New Alexandra Petri column about abortion rights
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
|
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/11/30/supreme-court-abortion-mississippi-case-satire/
I generally really like her writing, but this was next level. "It was hard to believe the time was running out. Maybe it would not, after all. It had been so long — nearly 49 years, with a few scares along the way — that the illusion had held, that she was a citizen, a person with rights to be respected in her own right. That not merely her life was worthy of protection, but also her ability to make choices for her own future. That she was just as good as any state legislator, and possessed certain rights they could not abridge!" This column really hit home for me and articulated the abortion debate in a way I don't think I could have ever expressed - the WHY of what reproductive rights mean. |
Anonymous
| A timely reminder that women have beating hearts, too. |
Anonymous
| Deplorable that a bunch of white men, in the form of the Federalist Society, backed by billionaires, are on the cusp of stripping women in this country of their basic rights to control their own bodies. |
Anonymous
| Funny because her dad, Tom Petri, was a super conservative rep from WI. |
Anonymous
Organized, well-funded misogyny. |
Anonymous
Well as we learned from this column (if it still needed to be learned), she has a mind all her own. You know, like a separate person. |
Anonymous
|
Hit home for me too, OP. When I had my last kid, I had my tubes removed for this very reason. I have plenty of fertile years left, and I just couldn’t chance an oopsie pregnancy given the state of things.
As someone whose family members are going to need living organ donations, though, I really do look forward to the legal possibilities of a post-Roe world. If the state can force a woman to donate her heart, uterus and kidneys for 9 months to save a life, it can also force some pro-lifer to donate an O-Neg kidney or at least their blood to save lives. And if children and fetuses are now public goods, that’s all the ground we need to start rescuing children from their religious wacknut parents. If the Constitution doesn’t expressly provide a right to decide your own family, it certainly doesn’t provide a right to homeschool. |
BlueFredneck
Member Offline
Member Offline
|
I'm skeptical that there exist a group of people who'll flip R->D or NV->D if Dems just hammer home hard enough on abortion. I do remain open to persuasion otherwise, but most people outside the educated liberal bubble start getting uncomfortable with it after 20 weeks.
Or, how have Dems been doing electorally this century after going from "safe, legal, and rare" to "abortion all the time until 40 weeks!"? Abortion's probably harder to get in more states than it was in 2000, and the GOP has built up trifectas in what, 26 or 27 states? |
Anonymous
Don't forget, we also have a white woman on the SC, a "handmaiden." |
Anonymous
It’s deplorable too that forced birth followers neither understand the facts nor will they admit that any of their misogynistic laws go too far. I don’t think there’s a single forced birther over in the 9 and 10 year olds needing abortions thread who will concede that forcing raped girls to bear children is bad. They can’t even admit that. Women (and girls) are not fully people to them. The cruelty and the denial of our rights as people is the point. |
Anonymous
|
[quote=BlueFredneck]I'm skeptical that there exist a group of people who'll flip R->D or NV->D if Dems just hammer home hard enough on abortion. I do remain open to persuasion otherwise, but most people outside the educated liberal bubble start getting uncomfortable with it after 20 weeks.
Or, how have Dems been doing electorally this century after going from "safe, legal, and rare" to "abortion all the time until 40 weeks!"? Abortion's probably harder to get in more states than it was in 2000, and the GOP has built up trifectas in what, 26 or 27 states? [/quote] Sure they do, but they also get very uncomfortable when they hear a woman died of sepsis because the fetus she was carrying was only mostly dead, and no one would help her until it was actually dead. It took one case with that fact pattern to change the law in Ireland of all places. I don’t think the right wing has taken into account just how much the world has changed since Roe. Privacy and shame are out the window. Social media provides a way for a woman or her loved ones to reach a global audience fast. There will be no tragedies in the shadows that can be conveniently ignored. Eventually Pro-lifers are going to be called to account for the death and destruction they are causing. |
Anonymous
| An unborn child (fetus) is a human. Change my mind. |
Anonymous
My friend's toddler is a Senator. Change my mind. |
BlueFredneck
Member Offline
Member Offline
As for Ireland: The amendment was approved on a single-issue vote, to change the status quo of "abortion banned entirely." Nearly all political parties came together to support the 36th Amendment. While some voters might be willing to vote pro-choice on a single issue black and white thing. Abortion in Ireland is legal for the first 12 weeks, and in cases of a fatal fetal abnormality/threat to the mother's life. I suspect most pro-choice activists in the USA would see that as a step backwards, but American activists for guns and abortions (or both!) do like their absolute freedoms. TX is basically Cersei playing with wildfire. MS is the more likely model red states will follow. People will get mad over "total ban." They won't be as mad (if the goal is to get people other than the usual suspects) over "banned after 15/20 weeks and providers must have admitting privileges at a local hospital, and parental notification/permission must be obtained." |
Anonymous
|
I absolutely love her columns. She wrote one after the Kavanaugh hearing that crushed me.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/opinions/wp/2018/09/28/it-is-very-difficult-to-get-the-train-to-stop/?outputType=amp |