Why It’s Impossible For Brett Kavanaugh To Make Abortion Illegal

[Chris]

Well, the Interweb is aflutter over the nomination of Kavanaugh and what might happen with abortion law.

I doubt much of anything. The law will continue to be a cover for weakening morality.

Why It’s Impossible For Brett Kavanaugh To Make Abortion Illegal opens with one side:

Here’s NARAL, declaring on Twitter that Kavanaugh would be “the fifth vote to overturn and gut Roe v. Wade, criminalize abortion and punish women.”

Again, I doubt it. Roberts runs a tight, narrow court.

The article then presents the other side:

ormer Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards appeared on “Hardball” to proclaim “abortion existed before Roe and it was simply illegal and unsafe and young, healthy women died routinely in emergency rooms across this country and that’s what we’re looking at again if this court tips to the other side.”

Let's look at this worn out scare tactic.

The GUTTMACHERINSTITUTE reports Lessons from Before Roe: Will Past be Prologue?

ILLEGAL ABORTIONS WERE COMMON

Estimates of the number of illegal abortions in the 1950s and 1960s ranged from 200,000 to 1.2 million per year. One analysis, extrapolating from data from North Carolina, concluded that an estimated 829,000 illegal or self-induced abortions occurred in 1967.

One stark indication of the prevalence of illegal abortion was the death toll. In 1930, abortion was listed as the official cause of death for almost 2,700 women—nearly one-fifth (18%) of maternal deaths recorded in that year. The death toll had declined to just under 1,700 by 1940, and to just over 300 by 1950 (most likely because of the introduction of antibiotics in the 1940s, which permitted more effective treatment of the infections that frequently developed after illegal abortion). By 1965, the number of deaths due to illegal abortion had fallen to just under 200, but illegal abortion still accounted for 17% of all deaths attributed to pregnancy and childbirth that year. And these are just the number that were officially reported; the actual number was likely much higher.

...

Abortion Mortality

The number of deaths from abortion has declined dramatically since Roe v. Wade.

There are two deceptions here.

One is the isolation of abortion-related deaths. For instance, the worst year reported claims: "In 1930, abortion was listed as the official cause of death for almost 2,700 women—nearly one-fifth (18%) of maternal deaths recorded in that year." OK, but in 1930, the CDC reports in Leading Causes of Death, 1900-1998 (.pdf) the number of deaths due to all causes was 1,327,240. Abortion-related deaths accounted for just 0.2%. From 1900 to 1998 abortion is never a leading cause by a long shot.

While the bell tolls for all and no death insignificant, the rported numbers are out of all proportion.

The other decption is in the chart. Why do they start with the year 1965? Why not go back to the year 1930 and include that year along with 1940, 1950, and show that "By 1965, the number of deaths due to illegal abortion had fallen" all along without legalizing abortion?

Abortion-related deaths did not declne because of legalization, which is absurd on the face of it, but because of advances in medical science.

Why be deceptive? Because there are those who are more than willing to fall for it.

The other side shouldn't scare people that Kavanaugh will suddenly change things.

[midcan5]

The Federalist Society and other 'dark money' judicial organizations are governed by the elite for the elite. A conservative SCOTUS is simply the legislative branch of the oligarchs, the corporatist, the bigoted, read its history if you doubt. The white working class plays along and then wonders why they have lost all power.

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/22715946-injustices

"Few American institutions have inflicted greater suffering on ordinary people than the Supreme Court of the United States. Since its inception, the justices of the Supreme Court have shaped a nation where children toiled in coal mines, where Americans could be forced into camps because of their race, and where a woman could be sterilized against her will by state law."


What will happen with Kavanaugh is the rights of women will be diminished through other decisions in conservative states. That has happened for years now. The rich will find a doctor or travel overseas, the poor will suffer as they always have. Nothing new under the sun, see these links.


http://www.feminist.com/resources/ou.../abortion.html


http://bostonreview.net/BR20.3/thomson.php


http://harpers.org/blog/2015/08/we-do-abortions-here/

http://harpers.org/archive/1987/10/w...-nurses-story/


Trump's immigration action is an act of evil, to separate a child because their parent wants a better life for them is un-American, un-Christian, and simply shows the lack of heart and compassion of America today. And the right wing's apologies for this evil demonstrates a lack of reason that should surprise everyone. "The trouble with Eichmann was precisely that so many were like him, and that the many were neither perverted nor sadistic, that they were, and still are, terribly and terrifyingly normal. From the viewpoint of our legal institutions and of our moral standards of judgment, this normality was much more terrifying than all the atrocities put together." Hannah Arendt

[Chris]

The Federalist Society and other 'dark money' ...

I'll ask you to kindly post on topic.

[Common]

yanno everyone wants to make his appt about abortion, I dont give a $#@! about abortion, everything else that goes to the supreme court is more important, like illegal immigration, 2nd amendment

Abortion has been a dumbass back and forth political bull$#@! football for over 40 yrs, time for it to go away

[Chris]

yanno everyone wants to make his appt about abortion, I dont give a $#@! about abortion, everything else that goes to the supreme court is more important, like illegal immigration, 2nd amendment

Abortion has been a dumbass back and forth political bull$#@! football for over 40 yrs, time for it to go away

That's what I see here, just a back and forth by NARAL and PP over a judge who has little to say on the matter.

[pjohns]

Why do they start with the year 1965?

It is possible that this is because that was the year of the Supreme Court's decision in Griswold v. Connecticut (which legalized access to contraception; and which was the antecedent to Roe v. Wade).

But it is more likely that it is merely an arbitrarily selected year, since it appears to support the argument being proposed brtter than any other year would.

[pjohns]

A conservative SCOTUS is simply the legislative branch of the oligarchs, the corporatist, the bigoted, read its history if you doubt.

This is the error of many: on the left; but on the right also.

The High Court (or any other court, for that matter) is not really divided into "liberal" and "conservative" jurists. Rather, it is divided into textualists and originalists (on the one hand) and living-document theorists (on the other hand).

The latter are activists; they are principally concerned with the end result.

The former do not make their rulings according to the end result; rather, they simply interpret the Constitution, as its authors (apparently) originally intended.

And some people find this to be...well, deeply troubling; and downright retrograde...