I never thought I'd write a blog about abortion, but here we are.
I was born in 1974, and abortion has been a hot topic my entire life. I’m not here to change anyone’s mind; I’m here to say what’s on mine.
What we’re seeing today is the manifestation of a 1973 ruling that became one of the most politically divisive traps in modern history: Abortion.
Abortion has no place in politics.
There are reasons that reproductive rights are under scrutiny (“strict scrutiny” to be exact) and states like Alabama, Georgia and Missouri are passing off-the-rails legislation.
The U.S. Supreme Court didn’t rule Roe vs. Wade far enough in 1973.
What Alabama is trying to do is usurp control over something the U.S. Supreme Court decided 46 years ago, and it’s time to put this baby to bed twice and for all.
Roe vs. Wade in a Nutshell
Roe vs. Wade is less about abortion than it’s about a woman’s right to privacy and access to legal and safe reproductive control.
It takes us nine months to breathe on our own, but our time on Earth is the real womb. No one makes it out of here alive.
In 1973, Roe vs. Wade set guidelines for state abortion laws. The U.S. Supreme Court segmented their ruling by trimesters, then kicked the entire package back to the states.
In Roe vs. Wade, SCOTUS ruled that states cannot ban abortion during the first trimester of pregnancy. Other than that, they left room for states to customize legislation during the second and third trimesters.
That’s the problem with Roe vs. Wade.
Under Roe vs. Wade, states can ban third trimester abortions unless a woman’s life is at risk, but that’s not what Alabama did. Alabama’s special brand of lawmakers didn’t stop there.
The new Alabama law makes abortions entirely illegal, all trimesters, including instances of incest and rape.
It’s a shitty law, but that’s only a reflection of Alabama.
Roe vs. Wade gave states an inch, and Alabama is coming for the yard.
What Alabama did is in direct conflict with the 1973 SCOTUS ruling in Roe vs. Wade, and any direct challenge to Roe vs. Wade must undergo “strict scrutiny”.
It was bound to happen; this was eventually going to come to a head in the U.S. Supreme Court.
To me, it would make more sense if this happened sooner. Like I said, abortion has been a politicized issue my entire life, but Alabama finally put a stake in the ground in resounding fashion.
Why Do I Care?
It’s a scary time in the United States. We are learning more and more about the problems in this country that are deeply rooted in – and manipulated by – politics.
I’m 44, male, white, and gay. Abortion isn’t an issue that affects me directly because I don’t have a vagina.
What Alabama has brought forth and thrown in our collective face, is a flagrant attack on the health and safety of Americans.
Frankly, whether or not anyone has an abortion is none of my business, but I’ll be damned if I sit quietly in a society whose leadership imposes parameters on anyone’s inalienable rights and their pursuit of happiness.
Let's be honest, nobody gives a crap about unwanted kids after they're born, least of all the parents who don't want to or cannot support them.
Separating Abortion & Politics
Imagine not having to consider abortion when casting a vote!
So long as there are single issue politicians, there will be single issue voters. Certain single issues should be settled at the federal level, and abortion is one of those issues.
A modern day SCOTUS needs to rule whether or not Roe vs. Wade stands. I believe it will, but that’s because people are finally coming out of the woodwork, and speaking up.
Timing is everything and Alabama represents anti-abortion's final strike to overturn Roe vs. Wade.
Naturally, it’s worrisome that the U.S. Supreme Court leans conservative, but I feel like I see where this is going.
This is just another issue amplified by endless data and fast technology. Unfortunately, that's how we learn these days. One must weed through the bullshit.
There’s only one way the Supreme Court can go, and that’s to honor a woman’s right to privacy and her access to safe and healthy reproductive services.
They did it once, and they’ll do it again.
And what better way to challenge Roe vs. Wade than with a conservative majority on the Supreme Court that strikes down the state challenging Roe vs. Wade?
I can’t believe the elderly female governor of Alabama signed a total abortion ban to begin with, much less one that includes instances of rape or incest.
At the highest level, Alabama’s governor is merely a tool.
When Pat Robertson comes out saying your anti-abortion laws are too extreme, you've bitten off more than you can chew.
That’s a whole other issue for Alabama to figure out.
Hey Alabama! Your governor just signed a law obligating a woman to give birth to her sibling in the event her father impregnates her. What the hell Alabama?
That’s literally mom-daughter sisters or mom-son brother/sister relatives. Boy or girl, it’s a weird relative to have.
And you thought gender fluidity was confusing.
Are you going to welcome the new arrival into your family with open arms? Forget Roe vs. Wade, let’s talk about the life of the child. What if they’re gay? I don’t think Alabama thought this through.
Oh yeah, they only care about clumps of molecules and incarcerations.
As if the U.S. Supreme Court will overturn Roe vs. Wade for whatever Alabama’s bringing to the table. It doesn’t make sense, and I don’t see it happening.
Alabama’s trying to make a mockery of the U.S. Supreme Court and SCOTUS needs to come down hard.
If they don't, God help us all.
Roe vs. Wade will not be overturned.
The U.S. supreme court will not overturn a woman’s right to privacy. That’s unconstitutional.
There will be a dissenting opinion from one of the conservatives, but Alabama will be struck down by the conservative leaning SCOTUS, and it won’t be a 5-4 vote.
Inalienable rights should not be up for debate in Washington (or any state capital for that matter).
Perhaps politicians can focus on things that belong in politics, items such as foreign relations, fiscal policy, national security, defense, education, veteran services, and healthcare. You know, things that contribute to the overall betterment of society.
Maybe figure out how to be pro-life for the living.
When People Play God
I want politicians who are pro-humanity, not against it, and ones who don’t use religion as a tool to legislate.
The more negatively (and aggressively) anyone infringes on the inalienable rights of others, the worse off they will be, eventually.
You take the good, you take the bad, you take them both, and there you have...
Each of us make decisions on how we handle ourselves when faced with adversity. That’s how we learn where we stand and which battles to hold dear.
Abortion is a deeply personal, inward decision for a woman to make for herself. Nobody, especially lawmakers, has the right to prevent her from making her own decision, I don’t care what church you go to.
To legislate otherwise is unconstitutional, and that’s why abortion has no place in politics.
Abortion has nothing to do with anyone else besides the woman in charge of her own body, health and life.
It’s ok to fundamentally disagree with the concept of abortion. There’s nothing wrong with that. If you don’t want an abortion, don’t have one. It’s that simple.