NYT: If Roe v. Wade Goes...

[mominatrix]

October 15, 2012
If Roe v. Wade Goes


It is no secret that Mitt Romney and his running-mate, Representative Paul Ryan, are opponents of abortion rights. When Mr. Ryan was asked at last week’s debate whether voters who support abortion rights should be worried if the Romney-Ryan ticket were elected, he essentially said yes.

They would depart slightly from the extremist Republican Party platform by allowing narrow exceptions for rape, incest or the life of the woman. Beyond that, they would move to take away a fundamental right that American women have had for nearly 40 years.

Mr. Romney has called for overturning Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court ruling that recognized a woman’s constitutional right to make her own childbearing decisions and to legalized abortion nationwide. He has said that the issue should be thrown back to state legislatures. The actual impact of that radical rights rollback is worth considering.

It would not take much to overturn the Roe decision. With four of the nine members of the Supreme Court over 70 years old, the next occupant of the White House could have the opportunity to appoint one or more new justices. If say, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the oldest member, retired and Mr. Romney named a replacement hostile to abortion rights, the basic right to abortion might well not survive.

The result would turn back the clock to the days before Roe v. Wade when abortion was legal only in some states, but not in others. There is every indication that about half the states would make abortion illegal within a year of Roe being struck down, according to the Guttmacher Institute. The Center for Reproductive Rights, which challenges abortion restrictions around the country, puts the number at 30 states. For one thing, abortion bans already on the books in some states would suddenly kick in. And some Republican-controlled state legislatures would outlaw abortion immediately.

Even with Roe and subsequent decisions upholding abortion rights, more than half the states have enacted barriers like mandatory waiting periods, “counseling” sessions lacking a real medical justification; parental consent or notification laws; and onerous clinic “safety” rules intended to drive clinics out of business.

Mr. Romney is a vocal supporter of this continuing drive in the states and in Congress to limit the constitutional right, even without overturning Roe. To a large degree, the anti-abortion forces have succeeded. In 1982, there were about 2,900 providers nationwide; as of 2008, there were less than 1,800. In 97 percent of the counties that are outside of metropolitan areas, there are no abortion providers at all.

We do not need to guess about the brutal consequences of overturning Roe. We know from our own country’s pre-Roe history and from the experience around the world. Women desperate to end a pregnancy would find a way to do so. Well-to-do women living in places where abortion is illegal would travel to other states where it is legal to obtain the procedure. Women lacking the resources would either be forced by the government and politicians to go through with an unwanted or risky pregnancy, attempt to self-abort or turn to an illegal — and potentially unsafe — provider for help. Women’s health, privacy and equality would suffer. Some women would die.

Mr. Romney knows this, or at least he used to. Running for the United States Senate in Massachusetts in 1994 against Edward Kennedy, Mr. Romney spoke of a young woman, a close relative, who died years before as result of complications from an illegal abortion to underscore his now-extinct support for Roe v. Wade. In a report in Salon last year, Justin Elliott, a reporter for ProPublica, found that when the young woman passed away, her parents requested that donations be made in her honor to Planned Parenthood. That’s the same invaluable family-planning group that Mr. Romney has pledged to defund once in the White House.

www.nytimes.com/2012/10/16/opinion/if-roe-v-wade-goes.html?_r=1

[josieposy]

This turned my stomach to read.

[gault]

Fucking scary. The people who pooh-pooh roe v wade as a throwaway, non-urgent legal concern should be legit freaked out.

[cattledogkisses]

I have never before felt like there is so much riding on an election. This scares the hell out of me.

[claireblue]

Oct 15, 2012 23:10:58 GMT -5 cattledogkisses said:

I have never before felt like there is so much riding on an election. This scares the hell out of me.

Ditto. Word for word.

[secretlyevil]

Oct 15, 2012 23:06:56 GMT -5 gault said:

Fucking scary. The people who pooh-pooh roe v wade as a throwaway, non-urgent legal concern should be legit freaked out.

yes, my thoughts exactly

[Deleted]

this is why when it all boils down, i've always been a single issue voter.

[downtoearth]

Making sure all my liberal friends vote and sending "good health vibes" to Ruth Bader Ginsberg...

[lys]

Would your state enact their own legislation making abortion legal in your state?

[sb]

Oct 16, 2012 8:27:53 GMT -5 lys said:

Would your state enact their own legislation making abortion legal in your state?

It would be illegal in my state. Guaranteed.

And I would do everything I reasonably could to move.

[penguingrrl]

So fucking scary. And making abortion illegal is just so uninformed. I have an aunt who is staunchly Catholic, but she's also a nurse who worked in the ER then later the OR pre-Roe. She stands firmly in the legal, rare and safe category because she often had to treat women who had had back alley abortions. She otherwise is strongly a Fox News Republican but on that single issue she breaks from her party (unfortunately that's not enough to sway her vote...). She doesn't condone abortion and isn't happy when women make that choice, but her life experience has shown her that it is happening whether or not it's legal so she would rather see it done safely since it will happen regardless.

[heightsyankee]

My state would make abortion illegal. I would be surprised to see exceptions for rape or health of the mother. My stomach is in knots when I think about this. I just want Nov to get here so we can know where we stand already.

[penguingrrl]

Oct 16, 2012 9:08:54 GMT -5 heightsyankee said:

My state would make abortion illegal. I would be surprised to see exceptions for rape or health of the mother. My stomach is in knots when I think about this. I just want Nov to get here so we can know where we stand already.

Unfortunately we won't know where we stand come Nov. I know a lot of purported pro-choice, pro gay marriage people who are voting Romney because they think his economic plan (that we don't even know yet) is better than Obamas. Personally I don't know how anyone can vote against their conscience, but I guess people can.

[downtoearth]

Where do I find if my state has a "trigger" law from the 70's?

[mominatrix]

Oct 16, 2012 9:53:09 GMT -5 downtoearth said:

Where do I find if my state has a "trigger" law from the 70's?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_the_United_States_by_state

[mominatrix]

Oct 16, 2012 9:58:57 GMT -5 mominatrix said:

Oct 16, 2012 9:53:09 GMT -5 downtoearth said:

Where do I find if my state has a "trigger" law from the 70's?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_the_United_States_by_state

oh, and based on this, I'm informing everybody here that I have a guest room, and I'm willing to put you up, for a small fee, while you relocate to the beautiful Evergreen State.

[heightsyankee]

Oct 16, 2012 9:51:52 GMT -5 penguingrrl said:

Oct 16, 2012 9:08:54 GMT -5 heightsyankee said:

My state would make abortion illegal. I would be surprised to see exceptions for rape or health of the mother. My stomach is in knots when I think about this. I just want Nov to get here so we can know where we stand already.

Unfortunately we won't know where we stand come Nov. I know a lot of purported pro-choice, pro gay marriage people who are voting Romney because they think his economic plan (that we don't even know yet) is better than Obamas. Personally I don't know how anyone can vote against their conscience, but I guess people can.

But we do know where we stand if Obama is elected. In that case I can put my resources in to changing the sitaution in my home state. If Romney is elected, I have to look on a more national level. Sure, in part it's all about where I'll donate but I would still like to know if I am gearing up for a local fight or a national one.

[mominatrix]

Oct 16, 2012 10:11:05 GMT -5 @esquirefish said:

I love NY.

I suppose we might see lots of underground abortion railroads to help get women to places like NYC to have safe and legal abortions. Or, you know, to Canada.

...which is the way it was prior to 1973.

[laurenpetro]

Oct 16, 2012 10:05:33 GMT -5 mominatrix said:

Oct 16, 2012 9:58:57 GMT -5 mominatrix said:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_the_United_States_by_state

oh, and based on this, I'm informing everybody here that I have a guest room, and I'm willing to put you up, for a small fee, while you relocate to the beautiful Evergreen State.

i have an awesomely comfey couch in the empire state if needed

[pixy0stix]

:/ Apparently CO has a trigger law despite abortion being legal (with limitations) before Roe v Wade.

I wonder how many people know about the trigger law, especially given the opposition to the personhood amendments that have been on the ballots recently.

[Deleted]

TN actually has a constitutional right to abortion even if Roe is overturned, but it is up for a constitutional amendment changing that in 2014

[marie427]

I love living in the unpatriotic and who-gives-a-shit-about-family-values State of New York.

This is scary. I'm going to send this to my H who is GOP but pro-choice and refuses to believe that Roe will ever be overturned.

[wrathofkuus]

Oct 16, 2012 9:35:05 GMT -5 asdfjkl said:

Oct 16, 2012 8:27:53 GMT -5 lys said:

Would your state enact their own legislation making abortion legal in your state?

States wouldn't "enact" legislation to make it legal. The issue would be those states that enacted legislation to make it illegal (because that's the way law works - what isn't statutorily or in common law illegal is default legal, not vice versa). Many states already have laws on the books that state that as soon as Roe v. Wade is overturned, abortion is illegal (so called "trigger bans.". And FWIW, my opinion is that having abortion illegal in even one state out of 50 sets women back. It demonstrates that they are truly at the mercy of unpredictable, inconsistent, and largely medically uninformed legislatures who may have any number of issues prioritized ahead of women's health and well being.

That this is even under consideration demonstrates how women's bodies aren't really considered to be ours, and how even the ability to pretend they are is at the mercy of rich white men.

I am amazed that anyone even bothers to make the point to the pro-lifers that women will still have abortions but it will be unsafe. Much like the push for abstinence-only sex ed, the grave consequences are what they want. They WANT women who own their bodies to be maimed and possibly die. That's the whole point.

[heightsyankee]

Oct 16, 2012 11:03:09 GMT -5 @esquirefish said:

The biggest problem - those talking about it in places like this board are those that already see the problems and don't need any convincing. How do you reach out to those that are undecided or those that think this is all about economics and don't see the bigger picture?

Indeed. I have tried to reach out to friends of mine, especially those with daughters. If they're pro-life, though, they're usually churchy and believe that their precious babies will never be in this situation- never abused, raped or have sex before marriage. They can't fathom it for their own kids so they seem to believe there is a fault in the women who are in these positions...

[msmerymac]

Oct 16, 2012 7:32:08 GMT -5 @septimus said:

this is why when it all boils down, i've always been a single issue voter.

:Y:

So basically, we could go back to 1970, when you could get an abortion in CA, WA, OR, AK, HI and NY. Super convenient for people in SC or Kansas, yes?

[secretlyevil]

Oct 16, 2012 11:14:35 GMT -5 msmerymac said:

Oct 16, 2012 7:32:08 GMT -5 @septimus said:

this is why when it all boils down, i've always been a single issue voter.

Sums me up to a t. While I care about a lot of things, this is my number one issue and why I will never be able to vote for someone who is anti-choice. We could agree on everything else but this is the deal breaker.

[msmerymac]

I just can't believe there's a possibility that the US might join the likes of other countries with illegal abortion - countries that are either extremely religious or extremely oppressive, or both. We are the United Fucking States, dammit!

[AJL]

Oct 16, 2012 10:05:33 GMT -5 mominatrix said:

Oct 16, 2012 9:58:57 GMT -5 mominatrix said:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_the_United_States_by_state

oh, and based on this, I'm informing everybody here that I have a guest room, and I'm willing to put you up, for a small fee, while you relocate to the beautiful Evergreen State.

I'm glad to know that DH's company has a major office in WA. I love my city (little blue oasis in the red desert), but I can count on Texas to do the stupid thing.

[NitaX]

Oct 16, 2012 11:24:02 GMT -5 secretlyevil said:

Oct 16, 2012 11:14:35 GMT -5 msmerymac said:

Sums me up to a t. While I care about a lot of things, this is my number one issue and why I will never be able to vote for someone who is anti-choice. We could agree on everything else but this is the deal breaker.

Slide over and make room for me.

[PinkSquirrel]

I think my state would be fine. We're one of the 13 states that have medicaid coverage for abortion, so I would assume those states would be much more likely to retain abortion rights. We're also pretty abortion friendly overall.