Posted on 03/05/2020 3:33:35 PM PST by Morgana
Everyone knows that Sen. Charles Schumer went off the rails by threatening two sitting Supreme Court Justices because he believes they will vote against an upcoming abortion-rights case. But little attention has been given to the hysterical reaction of two members of “The Squad”: Rep. Ayanna Pressley and Rep. Rashida Tlaib.
Pressley said that “reproductive justice is racial justice.”
This is the kind of statement we would expect from the Klan. We would not expect this from a black woman. Blacks, who are 13% of the population, account for 36% of all abortions. Pressley needs to explain why this is an expression of racial justice, and she needs to tell this to a black audience.
Tlaib aimed her remarks at pro-life Americans by repeating one of her standard lines. “Y’all, y’all, you know what? You’re so freakin obsessed with what I decide to do with my body, maybe you shouldn’t even want to have sex with me.”
Believe me, lady, no one does. I know of no defender of life who wants to sleep with you. And if you don’t know the difference between a woman who wants to remove a wart from her toe and a pregnant woman who wants to remove a human being from her body, you need to enroll in Bio 101.
The other “Squad” members are just as far gone. Here is what they said about abortion last year.
Rep. Ilhan Omar objected to pro-life legislation in the states, saying the bills were “only the latest in a long history of efforts to criminalize women for simply existing.”
That would mean that pro-life Americans want their mothers imprisoned. Even those in the asylum don’t speak such gibberish.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez objected to a pro-life bill in Alabama that the governor pledged to sign. She labeled the bill as an example of “patriarchy.” The governor is a woman. In the fall, she said that “nonbinary people” need access to abortion. Problem solved: they don’t exist.
This is the mentality of the those who love abortion. There isn’t much upstairs to play with, making it impossible to engage them in rational discourse.
I’ll continue to stand on what I stated.
BTW I was there in that fight.... I watched Clergy and mothers driving young high school girls to clinics to abort their babies and fathers begging their daughters not to do this. So I am well acquainted with where the blame and responsibility lays.
This would have never happened had the American people stood against it. There would be no abortion....and it certainly was well known about. It was not done in secret.
I’ll continue to stand on what I stated.
BTW I was there in that fight.... I watched Clergy and mothers driving young high school girls to clinics to abort their babies and fathers begging their daughters not to do this. So I am well acquainted with where the blame and responsibility lays.
This would have never happened had the American people stood against it. There would be no abortion....and it certainly was well known about. It was not done in secret.
That part is certainly true.
But this part of what you wrote at #5 ("Thank God we haven't had a woman for President or no baby would have a chance!") is irrelevant at best, misleading at worst. The legalization of criminal abortion had almost nothing to do with women in political power. The state legislators, and later, jurists, responsible for legal abortion were overwhelmingly men.
Not that anyone is entirely off te hook. There's plenty of responsibility---and irresponsibility -- to go around, in all races, all ages, and both sexes. But the preponderance of men in Roe-era abortion activism led to Andrea Dworkin's pathetic witticism:
You state....” The legalization of criminal abortion had almost nothing to do with women in political power. The state legislators, and later, jurists, responsible for legal abortion were overwhelmingly men”....
By the time of Roe v. Wade abortion was ‘already legalized’ in Hawaii, New York, Alaska and Washington..and it was the ‘Women’s Rights movement and court cases involving contraceptives that laid the groundwork for Roe v. Wade.
Women running for the presidency or holding any elected political office or any sort ---city, state,local --- had exceedingly little to do with the legalization of criminal abortion. Ironically and peculiarly enough, the emergence of abortion as a broad-based "popular" "women's" political issue happened after abortion was legalized via Roe vs Wade.
As I mentioned, groups like the National Organization for Women did not take up abortion in the late 60's --- which really frustrated the male abortion vanguard like Nathanson, Lader,and Baird.
NOW's focus was, locally, anti-discrimination workplace issues and challenging men-only social spaces, and nationally, the ERA. They actually churned out a ton of propaganda refuting the idea that there was an abortion-ERA connection. They felt that any link to abortion would be toxic to the ERA, and assailed conservative lawyers (like Phyllis Schlafly) who insisted that the ERA would be used to buttress a "right" to abortion and to abortion funding.
Pro-abort radical left feminist lawyers (like Sarah Weddington and the equally odious Margie Pitts Hames) got their support from the ACLU and the Georgia Legal Aid Society.
After legislative successes for abortion in CA, NT, HI and other liberal bastions, their political /legislative campaigns were losing steam or stalling out altogether. Abortion was not a popular political issue. That's why they preferred getting things "fixed" in the courts rather than the state legislatures.
Now, of course, abortion is "the" litmus test and rallying cry for ambitious female politicians and their associated demented maenads and pussyhats. But it was not always so.
Further writing....”Most scholarship on abortion has focused on two moments of legal change:. when abortion was ‘criminalized’ in the mid-19th century..... and when it was ‘decriminalized’ a hundred years later in the mid-1960s and early 1970s..... The century of illegal abortion is typically treated as obscure and unchanging. I find, however, that the history of illegal abortion was dynamic, not static.”
Analysis of public policy should examine how policy has been implemented and by whom, rather than be narrowly restricted to federal legislation or agency activity as much of the regulation of abortion was carried out not by government agents, but by voluntary agencies and individuals. .....as an example...........It would have been virtually impossible for the state to enforce the criminal abortion laws without the cooperation of physicians. State officials won medical cooperation in suppressing abortion by threatening doctors and medical institutions with prosecution or scandal ....
By the 1940s and 1950s, physicians and hospitals had become so accustomed to this regulatory stance toward women and abortion that they instituted new regulations to observe and curb the practice of abortion in the hospital. The medical profession and its institutions acted as an arm of the state
Her book brings attention on the nature of the public sphere, its membership, democratic discourse, citizenship, and the formation of public opinion and debate. You might consider a possible read.
When Abortion was a Crime 1867 - 1973
exerts of her book....
https://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/issues/97may/abortex.htm
I thought abortion was always illegal? is this author claiming it wasn’t illegal in the US before 1867? I find that hard to believe.
In those days, children were an asset. It was only when the Progressives invented compulsory education in the years after the Civil War and enacted child labor laws, that children became a financial liability. Then the New Deal invented the government's social safety net. After World War II government policy pushed for the nuclear family as opposed to the extended family as a way of supporting real estate.
Sound strange? Do some research into economics and the effects on social policy. It will curl your hair.
The link provides your answer.
That you. Makes sense. Any books you would suggest to get me started on the economics/social policy history?
I'll look around to see if I have anything left on my bookshelves.
I cleaned out a lot of stuff from my iibrary in my last move, but I would suggest a magnificent book on the Constitutional Convention of 1787: Decision in Philadelphia: The Constitutional Convention of 1787, by Christopher Collier and James Lincoln Collier. The second chapter, titled "America in 1787" gives you a good taste of what life was like when the only social safety net was your children.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.