When the U.S. Supreme Court legalized abortion, they did not rule on the morality, ethics, religious value or rightness/wrongness of abortion: in fact, the ruling wasn’t entirely about abortion at all. Let’s all take a moment to put our heads back together, since many of yours have likely just exploded.
All crania super-glued back together now? Excellent. Lots of folks think of a woman’s right to choose as it has been defined and discussed by TV preachers and glory-hound politicians, many of whom know nothing about the actual ruling (or pretend not to): they frame it as a Godless, liberal, genocidal baby-killing spree imposed upon the Godly American majority by a Satanic Supreme Court, or some similar load of twaddle.
In reality, the ruling hinged upon something far more basic: men cannot get pregnant, and there is no Constitutional way to force them to be accountable towards the women they impregnate or the children they help to create. As the late-night infomercial boyos like to say, “it’s just that simple”.
What the Supremes found was this: lots of men lie to women in order to get laid. Wow, who’d a thunk that? And if they get a woman pregnant, they likewise lie about taking care of the woman and child (or just take off). This leaves the woman completely and totally responsible for the consequences of an act that two people consented to (rape and other sex crimes that result in pregnancy are for another post), because the baby is inside her and she pretty much has to deal with that reality. Meanwhile the man can either be responsible, or not.
In nature, men can choose whether or not to deal with a pregnancy they help create, and women cannot (that’s the real meaning behind “pro-choice”). Simply put: Nature has created an inequality when it comes to pregnancy. The Supreme Court recognized this, and THAT is where Roe V. Wade came from. Giving women the same amount of choice as men. Equality, in other words. You know, that teenytiny little concept that our whole nation was founded upon? Yeah, that equality.
Yes, I hear you say, we have court-ordered child support: surely that addresses the situation? It might help, if there were any way to guarantee such payments: in reality, many men evade such court orders or simply don’t pay up when they are ordered to. Nor does child support cover all of the burdens of single parenthood.
Mr. Blunt and Cranky has imagined lots of fun ways to make men deal with their sexual behavior: surgical insertion of bowling balls into their intestines so that they can feel a bit of the pregnancy experience; forced labor on chain-gangs for 18 years with all proceeds going to the mother and child; all sorts of amusing notions, none of which, alas, are the least bit constitutional.
(One should notice that almost none of the recent restrictive state and local laws regarding abortion say thing one about making men deal with their share of responsibility. These laws take away the rights of women while doing nothing to address the fundamental inequity that the Supreme Court sought to rectify. Small wonder, since most of these bills were written by male politicians, who are evidently lying, thoughtless, irresponsible dicks, taking care of themselves and their like-minded brethren.)
When and if a way can be found to make 100 percent of men as 100 percent responsible as women for the children they create, perhaps Roe V Wade might no longer be necessary. Until then, while so many men remain a**holes about sex and reproduction, it is indispensable to the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness of women (remember them? They’re the majority of Americans).
= new reply since forum marked as read
