the young women?? I'll join you if start a revolution.
17
Hey, here's a thought for the next round all you folks pushing the fetal heartbeat bill might like: Force us to undergo vaginal ultrasounds every six weeks! All of us -- even us 80-plus-year-olds (because you just never know)! Even if we might not consider abortion, anyway. Even if we're not even fooling around.
And if there is a fetal heartbeat, clamp one of those ankle bracelets on us to make sure we don't go near an abortionist. And make sure we check in with you periodically.
Sounds like a plan?
14
@Rea Tarr Seriously, don't give them any ideas...
14
@Rea Tarr
What a great insight into the absurd reality such a law could take us to!
4
Republicans don't believe a woman has a right to her own life.
27
The right to life people want to say life begins at conception and ends at birth. If they want to help children then offer pregnancy and child support to poor women. They could support progressive taxation that would finance welfare, education, medical services, and mental health. If you can’t do that, then you are just into moral sadism
17
And if Michael Gonidakis' family member is raped and wants
an abortion, she'll get one.
In other words, what Roe v. Wade is really about is allowing all women to make their own decisions. Not just those who have connections and money.
19
Whenever I see a smug man discussing how important it is to ban abortion, I seethe. These entitled, righteous hypocrites. As though they could ever know what it is like to become pregnant as a result of rape, as a result of rape that is incest, as a result of a broken condom when there are already too many mouths to feed...they will never know the sheer panic, desperation and fear that women feel. And these men who have sought to control women since the beginning of time, none of them seem to be lining up to even adopt the unwanted children sitting in orphanages...neither have I read articles touting right-to-lifers providing even foster care. I am filled with nothing but pure, unfiltered disgust for these so-called religious people worrying about embryos no bigger than a pea, while women struggle and suffer, without support or help. Finally, a little reminder for all people seeking to ban a medical procedure that affects women and women's bodies only: We do NOT live in a theocracy! I cannot stress enough how important this recognition is! People need to be very, very careful when making decisions based only on their own very narrow, dogmatic religious interpretations. We are a democratic republic--not a theocracy like Iran! Keep your religious interpretations to yourself if you are a true patriotic American, because being a patriot in THIS nation means understanding that we have no state authorized religion. Therefore, your view on abortion is irrelevant.
53
The Ohio law does not provide exceptions for rape, incest, fetal prognosis, or maternal health. Ohio pro-lifers sees nothing wrong with forcing a traumatized 14 year old girl to carry her rapists baby to term. They see nothing wrong with forcing a woman with a stalled miscarriage to wait until the fetus dies inside her, regardless of the consequences to her own health.
Every day I drive past at least three pro-life bulletin boards, ranging from the innocuous ("Choose adoption not abortion") to the misleading ("Unplanned pregnancy? You have options! Visit our crisis pregnancy center!") to outright lies ("I was smiling at 14 days gestation!") I've seen pro-life groups picket the local maternity hospital - where every woman with a high-risk pregnancy end up. Why? Because an OB who works there responded to a law --written by pro-life groups! - that abortion clinics must have an MD on record who will share their hospital admitting privileges.
We have serious problems in this state, from the opioid epidemic to the economic health of our rust-belt cities. If they truly wanted to save babies, they would do something about the high infant mortality rate among Ohio's poor. But no. It is easier to pander to a small but vocal minority than to solve real problems.
182
So strange to see this going on. Here in Canada, we have no abortion laws. It's a medical procedure and any restrictions would be based on established medical practices, nothing legal. So for 30 years, no laws, and the sky hasn't fallen in. It would be considered rude to tell your neighbour what to do with their body. It's considered nobody's business but the parents and doctor.
56
@Detalumis I so wish I were Canadian sometimes...even though I hate the cold. You are doing the right thing on so many fronts.
11
@Detalumis Trust me, it's rude here, too. But some folks just can't seem to mind their own business.
7
@Detalumis
Much like state run healthcare, workplace creches, 4 day work weeks, state senior living, and paid family leave?
1
People who oppose allowing women to choose to have an abortion should be forced to read daily reports from all across the country about the many unwanted, abused, neglected and sometimes murdered children who lead horrible lives at the hands of their parents. Better, indeed, that those innocent, helpless, unwanted children had never been born.
17
But this news is in the papers all the time. Forced birthers don’t care at all about the child that is born.
14
It is an experiment that will fail.
The reason it will fail is that the OB profession is now heavily reliant on C-Sections. Mortality rates are bad enough now. Expect them get worse in these states as both women and babies experience a crisis in survivability.
For the sake of women's health, their well being and those of their families, women need access to care. Laws that frustrate access place people at risk and cause harm. They fail to prevent harm.
4
The right to an abortion rests solely on an old Supreme Court decision. It seems strange that Congressional Democrats never pushed through a law that allowed abortion and preempted any restrictions by states or localities.
1
"Newly confident red states are passing some of the strictest prohibitions the country has ever seen."
Unfortunately, that couldn't be truer. Here in Texas, the state House of Representatives tried to pass a law where it would criminalize abortion, and possibly the death penalty for women and physicians. Although it failed, it just proves how conservative states are emboldened by confirmation of Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh.
19
@student: It also proves they don't really care one whit about 'life.' Save the fetus, kill the woman.
22
I'm honestly surprised they're going after this. The heart starts beating before 6 weeks - which by the way, is only 4 weeks after conception. The "baby" at this point is not even a fetus, only an embryo the size of a pea. It doesn't resemble a baby in any way. I would be shocked to see Justice Roberts uphold such a law.
A more fruitful and concerning path for the Republicans and pro-lifers would be going after women who terminate at 10 to 13 weeks after adverse results from the new genetic screening tests.
Alternatively, they could push for viability to be defined as 21 weeks, as babies have survived at that gestation. Though if the baby is truly viable, the woman should have an option for an early C-section with the government assuming responsibility for the child and its medical care, a horrifying prospect.
8
I have grown very tired of "Right to Life" as a description of anti birthcontrol conservatives. Make no mistake, this is NOT about abortion, it is about women controlling their health, futures, and family planning. Legislation will NOT stop abortions, it will force the procedures underground, consevatives know this and it shows how little they actually care about womens health.
42
Mainstream? Really? What I think you meant to say is that among men who want to control a women's reproductive choices, this option is commonly used because most of their usual tools are likely to be struck down by the courts over the next couple of years.
14
How many times have we heard "if you can't feed your babies, you shouldn't have had them!" This is also the rallying cry of the ruling elite every time a single parent needs food, healthcare or housing assistance. You hear it every day. That's the thing about the anti-abortionists that is so unconscionable and so hypocritical. The wealthy never worry about food, housing, healthcare or about getting an abortion. They've done it safely and securely even before Roe v. Wade. They just hired private doctors or traveled to places where it was legal—offshore hospitals like their offshore bank accounts. No one wants an abortion for the fun of it. But it is our right, our bodies and our lives to determine what's best for us and our families. I sure wish men could get pregnant!
40
I don't see this as abortion at all.
This means state legislatures are passing and governors are signing into law measures that violate federal law.
This is Alabama not admitting black students into white schools after the Supreme Court decided Brown v. Board.
Is this a nation of laws? Do Republicans respect the constitution? This is not okay.
18
I truly wish that all people who are against a woman's right to choose whether or not to bring life into this world would be doing everything in their power to help those struggling mothers living in poverty, living with mental health issues, living with abusive spouses; everything in their power to be sure that each child living in this country has access to quality health care and education; everything in their power to teach men about birth control and what it truly means to respect women; everything in their power to keep their religion and belief systems OUT OF MY BODY!!
23
Ohio has become part of the Deep South, allowing religion to dictate women's control over their own bodies. I'm glad I left Ohio and would never move back. So tired of men telling women what to do with their bodies. We're not dumb people who casually have abortions for fun. We are intelligent capable humans fully able to assess our willingness and ability to parent based on finances, emotional and physical health, etc.
And if men are against abortion, then don't impregnate anyone. Only have sex with willing partners when you both agree you want to procreate.
154
@Anne
Right to lifers concerns cease as soon as the baby is born. Once born they proceed to play their hypocritical creed of "you shuoldn't have had a child if you can't afford it" ignoring the fact that they have removed all the ability for the "mother" to prevent it through the denial of health care, insurance based contraception and abortion. They will also not provide a healthy environment to allow the mother to healthily raise her child.
40
@Tony N - So called right to lifers don't care about unborn children. If they did they would be clamoring for pre-natal care, a living wage for families, a safe environment etc.
25
The American system of appointing judges seems not to be working. The idea that the politicians in power fill vacancies must lead to judges being part of the political system.
I think , for once, Trump got it right when he spoke about Obama judges.
In a fully functioning democracy the judiciary should be completely independent of the political system.
10
Even worse is electing judges.
1
I just hope all your people who voted for Trump because you didn’t trust Mrs. Clinton because of some ridiculous emails are happy when, and believe me it is when and not if, Roe v Wade is OVERTURNED. Don’t go crying about it or protesting it, just shut it and live with it because it will be your own fault.
57
If you really, really, really wanted to prevent abortions, you would be throwing birth control at people and making sure those who need it have access to it.
Otherwise, you're a hypocrite who just wants to keep immigrants and the poor in this country in a cycle of poverty trying to raise children that they aren't given the proper resources to raise: no health care, no education, no food stamps.
128
Say it louder for the people in the back!
10
@Joe - Republicans and conservations believe sex is for pro-creation. But they forget that most women getting abortions are not single young women, they are married women with children.
14
@Nina
They don't forget, they just don't want to know.
That is at the heart of every organized 'faith'. You have to refuse to observe some part of the observable universe.
6
These bills expose the reality that pro-abortionists have wanted to evade for decades: when does life begin? They would like to collapse everything into a "who chooses" while avoiding "what is being chosen." Pressed harder, abortionists pretend that the fetus is simply some "part of the pregnant woman" or "a clump of cells." Well, the heartbeat bill, besides raising awareness of how early on the fetus has an independently functioning heart, exposes the lie of the "part of the pregnant woman" line: it would mean that, for up to nine months, some women actually have TWO hearts? And it would also make very uncomfortable the discussion now being blackouted in the House over late term abortions, where that heart is deliberately stopped by a direct injection of digoxin to ensure that nasty Fourteenth Amendment doesn't come into play should the child be born alive.
3
@JOHN
There's actually a very simple answer to this question, one that the Supreme Court in effect provided twice, in 1973 (Roe) and again in 1992 (Planned Parenthood v. Casey); life begins at the point of viability, that is, when the fetus is capable of surviving outside the womb. Those who think this is the wrong standard, and that a more restrictive standard should be used, had better have an extremely persuasive argument ready, because otherwise, I don't think that the shift in numbers at the appeals courts and at the Supreme Court will be enough to result in an overturning of Roe.
7
@JOHN: There are no "pro-abortionists." There are only people who are pro-CHOICE as opposed to those who believe in imposing their own anti-CHOICE positions upon people who don't share them. And BTW: no child who is born alive is thereupon murdered by an abortionist.
20
NO parents want a late-term abortion. But a lot of truly dreadful medical anomalies aren’t detectable until then. Heartbreaking. Devastating to parents. You, smug in your armchair, feel you have the right to make the decision for them?
I read an obstetrician’s answer to a mother’s question when a late-term MRI revealed her unborn child lacked most of its brain, “Will she just sleep all the time?” The answer was, “She will be in too much pain to sleep.”
38
I don't understand the use of the term "mainstream" in the headline. I'm pretty sure that this is not the mainstream view of the public as a whole. Actually, it's not hard to find poll results showing that over 50% of the public favors some form of abortion rights. So, is the view that a minority is trying to impose on everyone mainstream?
66
@Alec
Judging from the anti-abortionist comments that The Times chose to publish, I would say that, yes, the view that a minority is trying to impose on everyone has become mainstream. And that's is beyond sad.
5
It's hard to argue that something inside you with its own beating heart and independent blood supply is just "tissue" that can be discarded without concern.
Sometimes I browse an anonymous chat group where people can post messages without any identification. It's heartbreaking frequently to see women wish happy birthday on the day that would be the birthday of a child that was aborted years earlier. The most recent one started "Baby forgive me..."
3
Yet, when I was 7 weeks pregnant at age 43 and with three children and I made a CHOICE about not growing a baby, I knew they took the sonogram and could see something in that blob that was NOT a baby. I terminated the pregnancy. Why? Well, my fellow male readers who will never be pregnant- I did NOT want another baby.
When I had the abortion, it was blood, like a period - NO BABY.
37
@Phil. I don't think that the heart is pumping blood at 6 weeks. There may be a beating cells, but heart cells in tissue culture can beat and nobody is saying they constitute a person.
21
@Phil
A fetus does NOT have an independent blood supply. Although the mother and baby's blood does not mix, the mother provides oxygen, food, and an excretion system for the fetus via the umbilical cord. Disconnect that cord and the fetus cannot survive. Your understanding of pregnancy and the mother/fetus connection is seriously flawed. Essentially, it is a parasitic relationship. The mother provides and the fetus takes.
22
My questions concerning abortion are whether politicians who favor the limits mentioned is: have they also
1) provided for public supported pre- and perinatal health care;
2) provided for housing and care of the infant and mother;
3) provided for education, job training and/or employment of the mother;
4) provided for vigorous prosecution of the sperm donor for support of the mother and child;
5) provided for care of the orphaned children when inevitably women die as a result of pregnancy?
If not, this is just another exercise in sanctimony.
121
They and their wives and girlfriends and grown female children should also be asked under penalty of perjury whether they have encouraged or paid for an abortion. The hypocrisy is monumental among many men who oppose abortion. This is an area where only women should have a vote.
19
@Barrie Grenell
Good suggestion. Except that a lot of men may not even know if they have been party to an abortion . . .
2
@Steve
Perhaps compulsory DNA testing of the accused fathers to prove, or not, that they are the fathers and then they can be forced to share the costs.
How much do you want to bet that these organizations act only in the interest of making profit, like a mega church? They care not one wit about life.
38
The Handmaid Tale was supposed to be fiction.
67
I have a question for the anti-abortion people:
Would you be willing to take on the responsibility of raising an unwanted child? Would you be willing to provide that child's needs until he/she is 21 years of age? Would you be willing to take on the cost of education up to and including college?
If not the just keep your noses out of other people's business.
The right to an abortion is the decision of the woman. NOT YOU!!
106
@Martin No he doesn't Martin. Please see responses to your comment for reference.
10
@Martin Do I get a say in your decision whether or not to have a vasectomy?
14
What about the father? He does not count in the decision to abort?
3
No, New York Times, it is not "mainstream," it is the result of an the extremist wing of the Republican Party having successfully seized power in several states, often by means of extreme partisan gerrymandering and minority voter suppression. Just because they're able to force through their agenda doesn't mean the majority or even a significant minority of the United States approves or condones it.
77
No law will stop abortions. They will be perform in the back alleys, be unsafe and even deadly.
60
Whether there are laws or not, terminating pregnancies will continue, as it has for thousands of years. It’ll be done either through pharmaceutical means, amateur methods, self induced, etc. It is still incredible to me that a group of people try to tell others how to manage something as personal as this, especially when it should be a medical decision made with a women’s healthcare provider. And, the hipocrisy of reconciling this with support of the death penalty, killing thousands in a war, not supporting starving refugees around the world, etc is unbelievable.
188
@Rob L: Some white male politician recently supported the death penalty for women who have abortions. SO 'pro-life'!
24
@Rob
Depending on the strength of their specific views, pro-life people believe that abortion terminates an innocent incipient life or, at worst, kills an innocent human being. Some but not all, also believe in the death penalty for the guilty.
In comparing that view to the group of pro-abortionists who have no problem with terminating innocent life but oppose lawfully ending the life of those guilty of the most heinous crimes, one has to ask 'who is the real hypocrite here?'
1
You want to live in Gilead? Fine. But let's do it right -- so that these restrictions affect everyone equally, not just those who can't afford to travel.
Remember, our President himself said that women should face "some form of punishment" for having an abortion, so let's establish criminal penalties and start enforcing them against all women regardless of age, socio-economic status, or circumstances.
26
Just another Republican pay to play scheme. The only people "winning a battle" are evangelical white men. Sex without consequences. Even though evangelical white women support this anti-abortion movement in the name of religious doctrine, they will live to regret lives ruined and children abandoned, not to mention women dying. Nothing Christian about that. The men just move on and ignore the results of their misogyny. They don't even pay child support. And the movement is not just focused on abortion, it also includes destruction of contraceptives and family planning. Have sex and walk away. Every man with an unsupported child should be in jail. Hold them accountable for their "religious" beliefs. See how they like having their lives ruined. Just another Republican pay to play scheme, where only the women pay.
96
Well, if it comes to sex between a woman and a man that would lead to a pregnancy you need two willing partners, the man and the woman (not talking about rape here). They both understand the potential consequences of their sexual encounter. Why is it that the man is blamed and the woman becomes a victim here? Shared responsibility applies, nobody is ignorant here, even if they would try to claim so.
1
@Martin Consistently, while the man is also responsible, I see way too often they refuse to pay child support, they aren't involved in the life of the child. The mother ends up taking way more responsibility. That's just reality.
16
@Martin
I think the woman becomes a victim when she is denied the right to terminate her pregnancy.
18
Heartbeat is NOT mainstream, it has been maneuvered into position to challenge Roe v Wade by Republicans -goaded by consevative so-called Chriatians holding votes over their heads- who gerrymandered and suppressed voting to gain statehouse majorities. I hope they fail.
46
@Kilroy71
If they pass the 'heartbeat law' and an
antivaxer with measles causes a miscarriage (because your fetus can't get vaccinated), can we send them to the electric chair for murder?
Banning abortion with these "heartbeat" laws is no where near mainstream and should not be characterized as such. The majority of Americans are against this. If you want to reduce abortion, make contraception better, more affordable, and easily available. Making abortion illegal will bring back the bad old days when women were maimed or killed by backstreet abortions leaving families without wives and mothers. The embryos were still destroyed but took the families with them. The rich will still be able to get their abortions. This is an attack on the poor and middle class women. You want less regulation? Get out of my bedroom and leave my body alone!
171
What the general public has failed to understand is that the for the real movers behind the pro-life movement it was never about preventing abortions. It has always been about controlling women and families.
154
@KKnorp
It's about maintaining a wedge issue that motivates certain people to vote reflexively for right-wing Republican candidates.
49
Women have lost their right to life.
83
Gilead 2020
28
The pro-choice advocates have been far too passive in countering the anti-choice forces, who have almost made the right to choose impossible. We are heading back to pre 1970's days.
80
@alank
Remember, the real goal of the anti-choice side is not to outlaw abortion completely, but to keep it going as a wedge issue. That is the true value for the right-wing.
33
@Pat
Respectfully disagree, Pat. They want to eliminate choice entirely.
22
@alank
People who get what they want can become complacent and sleep on their rights, but angry people vote.
The right-wing needs to maintain abortion as a reliable anger-generating wedge issue to get certain people to vote reflexively for Republican candidates without considering what those candidates do once in office.
14