Important Announcement

See here for an important message regarding the community which has become a read-only site as of October 31.

 
Post Reply
Page 1 of 2  •  1 2 Next
Switch to Forum Live View Justice Ginsburg: Reproductive Choice Is an Empty Concept for Low-Income Women
2 years ago  ::  Aug 03, 2015 - 3:42PM #1
Merope
Posts: 14,591

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said at a Duke Law event Wednesday evening that the concept of reproductive choice is an ephemeral one for low-income women who live in states that pass laws limiting access to abortion, as they may not be able to afford to travel to a state with less onerous restrictions.  Justice Ginsburg noted that the lack of reproductive freedom is a remaining barrier to gender parity.


Advocacy organizations and groups that fund abortions have pushed the idea that being pro-choice includes advocating for an end to the decades-old Hyde Amendment, which bans federal funds from going toward Medicaid coverage for abortion except in limited circumstances.  One in four women on Medicaid who would have abortions if the Hyde Amendment didn't exist instead carry an unwanted pregnancy to term because of the prohibitive cost of the procedure, the Guttmacher Institute notes.


Ginsburg’s remarks were all the more salient given that laws further restricting access to abortion in Mississippi and Texas are waiting to be picked up by the Supreme Court.  Legislation requiring clinics to meet the design and building standards of ambulatory surgical centers and mandating that providers have admitting privileges at local hospitals have caused clinics to close.  The laws have also forced patients to resort to methods they relied on before Roe, such as visiting illegal providers, attempting to self-induce their abortions, or crossing the border to Mexico.


The justice alluded to this new reality as Mississippi’s last clinic fights to remain open and providers address restrictions that could close all but nine or 10 clinics in Texas:

There’s a sorry situation in the United States, which is essentially that poor women don’t have choice. Women of means do. They will, always. Let’s assume Roe v. Wade were overruled and we were going back to each state for itself, well, any woman who could travel from her home state to a state that provides access to abortion, and those states never go back to old ways … So if you can afford a plane ticket, a train ticket or even a bus ticket you can control your own destiny but if you’re locked into your native state then maybe you can’t. That we have one law for women of means and another for poor women is not a satisfactory situation.


Your thoughts?


www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/ruth-bader-...

Merope | Beliefnet Community Manager
Problems? Send a message to Beliefnet_community
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Aug 03, 2015 - 3:45PM #2
Merope
Posts: 14,591

The last time the Supreme Court delineated what kinds of abortion laws were acceptable was in the 1992 Planned Parenthood v. Casey decision, in which the majority ruled that states can regulate the procedure unless doing so places an “undue burden” on the constitutional rights of abortion-seeking patients.


Ginsburg’s analysis of the challenges low-income women face will be at issue if any four of the court’s justices vote to hear the Mississippi or Texas cases.  When a panel of the New Orleans-based US Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit largely upheld Texas’ contested provisions this spring, those judges ruled that the state’s law did not place an undue burden on the constitutional right to abortion, since women in the western part of Texas could just travel across state lines to obtain an abortion in New Mexico.  That ruling contradicted an earlier decision from a different panel of the same appeals court saying Mississippi couldn’t shut down its last clinic and transfer its constitutional responsibilities to other states.


www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/ruth-bader-...

Merope | Beliefnet Community Manager
Problems? Send a message to Beliefnet_community
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Aug 07, 2015 - 2:06AM #3
in_my_opinion
Posts: 4,107

Part of the issue is that there doesn't seem to be anybody willing to fund poor women by paying for their abortions or providing free clinics that will do it.


There seems to be a great deal of fighting for that right through advocacy; but putting money there, not so much.


The other thing is people who don't want their taxes to go towards what vehemently bothers their conscience.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Aug 07, 2015 - 11:34AM #4
TemplarS
Posts: 7,522

This is true but I don't know why people seem surprised.


Be it women's health care, or any other health care, or education, or housing and neighborhood safety, or most other things- the poor always end up at the bottom of the list.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Aug 07, 2015 - 3:59PM #5
Druac
Posts: 14,509

We are in dire need of more female leadership like Ginsburg's. She rocks!


+1 to just about everything she has to say!

Jesus Is My Savior...He Saves Me From REALITY!
---------------------------------------------
We created god in our own image and likeness!
[George Carlin]
---------------------------------------------
"Reason & Logic" - A Damn Good Slogan!
---------------------------------------------
"Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion." - Steven Weinberg, an American physicist
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Aug 07, 2015 - 7:04PM #6
TPaine
Posts: 10,308

Aug 7, 2015 -- 3:59PM, Druac wrote:


We are in dire need of more female leadership like Ginsburg's. She rocks!


+1 to just about everything she has to say!



I agree. I had to change my list of whom I consider to be the five best SCOTUS Justices in history to add her to the list.

"To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason, and whose philosophy consists in holding humanity in contempt, is like administering medicine to the dead, or endeavoring to convert an atheist by scripture."-- Thomas Paine: The Crisis No. V (March 21, 1778)
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Aug 07, 2015 - 8:38PM #7
mountain_man
Posts: 44,029

Aug 7, 2015 -- 2:06AM, in_my_opinion wrote:

Part of the issue is that there doesn't seem to be anybody willing to fund poor women by paying for their abortions or providing free clinics that will do it.


The main issue is that immoral people do not care about the woman. They only care about money or forcing her to give birth.


There seems to be a great deal of fighting for that right through advocacy; but putting money there, not so much.


The other thing is people who don't want their taxes to go towards what vehemently bothers their conscience.


Those people are gravely, and purposely, mistaken. No government money goes towards abortions. Why do the pro birthers have to lie about this?

Dave - Just a Man in the Mountains.

There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.   Isaac Asimov
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Aug 08, 2015 - 11:56AM #8
SeraphimR
Posts: 12,687

Aug 7, 2015 -- 11:34AM, TemplarS wrote:


This is true but I don't know why people seem surprised.


Be it women's health care, or any other health care, or education, or housing and neighborhood safety, or most other things- the poor always end up at the bottom of the list.




Yes, that is what being poor means.

“So long as there is squalor in the world, those obsessed with social justice feel obliged not only to live in it themselves but also to spread it evenly.”

http://takimag.com/article/the_ugly_truth_theodore_dalrymple
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Aug 08, 2015 - 6:44PM #9
Druac
Posts: 14,509

Aug 8, 2015 -- 11:56AM, SeraphimR wrote:


Aug 7, 2015 -- 11:34AM, TemplarS wrote:


This is true but I don't know why people seem surprised.


Be it women's health care, or any other health care, or education, or housing and neighborhood safety, or most other things- the poor always end up at the bottom of the list.




Yes, that is what being poor means.




But it doesn't have to. However, you are correct, that IS what it means in a selfish and greedy society like ours.

Jesus Is My Savior...He Saves Me From REALITY!
---------------------------------------------
We created god in our own image and likeness!
[George Carlin]
---------------------------------------------
"Reason & Logic" - A Damn Good Slogan!
---------------------------------------------
"Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion." - Steven Weinberg, an American physicist
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Aug 08, 2015 - 7:04PM #10
SeraphimR
Posts: 12,687

Aug 8, 2015 -- 6:44PM, Druac wrote:


Aug 8, 2015 -- 11:56AM, SeraphimR wrote:


Aug 7, 2015 -- 11:34AM, TemplarS wrote:


This is true but I don't know why people seem surprised.


Be it women's health care, or any other health care, or education, or housing and neighborhood safety, or most other things- the poor always end up at the bottom of the list.




Yes, that is what being poor means.




But it doesn't have to. However, you are correct, that IS what it means in a selfish and greedy society like ours.




What else can it mean?

“So long as there is squalor in the world, those obsessed with social justice feel obliged not only to live in it themselves but also to spread it evenly.”

http://takimag.com/article/the_ugly_truth_theodore_dalrymple
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 1 of 2  •  1 2 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook