For all intents and purposes, the United States Supreme Court has ruled against women in one of the most important issues of this century.
If you support women’s rights, PLEASE share this article on every platform available to you.
Independent views from someone who offers some historical context
Just another WordPress.com weblog
Embracing life
A blog about just about anything and everything
Questioning the conventional wisdom
Come see what I share
my humanity in written form
If I can think it, I can write it.
A blog about living and writing.
...poetry, stories & rants.
We should all care about what we can reliably determine to be true.
Ponder(verb) to weigh in the mind; to view with deliberation; to examine carefully; to consider attentively
Broodings and Ponderings of a Pensive Skeptic
Analysis & Discussion For Political Uncertainty
I used to think it was awful that life was so unfair. Then I thought, 'wouldn't it be much worse if life *were* fair, and all the terrible things that happen to us come because we actually deserve them?' So now I take great comfort in the general hostility and unfairness of the universe. - M. Cole
creative writings old and new
Belief and Delusion: believing in a life after death is delusional.
I believe in you. I believe in me.
Welcome — Come Immerse, Convalesce, Spark Dialogue or Simply Discern
Searching for truth while leaving tradition behind.
Cogito Ergo Sum
Let's face it, your religion is probably wrong.
Nan's Notebook 
Excellent post…she makes some great points and much needed information for women
LikeLiked by 5 people
Abortion will still be legal in most places. So it’s not worth getting upset over.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Abortion is not the end of the issue.
LikeLike
Yes, Silence of Mind, you got it. This will not reduce the number of abortions. It will only become just a nother priviledge for the rich, who can travel to get it done by doctors where it is still legal. The poor can revert to traditional methods, like the coathanger, and if they survive that, there might be government organized accomodation and food for years to come in some “correctional facility” paid by the taxpayers. Who benefits, you may ask and indeed the only “soul” to come on top in this new situation is the shareholder of the company owning the prisons. So, no reason getting upset about anything, right?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Rutakyy, The abortion industry is so huge and so integrated into society, the economy, and federal, state and local governments that every woman who needs reproductive healthcare services will have access. A Texas woman will be offered all expenses paid transportation and lodging to a California clinic, for example. This is much like gambling where New Yorkers are transported by the busload to New Jersey. Abortion is a religious sacrament to the Democrat Party. All obstacles in the way of a woman’s right to choose will be overcome, and then some.
LikeLike
You just can’t seem to get past throwing in some kind of political comment to any discussion, can you? Granted, the two parties have different goals and perspectives, but your repeated derogatory remarks aren’t going to change anyone’s thinking. I would think you’re intelligent enough to recognize that.
LikeLike
Yes, Silence of Mild, it does seem like human rights are more valuable to some, than they are to others, but if you are right about the rest of it, it does beg the question; why these moves from the conservatives to ban abortion, if the banning achieves nothing? Is it just “virtue posing”, in order to look good to their religious and ignorant base voters?
LikeLike
The Conservative move to ban abortion comes from the Declaration of Independence which states that “all men are created equal and are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights among them the right to life…” And the belief that human life begins at the moment of conception. That being said, if the Court throws out Roe v Wade, that will not result in the banning of abortion. The result will mean that people get to decide the issue through the American political process, and not have the decision made for them by a politically unaccountable Supreme Court. That is the great achievement of having Roe v Wade overturned, should that turn out to be the case.
LikeLike
You are correct that abortion will not be banned in every state. But to take away this option in ANY state is the crux of the matter since it is not for you or any other person to make that decision for the WOMAN.
LikeLiked by 2 people
The issue for the pro-life side is the unborn child, not the woman. The child possesses the right to life. Neither the US Constitution nor the Declaration of Independence say anything concerning the “a woman’s right to choose,” which was conjured up out of thin air by SCOTUS in 1973 and proclaimed the law of the land. Only Congress can write laws. Pro life people believe that is the way to go on this issue.
The chasm between pro-life and pro-choice is insurmountable, therefore.
LikeLike
Please take note of this: https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/amendment-5/right-to-an-abortion.
Pay close attention to the wording. Whether “conjured up out of thin air” or not, it IS the law of the land and as other laws, it is enforceable — no matter who likes it or not.
-IF- this law is declared invalid, it DOES take away the RIGHTS of a woman to choose. But of course, as a member of the male species, this doesn’t affect you on either side of the issue so of course, why not just do away with it!
LikeLike
Actually, abortion is only the law of the land because the other branches of government did not tell the SCOTUS that their ruling was invalid because only Congress can make law.
Therefore, today’s SCOTUS would be doing a great good by invalidating Roe v Wade since it is a violation of the separation of powers which is fundament to the US Constitution.
If Congress does not pass a law legalizing abortion or making it illegal, then it is up to the states to write their own laws regulating it one way or the other.
LikeLike
PS There is no right in the US Constitution for a woman to choose based on privacy. SCOTUS created that right simply because it wanted to. It is unconstitutional for SCOTUS to create rights.
LikeLike
The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment is the source of an array of constitutional rights, including many of our most cherished—and most controversial. Consider the following rights that the Clause guarantees against the states:
procedural protections, such as notice and a hearing before termination of entitlements such as publicly funded medical insurance;
individual rights listed in the Bill of Rights, including freedom of speech, free exercise of religion, the right to bear arms, and a variety of criminal procedure protections;
fundamental rights that are not specifically enumerated elsewhere in the Constitution, including the right to marry, the right to use contraception, and the right to abortion
https://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/interpretation/amendment-xiv/clauses/701
LikeLike
Nan, You make a great point. And what that point indicates is that there can be no reconciliation or compromise between the pro-life and pro-abortion positions.
LikeLike
The issue for the pro-life side is the unborn child, not the woman. The child possesses the right to life
Even if one accepts that a fetus is the moral equivalent of a person (a self-evident absurdity), there is no other situation where a person’s right to life overrides another person’s right to bodily autonomy. You cannot be forced to donate an organ, or even blood, to another person, even if that person will die without it and there is no alternative. Even the organs of a dead body cannot be harvested to save the lives of living persons if the deceased did not give permission. The forced-birth fetishists’ position is thus that a woman has less right to self-determination than a corpse has.
Yes, some of the states will soon make abortion illegal. Some of the states (largely the same ones) once had legal slavery. When faced with a grossly unjust law, it is legitimate to help the victims evade or outright violate that law when necessary to restore their freedom. This was done in various ways for slaves before 1865 and it will be done in various ways for women starting in 2022.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Infidel, “Bodily autonomy” is a leftist construct whereas the right to life is fundamental to American law and which is based on natural law. Therefore, a leftist construct is imaginary whereas the right to life is real.
It is a scientific fact that the human life begins at conception. All creatures are defined by their genome. At the moment of conception any sexually reproducing creature’s genome is complete. Therefore, it is not only self-evident, but a scientific fact that at the moment of conception a human person comes into being. Thus, abortion is cold blooded, premeditated murder.
LikeLike
“Bodily autonomy” is a leftist construct
I rest my case.
LikeLike
Infidel, A mother choosing to end the life of her unborn child is not bodily autonomy. Therefore, “bodily autonomy” that includes ending the life of the unborn child is a leftist construct.
LikeLike
Bodily autonomy is a right granted to every person to have the right to control what are the things to be or not done to their own bodies. When each person has full bodily autonomy, they’re not only empowered to decide things when it comes to their health and future – without constraints or any control by other people – they also have the support and resources that are needed to eloquently carry out all the decisions they would make.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The unborn baby has its own body and a complete human genome. That means the mother’s body is different from the baby’s body. Therefore, abortion violates the bodily autonomy of the unborn baby.
LikeLike
An unborn baby (more accurately a fetus at the time of most abortions) does NOT have the ability to “decide things when it comes to their health and future.” Thus, no bodily autonomy.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Nan, Your articulation and description of the pro-choice side of the argument has been excellent. It shows why the two positions, pro-life and pro-choice are irreconcilable. The pro-life side considers the unborn child a person who possesses bodily autonomy and the right to life. The pro-choice side does not. But whereas the pro-life side would see this issue resolved democratically, the pro-choice side would see this issue decided by government diktat.
LikeLike
The pro-life side would see this issue resolved democratically …? Hardly.
The democratic way (not capitalized) would be by vote of the American people through their elected representatives — not by a group of individuals (the Supreme Court) who seem to have unfettered power to make decisions and to “impose its values” on the entire country. That is “government diktat.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
The Alito draft that was leaked has SCOTUS vacating Roe v Wade (a Court diktat) and sending the issue back to the states. That is democratic. Roe v Wade was not democratic. I think we are in agreement here.
LikeLike
😱
LikeLike
So, Silence of Mind, the move to overthrow the Roe vs. Wade is ultimately merely a piece of virtue posing, because despite these legal issues and appeals to a constitution, in practice – according to you – nothing will change? Not the amount of abortions, nor the number of unwanted pregnancies. So, absolutely nothing, exept that life becomes a bit more harder for some poor women, already facing a hard situation in their lives. A pointless effort of legal nitpicking in order to achieve nothing other than a demonstration of moralistic opinion (and a cheer from the crowd to some populist politicians by people who already supported them)? What a waste of time and money!
LikeLiked by 2 people
Valerie is magnificent.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Thé Supreme Court has lost all credibility. The last two nominees lied to Congress about precedent and many others things. The solution is to abolish the Supreme Court as a political body ( unnecessary as it no longer serves its purpose under the constitution that states it will be a non political court and of course it’s been taken over by the GOP and serves their purpose which is to put a boot on the throat of women , treat them as chattel and take away their rights as human beings equal under the law which they strive to destroy. The 2nd option is to limit their terms as we do Congress and the president since they have chosen to be political. Third is to open the court up for more justices to even the playing field. Either way they must be condemned for their political ploys and actions in stamping out the rights of women and soon the rights of minorities will also be irradiated.
LikeLiked by 5 people
I agree that the Supreme Court has lost all credibility and is now a purely political institution serving whatever ideology a majority of the justices adhere to. However, abolishing it would take a Constitutional amendment, which requires a two-thirds vote in both the House and the Senate, plus approval by the legislatures of three-fourths of the states. In other words, it’s impossible.
Increasing the number of justices, imposing term limits on them, and/or passing a federal law to protect abortion rights and override state-level restrictions, would each be doable by simple legislation, but would require that the filibuster be abolished (since there’s no chance of getting ten Republican senators to vote for any of those things). However, Manchin and Sinema continue to block abolition of the filibuster. If the Democrats increase their Senate majority to at least 52-48 this November (plausible) and also keep their House majority (very unlikely, but this is a thought experiment), then they could abolish the filibuster and pass those reforms.
However, the Democratic leadership still will not commit to abolishing the filibuster if they can, and indeed still outright oppose doing so. In other words, they have promised not to do anything which will actually fix this problem, because the hoary and ridiculous rules and traditions of the Senate are more important. So there is no way of restoring abortion rights by voting. In fact, there’s not much point in giving more power to the Democrats since they openly say they will not use that power in any way which will actually work to fix the problem.
Thus, the types of action recommended by Tarico — basically, helping women and girls who need abortions to circumvent their state laws by various means — is the only option at this point. The left is too attached to the idea that top-down government action is the only viable approach to any problem, and that winning control of the government by voting is thus the key to everything and the only form of action worth serious effort. Since there will always be times when the theocrats hold some or all of the levers of government power, we need to think more in terms of actual defiance of unjust laws. The sanctuary city movement, the conservatives’ sanctuary county movement (in which rural counties in blue states refuse to enforce state-level gun restrictions), the methods used to help men avoid the draft during the Vietnam war, and the non-violent actions of the black civil rights movement, all suggest possible models to look at. And technology is on our side — abortion pills, Tarico’s first recommendation, are widely used and a ban is hard to enforce since they can be sent by mail or even courier (what are they going to do, search every car entering a state for tiny containers of pills?). Her other ideas are all good ones. We aren’t going to be able to restore abortion rights in red states by voting, not in the foreseeable future, so these kinds of ground-level actions will have to be the focus.
I already linked to Tarico’s post on my own blog yesterday. It’s a good idea for anyone with a readership to help get the word out.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Meanwhile in Europe similar attack on human rights have taken place in Poland, where the conservative nationalist government has banned abortion. Now, as evidence of systematic rape by the Russian military (possibly condoned by their conservative nationalist government) is piling up, many of those rape victims seeking refuge in Poland find themselves in situation where abortion is unawailable to them
LikeLiked by 2 people
Nationalism is a global movement and our GOP and Christian leaders have visited those nations that have turned to it.
LikeLiked by 2 people
That’s because Poland’s population is still heavily devout Catholic. It’s the only strongly-religious country left in Europe. Things in Ireland used to be just as bad. Once the child-molestation scandals destroyed the Church’s hold on the minds of the Irish people, abortion and same-sex marriage were legalized there by referendum with two-thirds majorities. It always ultimately comes down to religion.
Feminist and other groups in countries near Poland are already organizing to help refugees who need abortions travel to their countries temporarily to do so. We should be thinking along the same lines for helping women in red states with abortion bans to travel to blue states. The logistics and travel distances are comparable.
LikeLiked by 2 people
It always ultimately comes down to religion. Sums it up perfectly. And not only this issue!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sadly, war almost always means rape. Humans can be nasty critters😢
I do have one critique of this post: the title uses a non-woke term. Instead of “women, “ those in the know now use “Birthing Bodies”
LikeLiked by 2 people
Council for National Policy (Wikipedia)
Members of the CNP have included: General John Singlaub, shipping magnate J. Peter Grace, Edwin J. Feulner Jr of the Heritage Foundation, Rev. Pat Robertson of the Christian Broadcasting Network, Jerry Falwell, U.S. Senator Trent Lott, Southern Baptist Convention activists and retired Texas Court of Appeals Judge Paul Pressler, lawyer and paleoconservative activist Michael Peroutka,[10] Reverend Paige Patterson,[11] Senator Don Nickles, former United States Attorneys General Edwin Meese and John Ashcroft, gun-rights activist Larry Pratt, Colonel Oliver North, Steve Bannon, Kellyanne Conway, philanthropist Elsa Prince (mother of Blackwater founder and former CEO Erik Prince and Trump Administration Secretary of Education Betsy Devos), Leonard Leo, and [1] Virginia Thomas (wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas).[1] Former California State Assemblyman Steve Baldwin was CNP’s executive director from 2000 to 2008.[12]
Members of the CNP have included: General John Singlaub, shipping magnate J. Peter Grace, Edwin J. Feulner Jr of the Heritage Foundation, Rev. Pat Robertson of the Christian Broadcasting Network, Jerry Falwell, U.S. Senator Trent Lott, Southern Baptist Convention activists and retired Texas Court of Appeals Judge Paul Pressler, lawyer and paleoconservative activist Michael Peroutka,[10] Reverend Paige Patterson,[11] Senator Don Nickles, former United States Attorneys General Edwin Meese and John Ashcroft, gun-rights activist Larry Pratt, Colonel Oliver North, Steve Bannon, Kellyanne Conway, philanthropist Elsa Prince (mother of Blackwater founder and former CEO Erik Prince and Trump Administration Secretary of Education Betsy Devos), Leonard Leo, and [1] Virginia Thomas (wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas).[1] Former California State Assemblyman Steve Baldwin was CNP’s executive director from 2000 to 2008.
I hope we don’t think that what is going on with Trumpism and Christianity today are just coincidentally connected to these names and organizations. Among many others, I have often stated that I think Christian nationalism intends to return us to the middle ages. Alito, a lawyer for the CNP, has cited one of the most despicable characters from the dark ages, as authority against abortion.
Nan, if this is out of order, then by all means wield your blue and red pencils.
LikeLiked by 4 people
The only positive about Trump is he was so incompetent. We will not be so lucky next time 🤢
LikeLiked by 2 people
Not necessarily out of order, but I’m not sure publishing the names will accomplish much among readers. What is needed are avenues of action! Any workable suggestions?
LikeLike
Oh look, Ollie “no recollection” North?!!!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I know you are a fan, me too…but Heather Cox Richardson today will make your blood boil
LikeLiked by 2 people
Heather mentions that 58% of today’s workforce are women. Note — that’s over half! So what happens to this workforce when women start showing up pregnant — and eventually have to take time off for childbirth? What effect will this have on the business’s bottom line? One wonders if the anti-abortionist Republicans have considered this at all? Especially considering their primary focus is on the business world rather than people …
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Restricting access to abortion doesn’t reduce the number of abortions, [it] only increases the risk of death for those who need them.”
This is a quote from NewScientist.com, but there’s nothing new in the statement. Anyone who was around before Roe vs. Wade are fully aware of its truth.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The argument that the attack on abortion is no big deal because it will still be legal in some states is akin to the thought that once Hitler takes over Austria, oh, and maybe Poland he will stop. What guarantee is there that abortion will remain legal in some states, or that we will still have same sex marriage rights, or the rights of transgenders, lesbians, gays, mixed racial marriages etc. etc. will be upheld. Give the middle age masculine WASPs the reins and watch out Social Security, Medicare, and any program they consider to be Socialist.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Hello Don! Thanks for stopping by and adding your thoughts — which I agree with, BTW. 🙂 There’s little doubt we may very well be on the first step of a slippery slope.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well, they are socialist, as the goal of socialism is more equality in a given society. That is precisely why the priviledged oppose them and of course the stupid go along as they are easily influenced by primal emotions like fear, the fear of change aka conservatism in this case.
LikeLiked by 1 person
LikeLiked by 1 person
thank you for this post ❤
LikeLike
You’re more than welcome! I hope you’ll check out some of my other posts and “join the crowd.” 😊
LikeLiked by 1 person
[…] The end of Roe is daunting news, yes — which is why we absolutely mustn’t succumb to burnout. Now more than ever we must be active in whatever way we can, big or small. Please share this post and podcast on your social media, tell lawmakers and whoever you know where you stand. Contribute time and/or money to organizations such as Planned Parenthood. Contribute to justice winning. Stay informed and connected. Infidel753’s blog offers a growing wealth of information. A recent post included abortion resources, tips to avoid criminal charges for abortion pills, a link to Valerie Tarico’s post on fighting for abortion rights inspired by a discussion at Nan’s Notebook. […]
LikeLike