"Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties. Truth was never put to the worse in a free and open encounter..."
~ Milton
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
~Benjamin Franklin

Reading:
A Fistful of Euros
Andrew Tobias
Angry Liberal
Archy
Bad Attitudes
Common Dreams
Fablog
Hullabaloo
Informed Comment
Madelaine Kane
Mahablog
Obsidian Wings
Off the Kuff
Orcinus
Sarah Kendzior
War and Piece
Washington Monthly

Books
The Emerging Democratic Majority (Judis & Teixeira)
Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them (Franken)
Rush Limbaugh Is A Big Fat Idiot (Franken)
The True Believer (Hoffer)
Still Being Bushwhacked

All Book Reviews
Race, Gender, and Sexuality
It's always "us" vs "them"
Women's March on (fill in your location)
Children learn what their parents teach them.
You Got My Support. But.
Even Endangered Penguins Do It

All Race, Gender, and Sexuality
Campaigns and Voting
Where do we go from here?
It's always "us" vs "them"
Some interpretations
On and on I go
Just appalled

All Campaigns and Voting
Lecture Circuit
It Was 40 Years Ago Today
July 2, 1964
Pledge
May 14-15, 1970
The Erotica of Bare Knees

All Lecture Circuit
Media
The Liberal Media, At It Again
Fairly UNbalanced
P.S.
What's this?
OHMIGOD

All Media
Big Brother
Shoulda' Guessed
Where did my country go?
You know what you never thought you'd read?
Not in his name
Sleight of Hand

All Big Brother
World O'Blog
It's Vocabulary Time!
They wrote it
Mighty-fine blogging
Other People Said....
Phillipines

All World O'Blog
Aimless Ranting
It's always "us" vs "them"
So, I'm thinking with half my brain
Do You Know Peter?
Long, Little Privacy Rant
My Takeaway

All Aimless Ranting
Archives
February 05, 2017 - February 11, 2017
January 22, 2017 - January 28, 2017
January 15, 2017 - January 21, 2017
November 13, 2016 - November 19, 2016
October 09, 2016 - October 15, 2016

All Weekly Archives


Electioneering
Open Secrets
Political Wire Exit Polls
Politics1
Polling Report

Information
American Research Group
Center for Democracy and Technology
Center for Public Integrity
Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
Congressional Report Cards
Death Row Roll Call
DebtChannel.org
Democracy Now
Economic Policy Institute
FairVote Colorado
Foreign Policy In Focus
Global Exchange
Human Rights Watch
Independent Judiciary
Inequality
Institute on Money in State Politics
Institute for Public Accuracy
JobWatch
Lying in ponds
Media Reform
Media Transparency
Move On
One World
Open Democracy
Pew Research Center
Project Censored
Public Citizen Health Research Group
Stockholm International Peace Research Institute
Take Back The Media
The Urban Institute
WHO Outbreak News

Connections
XML & RDF
Peevish for PDA



Blog Directory


Search








Credits
Powered by Movable Type

Site Design by Sekimori





All content © 2002-2005 Anne Zook

November 01, 2005
Put To Shame

Once again, I should have waited until I read more of other people's posts on the Alito nomination.

Hugo Schwyzer has an excellent post saying, in calmer, more temperate language, much of what I was trying to say.

There's a lively discussion going on in the comments, as usual. I haven't had a chance to read them all yet and I suppose this point is made there, but it's one that I think is worth posting here as well.

My primary objection to Alito's "women have to notify their husbands before they're allowed to have an abortion" stance is that it's anti-woman-as-equal. There's just no other way to read it.

I know twenty married women and their marriages range from the passionate to the indifferently tolerant, but they are married. They are in committed relationships. It is inconceivable to me that any of these women, upon discovering that they're pregnant, would make the decision to have an abortion and carry it through with no discussion or input from their husbands. (What kind of mind...what kind of relationship would someone have to accept as "normal" to think otherwise?)

The only reason to have such legislation would be to codify, in whatever small way, the legal fact that a married woman is not a fully equal human being but is subject to a man's wishes. Because, one assumes, there would have to be some kind of signed document from the man, acknowledging that he'd been informed of the planned abortion. That he, in effect, was "giving his permission" for it. And that's just wrong. My body. My choice.

Also? Laws don't only exist to protect the majority. They sometimes exist, or don't exist, to protect the minority.

In this case, the lack of Alito's preferred "notification" position means that women who are in abusive relationships will not be legally forced to endanger their lives and their health by attempting to get an abusive spouse to "give permission" for an abortion. Yes, the "unless she thinks he might kill her" exemption would have done the same thing, but by leaving the notification clause out entirely, the burden is not on the abused woman to prove she faces bodily harm or possible death.

But do read the comments in Hugo's post. Especially the first one from, "evil fizz" which saves me writing 500 words to make a simple, but important point.

There's a tendency on the part of some commenters to approve "notification" because it could be used as a tool to make certain the husband was aware of the abortion, because these people seem to think it's the government's responsibility to inform a man that there's a fundamental and serious problem with his relationship.

I'm out of time to address the headspin that gave me, or the sublimely ignorant (in the "knowledge of what you're talking about" sense) commenter who said it was easy enough for a woman to avoid abortion, she just had to give birth and then walk off and never see the child again.

Hugo's blog almost always has great discussions.

Posted by AnneZook at 02:48 PM


Comments