Women: Almost as human as men
Make no mistake, yesterday’s supreme court decision should come as no surprise. The christian right is nothing if not organized and disciplined. The great thing about trying to organize a group of authoritarians is they love being told what to do and they always do what they are told. Once the leadership had set their sights on the courts it was a matter of time before they succeed in what they always called “legislating from the bench”.
Here is a quick roundup of good posts on this:
Defending Choice: why it is good politics This is important because a lot of (male) democrats like to talk as if the abortion issue is one we can throw under the bus to improve electoral chances.
A great article in Salon about “a decision that might as well have come with a gift card made out to President Bush’s base“.
Where the stand via NY Times.
Take My Uterus, Please from pandagon.
And finally, I strongly recommend, in addition to the appaling decision linked by Vijay, Justice Ginsberg’s great dissent (pdf).
April 19th, 2007 12:15
Court Ruling Catapults Abortion Back Into ’08 Race
It disgusts me that the candidates’ reactions have been on party lines. - “Rudolph W. Giuliani, the Republican former mayor of New York and a longtime supporter of abortion rights, said the court “reached the correct conclusion.”" - Hey Giuliani, grow a fucking spine!
April 19th, 2007 12:33
at least Obama and Clinton were clear in their opposition. One of my biggest reservations about Obama is the fact that he sometimes tries to play the social conservative card. He could have equivocated, and I’m glad he didn’t.
I wonder what the next phase of litigation will be. I actually think there might be a way to postpone any decision on Roe. Although, it would require liberals to attack the partial-birth ban on conservative grounds. Basically, if PP attacks the law as unconstitutional because it exceeds congress’ constitutional authority, I think they would have a winning argument. Of course, it might open the door to the Supreme Court striking down other federal laws. But it would postpone a devastating Roe ruling. I don’t know. Either way, the road ahead is going to be particularly bumpy.
April 20th, 2007 11:32
In my previous comment, I had suggested that the NYT was doing a good job of exposing Giuliani’s hypocrisy. But according to Media Matters, NY Times again ignored Giuliani’s shifting position on abortion ban:
“In an April 19 New York Times article on the political impact of the Supreme Court’s recent decision to uphold the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003, staff writer Robin Toner reported that Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani “said the court ‘reached the correct conclusion.’ ” But while the article noted that Giuliani is “a longtime supporter of abortion rights,” it did not mention that, in 2000 when running for a Senate seat from New York, Giuliani agreed with President Clinton’s veto of similar legislation, the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 1997, saying that had he been in the Senate when it was considering the bill, he would have “vote[d] to preserve the option for women.” By contrast, in related April 19 articles, the Los Angeles Times, The Washington Post, and Newsday all noted the apparent contradiction in Giuliani’s statements. …”