…on the abortion issue, that is.
I have to say, I think South Carolina’s is the most commonsense:
In 2021, Republican Gov. Henry McMaster signed a bill prohibiting most abortions from being performed after a fetal heartbeat is detected, with exceptions for medical emergencies, fetal anomalies, rape, and incest.
The Socialists are all about “let the people speak” until the people actually say something they disagree with, in which case it’s Jackboot Time and compulsion then becomes the order of the day.
Personally, I hate the idea of abortion — most especially when it’s used as contraception — but at the same time I don’t really have a problem with abortifacients like RU-486 (the “morning after” pill) provided that it is used the morning after and not five months into the pregnancy as some silly women have tried, with disastrous consequences.
Also, I’m uncomfortable with government charging people with murder for having an abortion, because that seems to be a swing of the pendulum too far.
Of course, as always, the wealthier women will always be able to procure an abortion simply by traveling to where they’re available, whereas the poorer women won’t. On the other hand, if the fear of pregnancy does evoke even a little bit of personal responsibility — as opposed to the hook-up culture and utter licentiousness of our oh-so modern society — then making abortion difficult to obtain may have even a little social benefit. In the meantime [Dr. Kim sez] :
If there was a single aspect of the human condition that I could solve, unplanned / unwanted pregnancy would be it.
On the lighter side:
Well now, as a UK citizen, I’ve watched this with interest from the sidelines. For me, it’s fundamentally not right for someone else to have domain over your choice – and especially not over your healthcare and definitely not over your body.
You have your beliefs and I have mine. From that, you can make your choice and I’ll make mine.
I believe this will make terminations more dangerous for those that cannot access legitimate care.
Yes, some women do use it as a form of contraception – whilst having a second medical procedure, the woman in the next bed to me had undergone five consecutive terminations – that’s between them and their conscience but I would venture that they are in the minority.
But as you say, under normal circumstances, no glove no love needs to be promoted!
I think you said it perfectly. I find abortion pretty damned disturbing from a philosophical standpoint, but I also recognize that government control over one’s body is even more disturbing. It’s a shitty choice, and the last thing I want is the government stepping in to make that choice. I’d rather then woman make that call in any circumstance. But here we are.
The other issue I have that makes me queasy stems from being an attorney — Roe, from a purely constitutional standpoint, was wrongly decided. I hate the consequences of it being reversed, but Congress had 49 years to fix the issue by passing a simple law that would have resolved the question. But they didn’t. Every single legislator, both Rs and Ds, is to blame for where we find ourselves.
I know a couple women who were raped. They both got the morning after pill the next day. I can’t see any moral justification for precluding use of a morning after pill, or even for precluding a medical abortion for at least the first 12 weeks. I figure that if you can’t be bothered to notice you missed a period and take a pregnancy test within a few weeks, it’s kind of on you. I think we’re going to see a shit show of a mess as a result of Dobbs, but if Congress wanted to fix this, it could, and easily. I’m in my late 40s — middle class upbringing — I know of one kid from my high school class who was dumb enough to knock up his girlfriend, and they had an abortion at 5 weeks. The rest of us, to use your phrase, gloved up.
Morally I view abortion as straight up murder, of the most helpless and innocent. I don’t see much difference between dumping unborn babies, as walking through a geriatric ward shooting the Alzheimer’s patients in the back of the head for the same reason.
From a legislative standpoint, I take pause. Roe was a poorly thought out, extremely tortured decision. If you read Breyer’s and Marshall’s take on it, its basically a “dog ate my homework” ideological decision. But I don’t trust legislation anymore, and I’m not sure of the unintended consequences.
As a Reagan kid I was 100% behind the drug war back in the day. Now being somewhat ummm…older I look at what that has accomplished, and I’m not sure we wouldn’t be better off being able to buy Cocaine at the corner pharmacy.
It should always have been a State level decision, and as such I applaud that. But anything that increases the authority of a .gov agency over a person, is concerning, and I’ve seen too many well-intentioned things like this blow up in my face over the years.
I want to celebrate the decision. From a Constitutional standpoint I do. But I’m worried once again that we’ll be giving .gov assholes gasoline and matches.
I’d love to see a Property Rights ruling of the same stripe out of the court though.
Unfortunately I think a property or a Commerce Clause decision will be even less likely, as “all Property is theft” is even more firmly rooted in the psyche of ordinary Americans than this decision, even though raising a child for 18 years is a colossal burden.
During my Navy Medicine career, I sat on the Medical Ethics committee at several of the hospitals I was assigned to. Back in the early 00’s, we managed to get a very sophisticated (for the time) in utero video of a complete abortion on a 2nd trimester fetus. It was unquestionably clear (and has been supported by evidence) that the fetus felt pain. This one went into protective position, defending her eyes and head.
It’s not a hard call for me; between the women’s right to kill her unborn child and the child, I’ll side with the one with the defensive wounds every time.
Nobody’s ever asked my non-uterus self what my opinion on the matter is, but I’ll offer it unsolicited. If you’re going to be sexually active without a surefire means of birth control, have box of Morning After pills in the medicine cabinet. It’s the least you can do.
And just as an aside, if you are an active duty “birthing person” and decide to have an abortion, CO’s have the discretion to grant up to 30 days of convalescent leave for you post-abortion. They still don’t pay for it (actually they do, but that’s supposed to be a secret), but they definitely give you plenty of time off to recover from the “trauma.”
In re: to your first paragraph:
I think that would be worse to watch than a buddy get shot or blown up. I haven’t had any of it happen so I don’t really know. But the thought of watching that gives me the shakes.
I’m admittedly a wuss.
As a woman who has been through the procedure (the baby died in Utero) I know what they do. I doubt very much if any woman doesn’t. That kind of graphic information isn’t helpful. Using emotive language like kill, isn’t helpful.
When having to make what is likely to be the hardest decision of their lives. They know they are ending the babies life with the end of the pregnancy.
No woman would ever take any decision to have an elective termination, without deep and long reflection. Abortion, for whatever reason, is solely a woman’s choice – it is not right, IMHO, for anyone to have domain over that. Not even the prospective father. It is fundamentally wrong to force a woman, by preventing them access to medical care, to have to bring an unwanted child into this world.
When a man is able to bear a child, perhaps they will understand that.
It makes my blood run cold, to think that someone that has become pregnant through being raped, abused by a family member, is a backwoods 11 year old knocked up by the local gimp, or is carrying a damaged child that will have little or no quality or hope of life, cannot in some areas, have the choice whether to access safe means to address that and is instead, more or less forced to go through what is often extreme and protracted pain with the birth, which may put her own life at risk.
As for prevention, I completely agree that women should safeguard their fertility such that they cannot become pregnant unless they want to, and there are myriad ways of doing that, In a relationship, that is a shared responsibility.
Couldn’t have put it better myself.
So the baby gets no say in its own life. Got it. and by the way, listen to some of these supporters of infanticide. They brag about how many children they killed as a form of birth control.
There are plenty of products available to stop abortion being used as a form of birth control. There are any groups who would gladly provide these products free of charge to men and women who chose to use them.
It’s a shame that people are so dismissive of human life and refuse to take responsibility for their behavior.
JQ
So the mother gets no say in her own life? What next – once you start controlling something as fundamental as choice for ALL women (not just enforcing YOUR choice on them) which freedom is next?
Compulsory vasectomy for fathers of more than X number of children?
No, thought noy
“That kind of graphic information isn’t helpful. Using emotive language like kill, isn’t helpful.”
I didn’t use it to be helpful, I used it to be truthful. I’m sorry if the bluntness of the truth is offensive to you, but that doesn’t make it any less true. Pro-abortion advocates, as well as the media (but I repeat myself), have controlled the language around abortion for 60+ years, soft-pedaling the reality of what occurs. The Left celebrates abortion and inserts the preferred verbs (terminate) and nouns (fetus) to plea bargain down the death (procedure) to filter out the reality. If one is being intellectually honest, one has to hear the truth (or see it) with as few filters as possible. And because the truth runs in all directions, sometimes it runs right at you.
Oh, and the examples you cite (rape, incest, etc) account for less than one half of 1 percent of all the abortions carried out in first-world countries. It makes for a compelling and sympathetic defense, but that isn’t really what this whole thing is about, is it?
I’ve heard and read several times today the sentiment that the pro-choice crowd brought this on themselves. They had what they wanted, but they pressed for more. Partial birth abortions, abortions until the moment before birth, etc. They had a negotiated settlement, but insisted on total capitulation. I predict they’ll continue to make this mistake–at least I hope they do.
*not
As someone associated with the healthcare profession for over 15 years, I’m well aware of what happens – would you like me to describe it for you – I can do it either from personal experience or in simple terms. Terminate, foetus and procedure are the correct medical terms, not any kind of leftist grammar choice and who in their right mind ‘celebrates’ abortion?
As for it being ‘only 1%’? For the person it happened to, it’s 100%. Would you be prepared for your daughter or female relative to be denied healthcare choice in those circumstances? And what about in other parts of the world, where the %age is likely higher – just leave them to it?,
Partial birth abortions, whatever they are, and abortions until the moment of birth (I don’t know what that means either) are advocated by sick people.
But you’re right. None of this is what it’s really about is it. It’s about choice – and removing a basic human right to have one.
many people ignore the science that the baby has DNA distinct from the mother and the father so is a different person entirely. You don’t get to run around murdering other people.
If you think that the baby is not another person, apply your belief to the fertilized egg of a bald eagle. If you crush that fertilized egg, you will have committed a felony.
If we’re going to decide what a life is and when it starts, it has to be consistent.
Anyone can go online to examine the debate for and against abortion. The fact is that the choice comes before intercourse so condoms, oral pills and intrauteral devices or even abstinence should be employed. The majority of abortions are used for the purpose of birth control or deciding that the sire and dam do not want a baby with a specific gender, see India and such.
Rape, incest and endangerment of the mother are rare.
But this discussion is exhausting.
The real crux of this is that the original Roe decision was a bad one. The right to an abortion clearly is not in the US Constitution. Neither are the rights to get married or even own property. The ninth or tenth amendments clearly state that there are more rights out there but since they are not mentioned in the US Constitution then they remain with the states or the people. This decision recognized that fact. Now get the legislature to enact the laws you want and if the US COnstitution is unacceptable as currently written then work to amend the Constitution. There is a process for that and we have done that numerous times after adopting the Bill of Rights.
JQ