LEGALIZED ABORTION AT STAKE IN THE 2008 ELECTION

What follows are not scare tactics but facts. And when taken together they present a stark picture of what a John McCain presidency would mean to a woman's right to choose to have an abortion. Anyone who is pro-choice should think long and hard before casting a vote for John McCain.

Note that the next president will undoubtedly appoint at least one but probably a handful of Supreme Court justices and that many of the likely vacancies will come from the four member moderate/pro-legalized abortion wing. Justice Stevens is 88 years old, Justice Ginsburg is 75 years old and has fought cancer, Justice Breyer is 69 years old and Justice Souter is 68 years old and allegedly longs to retire to his New Hampshire home.

Meanwhile, as Jeffrey Toobin (a moderate Supreme Court expert) recently wrote in a must read article about a McCain speech addressed to the religious right, legalized abortion is on the table in a McCain presidency:

"In short, this one passage in McCain's speech amounted to a dog whistle for the right -- an implicit promise that he will appoint Justices who will eliminate the right to privacy, permit states to ban abortion, and allow the execution of teen-agers."

And McCain has told Fox News: "I do not support Roe vs. Wade. It should be overturned."

The importance of these statements and beliefs cannot be understated because the Supreme Court already consists of four conservative radicals who, along with conservative Judge Anthony Kennedy, have been chipping away at legalized abortion over the last few years. The replacement of just one judge from the liberal/moderate pro-abortion wing with a McCain appointee would tip the balance and all but guarantee the end of legalized abortion in most states, if not the country.

An April 2007 Court decision that criminalized partial birth abortion evidenced the radicalness of the ultra-conservative Court members:

"Respect for human life finds an ultimate expression in the bond of love the mother has for her child. The Act recognizes this reality as well. Whether to have an abortion requires a difficult and painful moral decision... While we find no reliable data to measure the phenomenon, it seems unexceptionable to conclude some women come to regret their choice to abort the infant life they once created and sustained. Severe depression and loss of esteem can follow."

I wrote the following about the decision in April 2007:

"Isn't that special! Five old, rich, white (with all apologies to Clarence Thomas), Jesus fearing/loving men have decided that they know what's best for women who otherwise may come to regret their choices in life and suffer depression. In other words, women are dumb and need men to tell them what to do. Interestingly, the Paternal Five are not troubled by the lack of reliable evidence supporting their position because it seems unexceptional to themselves. Or, who needs evidence when something is so plain to the eye (of at least 55% of Supreme Court Justices). Ladies and gentlemen, announcing the arrival of the faith based Supreme Court!"

As it turns out, there is plenty of evidence that the Paternal Five are full of it. Earlier this month the American Psychological Association released a study that debunked much of the Supreme Court's reasoning, concluding that a single abortion does not pose a mental health threat to women.

Facts be damned! The conservative justices were making a clear statement that they know what is best for women and that that does not include abortion. And the only thing standing in the way of criminalizing abortion altogether is one more radical judge -- the kind that John McCain has repeatedly promised to appoint to the Supreme Court:

"McCain has cited Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito as being his model justices, and he's also praised Scalia, one of the most conservative justices ever to sit on the Supreme Court."

And McCain's views were shaped long before he picked the ultra-conservative Christianist Sarah Palin as his running mate. The even more radical Palin believes that abortion should only be legal when a mother's life is at stake. Thus, she is against abortion even in cases of incest and rape. Palin has stated that she would choose life even if her own daughter was raped.

Making matters even worse, both McCain and Palin support policies that make it more likely that women will have unplanned pregnancies. They both support abstinence only education which has been proven ineffective by government studies. And they oppose the much more effective safe-sex education. Sadly, such policy choices have also led to a huge increase in teenage STD cases. In fact, 26% of teenage girls are infected with an STD according to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC).

McCain has also worked to cut funding for family planning and opposes requiring insurance companies to cover prescription birth control. And as Governor, Palin has cut funds that would help teenage mothers.

So grim is the McCain/Palin ticket for supporters of women's rights issues that the co-chair of Republicans For Choice said the following this week:

"Well, it means we have to work harder. We have to make sure that the McCain/Palin administration... don't make these issues, the social issues, the central portion of their policy agenda, as Bush has done. We have a lot of work to do. We don't believe McCain would -- he really doesn't care much about the issue, even though he has an almost perfect pro-life voting record."

And on the prospect of overturning Roe v. Wade:

"The only thing that gives me comfort is that Democrats are going to win the Senate."

But it is the president who nominates Supreme Court judges. And while it is true that the Senate must confirm those picks, it is worth noting that four Democrats voted for Samuel Alito in 2006 and 22 Democrats voted for John Roberts in 2005. Further, there is no guarantee that Democrats will hold onto the Senate in two years.

Finally, McCain's pick of Palin to be his VP all but proves that he is beholden to the religious right whose top desire is to outlaw abortion. McCain's top two choices for vice president -- Joe Lieberman and Tom Ridge -- were shot down by the religious right because of their pro-abortion stances. So McCain settled on Palin, a choice which has been met with overwhelming approval by James Dobson and other far right religious extremists.

Make no mistake about it, legalized abortion as we know it is at stake in this election.

Comments

[NH]

This is the stupidist post I ever read.

Since when does the personal view of a Vice President have any bearing on the current LAW?

And what about all the years of Republicans in the White House where the law was never changed?

You people are beyond hysterical.

Yep, we are going to make a law to execute teenagers.
HOW ON EARTH CAN ANYONE TAKE THIS KIND OF NONSENSE SERIOUSLY?

GO SARAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[HPM]

While I would normally thank you for the compliment -- "stupidest post [you] ever read" would be quite the accomplishment -- my enthusiasm is tempered by the nonsense you wrote in the rest of your comment.

For starters, the piece is almost entirely about John McCain, not Sarah Palin. So, I can't help but question why you would ask, how "does the personal view of a Vice President have any bearing on the current Law?"

Beyond that, I'm not sure why you would qualify Palin's views with the word "personal." Certainly her "personal" views on abortion, like all her personal views, shape the way she governs. And I, in fact, list a few of her policy decisions that were impacted by her "personal" views on abortion.

Also, it seems odd that anyone who has lived through the last eight years would question wanting to know the views of the VP. It would seem to me that the country would be in a far better place if Dick Cheney's views on executive power, secrecy and war had been explored to a greater extent.

Also, as the post clearly states, abortion law most assuredly has changed in "all the years of Republicans in the White House." And that change has been most dramatic since Justice Alito was sworn in in 2006 giving the Supreme Court four radically conservative justices.

Should John McCain win the election and appoint the type of justice he has repeatedly said he would appoint, then that would make five justice adamantly against abortion and the law would likely change even more dramatically.

John McCain is a 72 year old cancer survivor who was tortured for years of his life. Actuarial charts suggest their is a greater than 25% chance that he would die in office and those don't take the years of torture into account. Thus, it would be negligent to not look at the views of McCain's VP as you suggest.

Finally, you exhibit considerable ignorance when you write, "Yep, we are going to make a law to execute teenagers. HOW ON EARTH CAN ANYONE TAKE THIS KIND OF NONSENSE SERIOUSLY."

Well, it wasn't until March 2005 - prior to the appointment of Justices Roberts and Alito who most assuredly are for executing teenagers - that the Supreme Court finally ruled that executing juveniles is cruel and unusual punishment. Thus, with the addition of those two conservative justices and another one appointed by McCain, there is little doubt that that ruling will be revisited.

Up until that ruling the US was the only democracy in the world to execute teenagers. Other countries that execute juveniles include Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Yemen.

The point is that we have executed juveniles until recently and many in the country, led by the religious right, want us to resume that practice. So what you call nonsense is fact.

Based on all of your errors, faulty reasoning and utter nonsense the only question I have is how do you expect anyone to take you seriously?

[Diana Hsieh]

Thank you for your support of abortion rights. Even aside from the national election, abortion is a HUGE issue in Colorado this election, thanks to Amendment 48. If it passes, that measure would give fertilized eggs (!!) all the legal rights of persons. The hope of the religious right is that the measure, if it passes, will serve as a basis on which to directly challenge Roe.

The Coalition for Secular Government ( http://www.seculargovernment.us ) just published an issue paper on it "Amendment 48 Is Anti-Life: Why It Matters That a Fertilized Egg Is Not a Person" by Ari Armstrong and myself. It's available at:

http://www.seculargovernment.us/docs/a48.pdf

The paper discusses some of the horrific implications of this proposed amendment, including its effects on the legality of abortion, birth control, and in vitro fertilization. It also offers a strong defense of abortion rights based on the biological facts of pregnancy.

Diana Hsieh
Founder, Coalition for Secular Government
http://www.seculargovernment.us