I can’t breathe. I turned 20 the year Roe v Wade happened. In high school (so before that), my four best friends sought abortions. Contraception wasn’t readily available and, in fact, birth control pills weren’t legal for unmarried women (well teenagers). We didn’t have Planned Parenthood in every 2nd city. We finally did get clinics at college. My sister had an abortion. My mother did. She was 37 or 38 and had a 2 year old. She got eclampsia with that pregnancy and was afraid for her life. All of these abortions were before Roe v Wade. You just can’t imagine how terrified these young women were. Terrified. That’s what we have ahead of us.
You are right on in your assessment and the urgency at hand. I agree with everything except when you say that a national ban on abortion would come "if and when Republicans seize control of both chambers of Congress and the presidency." It wouldn't require a Republican president. It would only require two-thirds majorities in both chambers to override a Democratic presidential veto. THE MIDTERMS ARE CRITICAL.
I'm a man: I'm a psychiatrist. The cruelty, hubris, arrogance and ignorance of these men and woman (that's YOU, Amy) knows no limits. Rape? Incest? These men should be forced to watch DELIVERANCE (60s movie) and see the horrors of a man being raped. To see the terror and devastation of this act on a man; help them stand in a woman's shoes?? ---- oh, they'd say it's just a movie.
I attended a Force Multiplier event last night where Jamie Raskin was the speaker. What an inspirational individual.
Two points stuck with me: The first was his reviewing the history of the Supreme Court where he pointed out that except for the Warren years and a couple of decades, it has always functioned as a reactionary body. (Who knew?)
The second was his discussion of FASCISM. He described their methods, one of which was to create DESPAIR in all of us. Once he said that, a light went off. We can not give them this power. Find a scapegoat, create havoc and despair among those who are kind and decent.
Robert - you constantly push us not to despair. Raskin's explanation of creating this feeling in us to retain power added another nuance to your exhortations!
The days when men can have "their way" with women without factoring in the burden of raising children or the pain or risks of pregnancy or the heartache of giving up a baby are long gone. This is the bridge too far. The women of the 60's brought us to here. We are no longer there. We are not going backwards to be ruled by testosterone without morality. Me, too, is here to stay.
As Robert eloquently points out, the MAJORITY on the Supreme Court got there through the machinations of a MINORITY of Americans. This Court has sided with the roughly 25% of the country that seeks the total elimination of a woman's right to decide when and whether she will bear a child. It is up to us to ensure that these right-wing zealots pay an enormous political price for their reactionary policies this November and in every subsequent election. The decent majority of Americans now have a unifying banner to march under.
Thank you, Robert, but I fear it’s even worse. The logic of the passage from the draft that you quoted says that if it’s not mentioned specifically in the Constitution, it’s not there. That would justify ruling that environmental protection is beyond Congress’ authority, much less protecting public health beyond the most immediate threats. The non-delegable duty rule would be used to strike down any regulation that the reactionaries don’t like. They would take us back to the America of the 1920s.
One more point: the struggle for a woman’s right to choose is often phrased as whether a woman can control her own body. But the reactionaries do not want merely to deprive women of the right to control of their bodies. They would deprive them of the right to control their own lives. And men, too, although they’re a little less obvious about that.
Thank you, Robert, for clarifying that how SCOTUS is overturning Roe is not a "women's" issue, but a personal constitutional rights issue. We can rely on you to promote activism over analysis and lamenting.
(I started to write "civil rights." Can you explain the difference from constitutional rights?)
As you say, "The moment of crisis is upon us." Now we have to rise up, "all of us this time," as Cathy Learoyd so often reminds us, and stand shoulder to shoulder as Americans and remember what Abraham Lincoln said in his moment of crisis: "We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution."
I pray Alito and McConnell have reached too far. This is all on McConnell. He stole Obama's right to nominate a justice. And he abetted the fiction that Trump's nominees would treat Roe as settled law. SHAME! Shame on the partisan hacks that are now the majority of Roberts' court.
So what you are saying here is that, if Alito's comment about originalism stands, this is ultimately a much bigger issue than abortion and Roe. This is about the 14th Amendment - (1) personal rights (2) voting rights (3) insurrection by members of the government against the government - and all subsequent amendments including presidential term limits and senators elected by popular vote. If any or all of this is true, it is a clarion call to action.
We now see plainly the anti-democracy stain of “originalism” in this draft SCOTUS opinion from an unelected cabal of Supreme Court Justices placed in power through appointments by executives who did not receive a majority of the popular vote. It should be evident through examining carefully the original Roe v. Wade 7:2 decision how far the Repiblican party has moved toward restriction of established Constitutional rights. Of the 7 SCOTUS Justices in the majority of the original Roe v. Wade decision in 1973, 5 were appointed by Republican Presidents and approved by a Republican controlled Senate. The death of the Stare Decisis principle is beyond tragic and portends the reversal of further rights by this radical SCOTUS majority.
This is a hair-on-fire, break-the-glass moment for our democracy and requires an appropriate reaction from voters to alter the drift away from democracy by Republicans.
American Revolution II has begun. This supreme assault on our freedoms will backfire. We have 6 months to oust the seditionists, the federalists and the antiabortionists. This ruling is energizing and focusing us! There are "troops" scattered all over this good country. ORGANIZE NOW!
In Michigan's capitol city, just in the past few weeks, we have created a group of former state public health officials, medical and nursing association leaders, retired lobbyists, and providers to forge a plan of action to assure healthcare is above politics. In Northern Michigan we have small groups working to convince "decent" and "moderate" Republicans to vote for our excellent, decent and moderate, Democratic candidates. Here we will elect a physician from Marquette, Michigan, Dr. Bob Lorinser, to Congress!
Thank you, again, for the clarity. It is, as you say, not just a question of women's rights but a larger and even more destructive umbrella over the violation of the basic rights of all citizens. But, as a woman who is old enough to remember the butcher-shop back-alley abortions that were the norm. before Roe, I can say that the particulars of that reality are, in themselves, enough to motivate anyone to take to the streets. The blood that flowed is symbol enough of the violence that has already been done and is about to be turned into law. Heaven help us all
I can’t breathe. I turned 20 the year Roe v Wade happened. In high school (so before that), my four best friends sought abortions. Contraception wasn’t readily available and, in fact, birth control pills weren’t legal for unmarried women (well teenagers). We didn’t have Planned Parenthood in every 2nd city. We finally did get clinics at college. My sister had an abortion. My mother did. She was 37 or 38 and had a 2 year old. She got eclampsia with that pregnancy and was afraid for her life. All of these abortions were before Roe v Wade. You just can’t imagine how terrified these young women were. Terrified. That’s what we have ahead of us.
You are right on in your assessment and the urgency at hand. I agree with everything except when you say that a national ban on abortion would come "if and when Republicans seize control of both chambers of Congress and the presidency." It wouldn't require a Republican president. It would only require two-thirds majorities in both chambers to override a Democratic presidential veto. THE MIDTERMS ARE CRITICAL.
I'm a man: I'm a psychiatrist. The cruelty, hubris, arrogance and ignorance of these men and woman (that's YOU, Amy) knows no limits. Rape? Incest? These men should be forced to watch DELIVERANCE (60s movie) and see the horrors of a man being raped. To see the terror and devastation of this act on a man; help them stand in a woman's shoes?? ---- oh, they'd say it's just a movie.
I attended a Force Multiplier event last night where Jamie Raskin was the speaker. What an inspirational individual.
Two points stuck with me: The first was his reviewing the history of the Supreme Court where he pointed out that except for the Warren years and a couple of decades, it has always functioned as a reactionary body. (Who knew?)
The second was his discussion of FASCISM. He described their methods, one of which was to create DESPAIR in all of us. Once he said that, a light went off. We can not give them this power. Find a scapegoat, create havoc and despair among those who are kind and decent.
Robert - you constantly push us not to despair. Raskin's explanation of creating this feeling in us to retain power added another nuance to your exhortations!
The days when men can have "their way" with women without factoring in the burden of raising children or the pain or risks of pregnancy or the heartache of giving up a baby are long gone. This is the bridge too far. The women of the 60's brought us to here. We are no longer there. We are not going backwards to be ruled by testosterone without morality. Me, too, is here to stay.
As Robert eloquently points out, the MAJORITY on the Supreme Court got there through the machinations of a MINORITY of Americans. This Court has sided with the roughly 25% of the country that seeks the total elimination of a woman's right to decide when and whether she will bear a child. It is up to us to ensure that these right-wing zealots pay an enormous political price for their reactionary policies this November and in every subsequent election. The decent majority of Americans now have a unifying banner to march under.
Thank you, Robert, but I fear it’s even worse. The logic of the passage from the draft that you quoted says that if it’s not mentioned specifically in the Constitution, it’s not there. That would justify ruling that environmental protection is beyond Congress’ authority, much less protecting public health beyond the most immediate threats. The non-delegable duty rule would be used to strike down any regulation that the reactionaries don’t like. They would take us back to the America of the 1920s.
One more point: the struggle for a woman’s right to choose is often phrased as whether a woman can control her own body. But the reactionaries do not want merely to deprive women of the right to control of their bodies. They would deprive them of the right to control their own lives. And men, too, although they’re a little less obvious about that.
To the barricades!
Thank you, Robert, for clarifying that how SCOTUS is overturning Roe is not a "women's" issue, but a personal constitutional rights issue. We can rely on you to promote activism over analysis and lamenting.
(I started to write "civil rights." Can you explain the difference from constitutional rights?)
As you say, "The moment of crisis is upon us." Now we have to rise up, "all of us this time," as Cathy Learoyd so often reminds us, and stand shoulder to shoulder as Americans and remember what Abraham Lincoln said in his moment of crisis: "We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution."
I pray Alito and McConnell have reached too far. This is all on McConnell. He stole Obama's right to nominate a justice. And he abetted the fiction that Trump's nominees would treat Roe as settled law. SHAME! Shame on the partisan hacks that are now the majority of Roberts' court.
I am literally overwhelmed with anxiety as it seems as if our democracy is hanging by a thread. I agree with Deborah....I cannot breathe.
These so-called Christians have been fighting the war on women for a long time now. The gloves are off, and they will rue the day.
So what you are saying here is that, if Alito's comment about originalism stands, this is ultimately a much bigger issue than abortion and Roe. This is about the 14th Amendment - (1) personal rights (2) voting rights (3) insurrection by members of the government against the government - and all subsequent amendments including presidential term limits and senators elected by popular vote. If any or all of this is true, it is a clarion call to action.
We now see plainly the anti-democracy stain of “originalism” in this draft SCOTUS opinion from an unelected cabal of Supreme Court Justices placed in power through appointments by executives who did not receive a majority of the popular vote. It should be evident through examining carefully the original Roe v. Wade 7:2 decision how far the Repiblican party has moved toward restriction of established Constitutional rights. Of the 7 SCOTUS Justices in the majority of the original Roe v. Wade decision in 1973, 5 were appointed by Republican Presidents and approved by a Republican controlled Senate. The death of the Stare Decisis principle is beyond tragic and portends the reversal of further rights by this radical SCOTUS majority.
This is a hair-on-fire, break-the-glass moment for our democracy and requires an appropriate reaction from voters to alter the drift away from democracy by Republicans.
American Revolution II has begun. This supreme assault on our freedoms will backfire. We have 6 months to oust the seditionists, the federalists and the antiabortionists. This ruling is energizing and focusing us! There are "troops" scattered all over this good country. ORGANIZE NOW!
In Michigan's capitol city, just in the past few weeks, we have created a group of former state public health officials, medical and nursing association leaders, retired lobbyists, and providers to forge a plan of action to assure healthcare is above politics. In Northern Michigan we have small groups working to convince "decent" and "moderate" Republicans to vote for our excellent, decent and moderate, Democratic candidates. Here we will elect a physician from Marquette, Michigan, Dr. Bob Lorinser, to Congress!
$upport Dr. Bob:
https://www.votedrbob.com/
A quibble: Politico published the leaked draft. Politico is not the leaker.
Thank you, again, for the clarity. It is, as you say, not just a question of women's rights but a larger and even more destructive umbrella over the violation of the basic rights of all citizens. But, as a woman who is old enough to remember the butcher-shop back-alley abortions that were the norm. before Roe, I can say that the particulars of that reality are, in themselves, enough to motivate anyone to take to the streets. The blood that flowed is symbol enough of the violence that has already been done and is about to be turned into law. Heaven help us all