Supreme Court Rhetoric Reveals Deep ‘Hostility’ To Women’s Rights

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/18/supreme-court-hostility/

Supreme Court Rhetoric Reveals Deep ‘Hostility’ To Women’s Rights

scaliaup.gif In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court today upheld a nationwide ban on “partial birth” abortion. The nation’s leading group of professionals providing health care for women, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, opposes this law because the banned procedure is often the best option for women.

Yet the majority — Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, and Alito — dismiss the medical community’s opinion and instead adopt political rhetoric intended to appeal to the right-wing base. Some examples:

Abortion methods vary depending to some extent on the preferences of the physician and, of course, on the term of the pregnancy and the resulting stage of the unborn child’s development. (p. 3)

The law need not give abortion doctors unfettered choice in the course of their medical practice, nor should it elevate their status above other physicians in the medical community. (p. 33)

When standard medical options are available, mere convenience does not suffice to displace them. (p. 37)

As Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg explains in her dissent, that the majority opinion’s language seems to be based on a deep hostility to women’s rights, rather than on sound scientific evidence or jurisprudence:

The Court’s hostility to the right Roe and Casey secured is not concealed. Throughout, the opinion refers to obstetrician- gynecologists and surgeons who perform abortions not by the titles of their medical specialties, but by the pejorative label “abortion doctor.” A fetus is described as an “”unborn child,”” and as a “”baby,” second-trimester, dissenting previability abortions are referred to as ““late-term,” and the reasoned medical judgments of highly trained doctors are dismissed as “”preferences”” motivated by ““mere convenience.”

The majority “also rejected claims that the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act is so vaguely worded it would force doctors to forgo a commonly used, constitutionally protected abortion technique for fear of prosecution.”

is whatever that doctor says it is." Basically, she meant that should a need for this procedure exist, it will be performed, yet simply be labeled something else on the paperwork. She also stated that you'd be astounded how many abortions get labeled D&Cs.
I am hoping this is true, because if it's not, a lot of women are going to die.

It was horrific for her and her husband. It was her life or her dying 7 month old fetus. They made the right choice. It is horrible to imagine she could not today. :(

I think they really want to see statistics on women who will now die as a result of not getting medical treatment she will need.

I think they think these women don't exist.

They just want the Already Living to die off
so they can have Fresh Young Meat to brainwash, use and exploit.

And yes they are Fuckers to the worst degree.

I am enraged at what they did and they way they said it. Women who could die count for freaking ZERO. Fuck them and their sick RW ideas.

Or else you deeply misunderstand the true nature of misogyny.

Misogyny is hatred of women. That would be everything about them, everything that they are, everything that they do. But most of all, in so many instances, hatred of their sexuality.

They don't consider women who'll die as non-existent, they are subconsciously (and maybe even consciously!) eager to see women die to punish them for their sexuality. That is the ONLY reason at all to oppose abortion: women have sex and must bear the burden (punishment) of having a child and carrying it to term, OR, they must die.