Roberts Tips His Hand on Abortion | Alternet.org
“In the first abortion case before the Supreme Court, we get a glimpse at how our new chief justice might restrict abortion.
But observers had their first insight into the disposition of the new court on the explosive issue of reproductive rights when a crucial question arose: whether abortion laws can take effect while they are being challenged as unconstitutional.
On several occasions in the hearing of Ayotte v. Planned Parenthood of Northern New England, Roberts questioned the need to strike down an entire abortion statute based on a single sticking point — in this case, the lack of an exception for the health of the mother.
In arguments before the justices, Kelly A. Ayotte, the attorney general of New Hampshire, rejected the notion that the lack of the health exception posed a problem, arguing that a “judicial bypass” provision would cover medical emergencies by enabling doctors to get quick permission from a judge to circumvent the law’s requirement that physicians notify a parent of a pregnant teen at least 48 hours before performing an abortion.
Several of the justices seemed unsatisfied with that explanation.
But Roberts seemed to suggest that even if the judicial bypass provision is deemed problematic, it should not necessarily invalidate the entire statute.
Campaign Against Abortion Clinics
The court also heard oral arguments in two other abortion-related cases, Scheidler v. National Organization for Women and Operation Rescue v. National Organization for Women.
A defeat would lift a federal injunction prohibiting demonstrators at abortion clinics from conducting blockades, trespassing, damaging property or committing acts of violence. The lack of an injunction, Smeal said, could lead to a resurgence in violence against abortion providers and their patients and ultimately the shuttering of more abortion clinics. “
My take on the situation: Being a Mother, is NOT like pushing a litter out, every year, to guarantee existence of the species. I RESENT that my RIGHT to make MY decision (with the father, if he’s still involved) to make that commitment. The commitment being to support and love the child, the rest of your life. This commitment should be made by both parents, but the burden falls on the woman (which is another discussion all by itself), in a lot of cases. I know that there are deadbeat moms AND dads, out there, but I’m talking about my own experience and observations.
Speaking of observations, I used to volunteer at Second Harvest Food Bank and the realities I learned there, opened my eyes, and made me appreciate my never empty cupboards. Children suffer long term damage from hunger and lack of nutrition, which can be different things. Second Harvest generates $10 of food for each $1 donated, and I can think of no less pleasant thing, than to be hungry. The number of hungry people is a sign of lack of support from the government. When people have to choose between medicine and food, or health care and food, for your child especially, its an impossible situation, that speaks very poorly of the society that allows it to happen. Remember, Jesus said you will be judged by the least among you. Who would have a child that you weren’t sure you could feed or keep healthy?????
The only support the current administration gives US citizens, is when they aren’t sentient. Either a fetus or a brain dead patient, more seems to be better. Ignorance IS exactly where dubyass’ administration wants you. Why not be smart about the children you bring in the world? Don’t just think about the 30 seconds of fun, but the lifetime of love. 🙂
So, let your Senators know you don’t support Alito, because if he gets in, women have lost all control of self. AND, we only need 16 Democrats in the House, and 6 Democrats in the Senate, and the domino’s start to fall. Otherwise, we will also lose most of our civil rights. Fading as they may be now, it could be much worse…. Write your Senator!