This topic contains 21 replies, has 6 voices, and was last updated by SpaceySteph 2 weeks, 1 day ago.
- December 13, 2016 at 5:18 pm #663992
From the Dispatch:
“In his veto message, Kasich agreed such language went too far and violated U.S. Supreme Court rulings. “The state of Ohio will be the losing party in that lawsuit and, as the losing party, the state of Ohio will be forced to pay hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars to cover the legal fees of the pro-choice activists’ lawyers. Furthermore, such a defeat invites additional challenges to Ohio’s strong legal protections for unborn life.”December 13, 2016 at 5:19 pm #663993
update on Ohio abortion law bumpDecember 13, 2016 at 5:21 pm #663994
Cont. from the dispatch…
“With exceptions for rape, incest and the mother’s life, current state law forbids abortions after 24 weeks and abortions between 20 and 24 weeks require a medical finding that the fetus is not viable. Only 145 of the nearly 21,000 abortions performed in Ohio last year occurred after 20 weeks.”December 13, 2016 at 6:07 pm #664002
Dawn Laguens, a spokeswoman for the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, said the 20-week ban is “just another shameful attempt by John Kasich to make abortion illegal.”
“Kasich is on a mission to make abortion illegal in Ohio, and he’s intent on using smoke and mirrors and backdoor politics to do it,” she said. “He may hope that by vetoing a six-week ban – which would have virtually banned abortion with almost no exceptions – he comes off as moderate. But Ohio women see right through this and reject this extreme agenda. The 20-week ban will force women to travel long distances and cross state lines in order to access safe, legal abortion –– a barrier that many women simply cannot afford.”December 13, 2016 at 6:09 pm #664004
I’d encourage everyone who is not planning on having children in the next 4 (or 8) years to get long-term birth control ASAP because I fully expect that Roe v. Wade will either be fully overturned or so severely restricted that it is available only to women who are privileged enough to just “go to another state” as the president-elect so glibly stated.
The more I look at where a Trump presidency is headed, the more I realize just how I had underestimated how bad it would get (and I was pretty fucking terrified before the election). Overturning Row v. Wade, ending protections for LGBTQ people, overt racism, governmental support for anti-muslim actions, repealing Obamacare, ending Medicaid and Social Security, no environmental regulations, no enforcement of protections for workers, no effort to make equal pay a thing, much less provide mandatory paid leave, probably a trade war with China and an actual war with Iran. It’s a rich, straight, white, male Christian’s wet dream, and we’re all living in it now.
The poor get poorer, the sick get sicker and the old die faster. But hey! We can all say “Merry Christmas” now. Oh, wait…December 13, 2016 at 6:11 pm #664005
Winter is coming, ladies.December 13, 2016 at 6:21 pm #664006
SO here’s a question: if the GOP ACTUALLY is successful overturning Roe v Wade, what do they really have to stand on or bring people together with? I mean, the pro-life lobbyist has to be an extremely lucrative position and the issue itself is a $$ generating thing from the evangelicals and Catholics. i mean, it’s one of the only reasons that Catholics are still encouraged to vote GOP anyway, right? Otherwise, from a social services perspective, they would be more aligned with the Democrats?
bottom line: i think it’s incredibly scary that we’re even THINKING it may be overturned and we should do everything we can to continue to support choice over our bodies and our reproductive habits. However, I think think (somewhat deviously) that the GOP establishment doesn’t really want to eliminate it because what the heck else would their emotional rally be on?
December 13, 2016 at 6:27 pm #664008
- This reply was modified 1 month ago by MaterialsGirl.
Simple. They can rally them with the threat that Evil Liberals will bring back baby murder if they win an election.December 13, 2016 at 6:32 pm #664009
I suppose anything is possible (as seen this election cycle). Just from an economics point of view, why kill a funding source.
it always surprises me to see the vitriol on high school classmates facebook feeds.. but again I guess I left behind the pro-life, abstinence rally, hand raising, evangelical crap and they didn’tDecember 13, 2016 at 9:52 pm #664037
“SO here’s a question: if the GOP ACTUALLY is successful overturning Roe v Wade, what do they really have to stand on or bring people together with?”
I might argue that the GOP actually HAS been successful at overturning Roe v Wade on individual state levels. Some state governments, such as in Ohio, have successfully created legislation under the double meaning of “protecting women”. Protecting women is essentially interpreted by anti-choice advocates as protecting them from choosing abortion. We might as well continue to use Ohio as an example of this. Physicians along with medical providers like planned parenthood cannot afford to operate with ever-changing and medically arbitrary mandates. These mandates are specifically designed to stop women from accessing early abortion, not because there is any compelling numbers (at least I haven’t come across them) that might put state-interest in front of medical privacy.
This effectively prevents women and doctors from exercising the inferred right to medical privacy.
The more recent case which affirmed and expanded on the ninth and twelfth amendment, Planned Parenthood v Casey, determined that government may not put an “undue burden” on the woman with regulatory procedures that may create obstacles. Clearly the state of Ohio has advocates pushing legislation to challenge these landmark cases. The effects aren’t hypothetical; these efforts are changing the way women experience civil liberty.
New supreme court justices who are willing to limit the position of the Supreme Court in interpreting nuance in our intentionally nuanced amendments will effectively decide the reach of individual state’s power versus an individual’s liberty from said power.
Furthermore, Roe versus Wade eluded to the inability of the court to determine legal personhood in a fetus. But the ruling did interpret an implicit right to privacy of the women determining their reproductive healthcare including early abortion. However, there was a caveat:
“this right must be balanced against the state’s two legitimate interests in regulating abortions: protecting women’s health and protecting the potentiality of human life.” “Arguing that these state interests became stronger over the course of a pregnancy, the Court resolved this balancing test by tying state regulation of abortion to the third trimester of pregnancy.”
The legal challenging of the supreme court isn’t going away or lessoning in angst regardless of which justices end up being appointed. With modern science advances affording fetal gestation that were formally impossible, miracle early-born survival rates, reproductive choices including zygote freezing, even embryonic stem cell research, the people of United States and State government will continue to legislate on existential issues and definitions of the “potentiality of human life” which further splits already partisan-split individual philosophy and religious beliefs (potentially considered an “immutable” part of identity) on the nature of life, liberty, and role of government. This loop doesn’t break in the foreseeable future barring game-changing crises and discovery. It’s difficult to conceive of the road of United States government and people. But I don’t believe populism is the way to maintain unity in the long-run.
Validation, anyone?December 14, 2016 at 10:16 am #664079
I wonder what the difference is in the US. In Canada we don’t seem to have this. PM’s have to promise not to touch abortion laws in order to get elected. Not saying we don’t have our issues – there are places in Canada where there’s little or no access, simply due to the distances and low population density. But it’s not a constant battle here like in the US. Do you think it’s purely up to the fact that the GOP has been whipping people into a frenzy about it? I think maybe it is, because we definitely have a good chunk of Catholics and other Christians here who are told by their church to be anti-abortion. My own brother wears one of those little anti-abortion rose stickers. But it’s not a huge election issue.December 14, 2016 at 10:36 am #664084
I do think a lot of it has to do with the GOP using it as a sticking point to help get them elected. They use abortion as a decoy instead of talking about the real issues, such as jobs and the economy.