Home › Anecdote › FROM THE BOSTON GLOBE

FROM THE BOSTON GLOBE

By on • ( 25 )

Date: June 24, 2022, 5:53 PM

So I guess if any of my young relatives get pregnant, and a serious situation develops, they should just walk down the street and ask random strangers what they should do.

Mind you, these random strangers have no idea what the serious situation is. They haven’t the foggiest notion of what the circumstances are, what factors the young couple have to consider, or anything else about what is going on. But they get to decide. Not the couple, in consultation with their doctors, their family, and each other. No. Strangers.

That’s what today’s Roe decision by the Supreme Court does: Removes decision-making power from women about their own health and well-being. The high court has now declared that American women have no bodily autonomy.

But wait, conservatives protest: What about the bodily autonomy of the fetus? Well, you can’t have bodily autonomy if you are not an autonomous person.

So I guess that means that any American, at any time, can be ordered to save the life of someone dying of, say, kidney or liver disease by being forced to donate an organ.

I really think that someone who has kidney or liver disease should file a lawsuit demanding that they be allowed to force any one of their fellow Americans to give them a kidney or part of a liver. They can cite this abortion ruling.

Makes sense, no? If the government can tell a woman she is required to carry a fetus to term on the theory that she must save a life, then shouldn’t all of us be required to sacrifice our bodies to save others’ lives?

I also think that someone who practices the Jewish faith, which does not prohibit abortion — it fact, abortion is mandated to save the life of the mother — should also sue, citing religious freedom. Ditto Muslims. Many practices within different Islamic traditions do not prohibit abortion.

After all, this is a Supreme Court that is so obsessed with “religious freedom” that it thinks it’s perfectly fine for gay people to be kicked out of restaurants, refused service at a bakery, or be mistreated in a host of other discriminatory ways if the business owner doesn’t like them.

So shouldn’t Jews and Muslims be allowed to follow their religious traditions without government interference? If the high court says yes, then we could end up with a situation where only Christian Americans are prohibited from seeking an abortion. And it will highlight the fact that this was a religious decision, not a legal one.

SOURCE: THE COMMONWEALTH FUND

Hey … that chart kind of looks like the worldwide gun deaths chart, doesn’t it?

Source: Institute for Health Metrics & Evaluation – Boston Globe Staff

Well, we certainly do like to be No. 1! Even if our priorities are royally screwed up.

By the way, if you’d like to voice your view of the Supreme Court’s Roe decision, the Globe is giving you the opportunity to share your reaction via Twitter, Facebook, or voicemail.

First, here’s a short form where you can write your views. Next, you can more publicly tweet your views here or post them on the Globe’s Facebook page.  Or, if you’re more comfortable, leave a voicemail message at this number: 617-299-9661. Thanks.
‹
›

Categories: Anecdote, Media, newspapers, Religion

Tags: ,

25 replies

  1. Anonymous
    06/26/2022 • 11:48

    You made your points well, Marilyn.

    Like

    • Marilyn Armstrong
      06/26/2022 • 12:07

      Well, they were made well, except I didn’t write this. It’s from the Boston Globe and I thought it was well-written and very much to the point. The Globe has some very good writers which is fortunate since it’s our only remaining newspaper.

      Like

  2. Limp Cabbage and Soggy Chips
    06/26/2022 • 02:06

    India (as with other South/SE Asian nations) is notorious for maternal deaths. USA surpassed India in 2010. In 2020, the numbers were USA: 152 per 100000 and India, 130. In absolute numbers of course, India is the largest, given our population, but the ratio in the US is far worse. (data from Goalkeepers). The current overturn would push America even forward in this area, I fear.

    Like

    • Marilyn Armstrong
      06/26/2022 • 11:40

      It’s appalling. I never believed this could happen. How can you start to strip away the rights people have accepted and lived with for more than 50 years? If I were young again, I think I’d be looking to move to another country. If I were even a LITTLE bit younger, I’d be considering it.

      Like

  3. slmret
    06/25/2022 • 21:54

    After my surgery a year ago, I cracked up the nurses by saying that I was glad not to have to worry any longer about getting pregnant. I would say that with a little different emphasis, but just as strongly, now! What a mess!

    Like

    • Marilyn Armstrong
      06/25/2022 • 22:49

      I feel displaced since everything I thought we’d gained in my lifetime — and before my life — has just been erased. My son is gay and he and his friends are worried. They just know they are next.

      Unless the god in whom I do not believe intervenes, I think I can safely predict I’m not getting pregnant again in this lifetime. Still, all the younger women are still at risk — and you KNOW they are going to make birth control harder to get. Not here, in Mass., but in at least half of our states. I wonder if we are going to see a mass migration of young people out of the red states? Makes you wonder, doesn’t it?

      Liked by 1 person

      • slmret
        06/25/2022 • 23:04

        I agree — and I’m afraid I think the gays should be worried. I hope that civil rights can somehow be protected before the Court gets that case (which I don’t think has been filed yet!). When I was in school, a lot of young girls went to Tijuana for abortions — it looks like they will come to California or Massachusetts this time around (the “Western Wall of Wash, Ore, and Calif are holding together so far!). And I wouldn’t be surprised to see mass migrations — perhaps like the birds, they will migrate for a season, then return!

        Like

  5. omniclassic
    06/25/2022 • 19:48

    First off judges should not be political appointees, but immune to party influence. Second, the nations highest court should be a balanced entity with equal representation, and this should be by law. Third, This imbalance negates any sense of justice and ruptures democracy at its very core. Fourth, appointing these individuals for life is counter productive to our democratic process, i.e. there should be terms for therm as well, limiting extended power and influence far beyond any one regime. No matter what any individual thinks about a particular issue this highest court should have zero political ties and should be a constitutional examining body ONLY and not a legislative hammer.

    Liked by 1 person