March 3, 2016 4:38 AM

The right to a safe and legal abortion: WHAT right??

Feb 24 (Reuters) - A U.S. appeals court on Wednesday allowed Louisiana to enforce a restrictive 2014 abortion law critics say is aimed at shutting clinics, ending a halt to the measure handed out by a lower court judge earlier this year. The Louisiana-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit granted a request from the state to put into effect the law requiring physicians who perform abortions to have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles (48 km) of the place where the abortion is performed…. “We reversed the district court and permitted the law to go into effect because the plaintiffs had not demonstrated that the law placed an undue burden on a large fraction of women,” the decision from a three-judge panel said.

How about we begin by dispensing with the fallacy that Roe v. Wade means anything at all. In an era when so many red states are employing Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers (TRAP) laws to practically and efectively deny women the legal right to an abortion, we can no longer pretend Roe v. Wade is worth the paper it’s printed on. Ever since Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey 505 u.s. 833 (1992)), states have been afforded the ability to regulate abortions, provided said restrictions don’t place an “undue burden” on women seeking an abortion.

The problem is that several states have, Louisiana being among them, having taken the bit and run with it. Strictly speaking, abortion remains legal, but these states have used TRAP laws to create an environment in which it’s virtually impossible to obtain one. The most laughable aspect of the judge’s decision- “the plaintiffs had not demonstrated that the law placed an undue burden on a large fraction of women”- is, strictly speaking, correct but prima facie absurd in a practical sense. Of course it doesn’t place an “undue burden on a large fraction of women,” just the exceedingly small portion of women who happen to be seeking an abortion. Because of rulings like this (and Casey, anti-choice culture warriors can pretend that TRAP laws are all about something they could really care less about.

It’s cynical and dishonest…but it’s all about protecting the health of women, amiright?? What I really want to know is why, if you’re a culture warrior bent on denying women their legal right to an abortion, you can’t just admit to your motives? At least have the integrity to own up to what your plans are instead of hiding behind some high-minded, self-righteous justification that only reveals you to be an ideologue who could care less about women’s health. Truth is, there’s no integrity and even less honesty to be found in those who hide behind TRAP laws and pretend it’s about protecting the health of women.

While you’re at it, how about admitting that you’re perfectly comfortable with forcing your narrow moral/religious agenda on those who happen not to share your views…because God’s on your side, don’tchaknow??

blog comments powered by Disqus

Technorati

Technorati search

» Blogs that link here

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Jack Cluth published on March 3, 2016 4:38 AM.

If the 99% voted, it wouldn't matter what the 1% did was the previous entry in this blog.

Remember when Mom told you to always wear clean underwear in case you went to the hospital? is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Contact Me

Powered by Movable Type 6.0.8