Margaret Atwood wrote a very popular book about reproductive rights and a totalitarian future.
In “The Handmaid’s Tale,” Aunt Lydia says, “There is more than one kind of freedom. In the days of anarchy, it was freedom too. Now you are being given freedom from.”
With the near-certain probability of the reversal of Roe v. Wade, are we opening the doors to anarchy or totalitarianism? Can we honestly say our democracy will be a better place without Roe?
The 14th Amendment has been used to protect reproductive rights. Amongst many elements of privacy are decisions about child-rearing, procreation, marriage and termination of pregnancy. As late as 1965 – in Griswold v. Connecticut – the Supreme Court overturned a state statute that prohibited the possession or sale of contraceptives to married couples.
In the 1925 Supreme Court case, Pierce v. Society of Sisters, an Oregon law requiring all children to attend public schools was overturned. It would have banned home and parochial schools.
Try some empathy for the Pro-Choice advocates if your basic right to school your children as you see fit was banned by government.
The brutality of red state laws on the books or waiting for the Supreme Court decision is cruel and unusual punishment.
To jail a doctor who terminates a pregnancy resulting from rape or incest means the victim of a heinous crime gets the brunt of the punishment. To jail a pregnant woman whose life is in the balance due to a problematic pregnancy is just as bad. To pay an award of $10,000 for the arrest and conviction of an alleged violator of an abortion ban is remindful of the Nazi culture that rewarded children who exposed their parents.
Not one woman who seeks to terminate her pregnancy does so with joy or abandon. The decision is emotional and remains with you for the rest of your life.
It is easy to say she should not have gotten pregnant to begin with. We have tried to create an awareness of the ways to avoid pregnancy in sex education classes. The abstinence method is a dismal failure. The prevention methods have been successful as the frequency of teen pregnancy has dropped nationwide.
Ask yourself if it is just as emotionally difficult to make the decision to continue an unwanted pregnancy to full term and then raise an unwanted child as it is to terminate the pregnancy.
Either decision is personal and should not be legislated.
There are the processes of enforcement and the “what is next” questions. A law without enforcement is a useless exercise in gaining favor politically. Enforcing a reproductive rights limitation law will result in chaos.
Opening the bedroom door to Victorian police scrutiny will only lead to additional laws that harm people who harm no one else.
If we want common sense to prevail, why don’t the folks who want the Roe v. Wade decision overturned seek a Constitutional amendment.
Let the people decide at the ballot box.
Roger Carlton writes a bi-weekly column for The Graham Star. He can be reached via email, rcarlton57@hotmail.com.