If We Only Had A Rewind Button
"Liberty requires restraints on government power"
" The original constitutional government was accordingly structured to "oblige it to control itself"
- James Madison
Conservatives everywhere are overjoyed that Roe was overturned. Sadly, these are many of the same people who used a similar slogan as abortion rights activists "my body my rights" in response to the government's push to vaccinate as many Americans as possible during the worse times of the Covid 19 pandemic. It is okay in this context but not another. Complete hypocrisy. And that is what so much of our lives comes down to each day. According to Historian Yuval Harari, our ability to live and function together is directly tied to this belief in common myths. One of which would be our system or spirit of justice. From the Code of Hammurabi to the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States, these have served as what Harari calls, "cooperation manuals" for millions of peoples. It is belief and faith in these "manuals" that allows us to live and work together. Is it starting to fail us?
"We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
Declaration of Independence
And we trust the Supreme Court to protect these unalienable rights for us. Not to follow or adhere to a Christian agenda that goes against what the majority of Americans want. Maybe it should read, "what the men in this country want."
Societies have been patriarchal for many years. In fact thousands of years. There are plenty of theories on why but not one that definitively explains the phenomenon. But times change and we no longer need to be strongest to hunt game or plough fields. We have evolved to a point where we recognize all genders for their equal worth. I always find it so funny that so many men (Congress and the Senate) still control the fate of so many women. These men act as if they have no idea that women are human beings too. Women should be considered as equal if not greater than their male counter parts.
Justice Alioto, when giving his reasons for his decision are laughable. Alioto went all the way back to the late 19th century of US case history to find applicable cases. Back to a time when women had no rights. So is he telling women that they had no rights before - do not expect to find them now? The Equal Rights Amendment was passed in 1972. Far later than it should have been, hundreds of years later. Today, women have come a long way but still have nowhere near the standing of men in our society. These rights are not provided by the government. They should not be considered to be given to women by anyone. These rights should be considered inherently theirs.
During his confirmation hearing he sang a very different song about Roe v Wade. Alioto said; "Roe v Wade (is) important precedent of the court. It was decided in 1973. It has been challenged on a number of occasions and the Supreme Court has reaffirmed the decision. When a decision is challenged and it is reaffirmed that strengthens it's value."
Looking back I wonder if we have not gotten it all wrong in the first place. Should we have argued the original case differently? This might have set a different tone on the many cases that followed.
I have an interesting quote from an article by Kimberly Wehle, an attorney and law professor with a slew of other credits to her cv. She brings a very interesting take on the very topic. If I understand correctly, the Roe's and Hallford (physician) challenged then Texas law banning all abortions unless they were done to protect the health of the mother. The Roe's and Hallford won because the court ruled the laws infringed on their Ninth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. But according to Wehle if handled differently, we would never have had to deal with this problem again.
"What We Keep Getting Wrong About Abortion" Kimberly Wehle 5/10/2022 The Atlantic
"Yet Roe's key vulnerability lies not with the justices voting to strike it down. It derives from how the issue was treated in the first place - as a question of an individual's "reproductive rights" and not one of the proper scope of government."
"There are certain things that are so bound up in the concept of American liberty that government cannot touch them at all - even with a hearing. The sacred sphere of family life, including the decision of whether to bear children in the first place"
For me the key line is "not one of the proper scope of government". It should be that men cannot decide the fate of women. It is a tragedy that the Constitution does not have the words "she" or "woman" incorporated in it. But 250 years ago how could the Founding Fathers have foreseen where life would take us. It is time to get with the times. It is time to enter the 21st century.
If the Roe's and Hallford had chosen a different argument, would we be even facing this dilemma today? Even still, over 70% of the country supports abortion to some degree. Once again, if we could just get organized and on the same page. Think of the things, we as a people, could accomplish.
