Mr. Romney has called for overturning Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court ruling that recognized a woman’s constitutional right to make her own childbearing decisions and to legalized abortion nationwide. He has said that the issue should be thrown back to state legislatures. The actual impact of that radical rights rollback is worth considering.
It would not take much to overturn the Roe decision. With four of the nine members of the Supreme Court over 70 years old, the next occupant of the White House could have the opportunity to appoint one or more new justices. If say, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the oldest member, retired and Mr. Romney named a replacement hostile to abortion rights, the basic right to abortion might well not survive.
The result would turn back the clock to the days before Roe v. Wade when abortion was legal only in some states, but not in others. There is every indication that about half the states would make abortion illegal within a year of Roe being struck down, according to the Guttmacher Institute. The Center for Reproductive Rights, which challenges abortion restrictions around the country, puts the number at 30 states. For one thing, abortion bans already on the books in some states would suddenly kick in. And some Republican-controlled state legislatures would outlaw abortion immediately.
Even with Roe and subsequent decisions upholding abortion rights, more than half the states have enacted barriers like mandatory waiting periods, “counseling” sessions lacking a real medical justification; parental consent or notification laws; and onerous clinic “safety” rules intended to drive clinics out of business.
We do not need to guess about the brutal consequences of overturning Roe. We know from our own country’s pre-Roe history and from the experience around the world. Women desperate to end a pregnancy would find a way to do so. Well-to-do women living in places where abortion is illegal would travel to other states where it is legal to obtain the procedure. Women lacking the resources would either be forced by the government and politicians to go through with an unwanted or risky pregnancy, attempt to self-abort or turn to an illegal — and potentially unsafe — provider for help. Women’s health, privacy and equality would suffer. Some women would die.
…and women still have the ability to get Obama re-elected and protect their right to choose. I’m always amazed at middle-class Republican women who support Romney. Essentially they are making themselves potential victims.
- NYT Editorial on Romney and a Future Without Roe v. Wade (lawprofessors.typepad.com)
- Romney: I Want the Supreme Court to Overturn Roe v. Wade via Life News.com (loopyloo305.com)
- Romney: Abortion is not ‘part of my agenda.’ Romney campaign: Oh yes it is. (dailykos.com)
- Romney Needs a Groin Shot (boomantribune.com)
- Ryan’s Roe v. Wade Bombshell (thedailybeast.com)
- Debate Moderator Candy Crowley Calls Out Romney ‘Then and Now’ on Abortion (politicususa.com)
- Women: Don’t Be Fooled by Mitt (thedailybeast.com)
- Mitt Romney’s Constantly Evolving Stance On Abortion Rights (thinkprogress.org)
All the discussion in the last couple of days about Abortion as a response to rape has raised so many women’s issues and shown the true face of the Republicans.
First take a look at the overall view of the 112th Congress, it is impossible to miss the big picture that Republicans have used a multi-faceted approach in their war on women, especially in their right to choose their own health coverage. For the past couple of days, there has been a firestorm over comments made by Representative Todd Akin regarding what he calls “legitimate rape,” and although it is a big story, it is just a small part of the entire GOP’s view of women.
Republicans – even Rush Limbaugh – abandoned and condemned Akin over his remarks on legitimate rape and conception, especially when the Republican congessmen trying to make him quit the race, have voted with him to eliminate a women’s right to choose throughout the 112th Congress.
The Romney campaign team swtated in writing: “Romney-Ryan administration would not oppose abortion in instances of rape,” but critics began connecting Paul Ryan to Akin. It became glaringly obvious that Ryan and Romney have also promoted his twisted pro-life position. Ryan co-sponsored, with Akin, a national personhood bill that defines a single-celled zygote as having all the rights of an American citizen, and Romney tapped him for vice-president.
Romney said he would scrap the Title X program (Medicaid coverage that handles contraception and abortion) entirely to cut costs. But, according to the Guttmacher Institute, every dollar spent helping women avoid pregnancy saves $3.74 in Medicaid spending. The issue is not cutting costs, but ending women’s right to choose when they give birth. And what is the basis of Ryan, Romney, Akin, and the rest of the Republicans’ pro-life stance? It is based entirely on the Christian bible and not fiscal conservatism.
If any woman in America has not yet figured out that Republicans, all Republicans, hold them in contempt and believe their place is on the birthing table, then they better take a better look at more than just Todd Akin.
- Paul Ryan pretends he doesn’t agree with every ‘outrageous’ thing Todd Akin said (dailykos.com)
- Reps. Todd Akin And Paul Ryan Co-Sponsored Bill Using Term “Forcible Rape” (alan.com)
- Do You Get It? (talkingpointsmemo.com)
- Parker: Todd Akin’s words about rape aren’t the problem (newsday.com)
- Akin Intimates That Women Fake Rape to Get Abortions (news.firedoglake.com)
- Eight staggering GOP comments on rape and women (salon.com)
- Ryan backed more than one ‘forcible rape’ abortion bill (firstread.nbcnews.com)
- Paul Ryan Is No Friend Of Women Who Were Raped (dekerivers.wordpress.com)
- Akin Concedes, No Illegitimate Rape, It’s Just That Women Lie About It (alan.com)
- Republican Todd Akin: Don’t Worry, You Won’t Get Pregnant From Rape (triing2survive.wordpress.com)