SUPREME'S BUFFER ZONE MORE IMPORTANT TO NATION THAN WOMEN'S RIGHTS

Justice Roberts (photo courtesy of Business Week).

Justice Roberts, in response to the question of whether it is problematic to enjoy a 98 foot buffer zone around the Supreme Court while striking down a 35 foot buffer zone for women entering or leaving a women's health clinic, said, not at all, and that it "prevents the appearance of the court as a body swayed by external influence."

He characterizes abortion clinic protesters not as protesters, but as "counselors who seek to engage in personal, caring, consensual conversations with women." And it's obvious, isn't it, that one cannot have a personal, caring, consensual conversation from 35 feet away?

I am disgusted by Roberts' lack of rational thought. He clearly disregarded everything said during arguments in defense of the buffer zone. He clearly thought he knew better, and was more informed of the reality of what women endure when trying to access a women's health clinic than he is. Roberts' statements also make clear his antipathy for women, and for a woman to make a decision about her reproductive health and destiny. Does he think that allowing "sidewalk counselors" (who "advocate" against baby killing with horrid pictures and harsh words of damnation) access to women seeking birth control is going to SWAY them? If so, it is apparent he believes that women need to be swayed.

With his statements, Roberts expresses his underlying belief that women are incapable of acting in their own best interests, or staying the course they've chosen. Women must be both stupid and impressionable. By assuming that protesters intend to engage in meaningful and consensual conversations, and that it may persuade a woman to change her mind about seeking an abortion, he assumes the best about protesters and the worst about women.

After the birth of my son, I had several miscarriages. The last one was particularly awful because my body did not reject the non-viable fetus. That's right. I had a fetus in my womb that was not alive. No fetal heartbeat. My doctor told me my body would reject it, but it wasn't happening. I called the doctor about two weeks later to schedule a D&C (also known as an abortion). My husband and I were sent to the same clinic that performs abortions in our area.

I think it's safe to say my procedure was NOT an abortion in the common use of the word. I think it's safe to say the procedure was medically necessary to prevent my body from going through a complete pregnancy which, because the fetus was dead, was not healthy for me (especially because the birth of my son resulted in primary high blood pressure - 180/120 - stroke numbers). 

Yet, as we walked to the entrance, protesters pressed horrible pictures into my hands; they hollered at me and my husband; they tried to block our ingress to the building bodily, and they moralized. Oh, how they moralized! These people thought they had a right to tell us we were bad people for killing our baby, even though they had absolutely no idea why we were there that day.

So, it is from personal experience that I can assure readers that those people who tried to intimidate me, those fools who knew nothing about me or my circumstances, those aggressive, mean-spirited people trying to impose their will on me, had NO relation to caring people whatsoever. There was no indication of any wish to provide counsel or communicate facts or even beliefs held dear. Their goal was to stop me from entering that building at any cost. They did not care about my doing the "right thing," only that they prevented me from doing the "wrong thing." They are the most self-centered, illogical, self-righteous idiots I have ever seen. They do not protest so much as delight in causing other humans pain and misery. It is my considered opinion that such protesters only feel like it's been a good day when they know they've made women cry, and men angry, and made several people lose their cool.

(I felt pity for any teenage girl trying to pass through the gauntlet I endured. To think she might have to visit the clinic more than once while addressing her gynecological health was outrageous. More than one visit is often necessary if dealing with birth control, STD's, pre-natal appointments, follow-up exams . . . so many things other than abortion.)

As mentioned, my fetus was dead already. Sure, the protesters had no idea. But isn't that the point? That I have a right to seek medical care for reasons of my own, without being harassed and abused by strangers? That if they really, really care about me, and want to counsel me, they would not have behaved with such extreme hostility?

Those people enjoyed my distress, and were tickled to think they had provoked it.

My ugly ordeal, from learning my baby was not going to be born, that my son wasn't going to have a little sister or brother, to facing the bitter hatred of the protesters, occurred before Hill v. Colorado, the first case upholding the notion of an 8 foot buffer zone around women's health clinics. Looking back to that period, I recall murders of abortion doctors and nurses, violence by protesters, and the real worry that women's rights were being completely overlooked. I would have loved being allowed the dignity 8 feet can provide as I lived through that day.

I honestly believe that my right to travel to and from a medical facility are at least as important as the right of a Supreme Court Justice to travel to and from their place of work. I think the staff of women's health clinics have just as much a right to get to their place of work as the Justices do. It is ONLY the entitled ego of Justice Roberts that tells him his right is greater than the rights of others to do the same thing -- to go to work unmolested . . . to live their lives unmolested.

Dear Justice Roberts, 

Climb down off your gilded pedestal and rejoin the world, please, and start looking out for the people of the country. We ought to be able to rely on you to think of the greater good, and not your own biases, when considering any issue of our rights. We ought to be able to rely on you to ferret out facts, if needed, rather than being swayed by emotions and personal beliefs. Worse still, you give the appearance of having been SWAYED by corporate interests, and it pisses us off.

Sincerely,

America

You Can't Be Pro-Life AND Anti-Women's Healthcare

(Photo courtesy of Flickr.)

Abortion has become an issue fraught with venom. People who are against the medical procedure moralize and want to penalize abortion providers, as well as those who have the procedure.  On the other side, Americans who want to continue to allow this Constitutionally protected procedure find themselves demonized by the right.

One would think we have no alternative to abortion for preventing pregnancy.

Aha!  Birth control is a reliable way to prevent pregnancy, but it also has come under the scrutiny of the right.  Historically, the Catholic Church opposed ANY use of birth control. In modern times however, even the Church has taken a less rigid stance, choosing instead to just keep mum.

At the heart of the issue today are the ultra right wing Christian corporatists, who view it as their right to dictate what treatments can be covered by insurance.  Apparently, by virtue of employing you, the Hobby Lobby lobby feels entitled to make your reproductive health choices for you.

Meanwhile, affordable, accessible birth control becomes more and more a thing of the past for some women.  In rural east Texas for example, the right wing 'minding-your-business-for-you' faction has shuttered every single provider of reproductive health services for low-income women, just because SOME of the services they provide relate to abortion.  What about cancer screenings?  What about pre-natal care?  What about a place to pick up free condoms, for that matter?

Places that allowed themselves to moralize away health care for women are likely to see huge increases in their state budget in the coming years. It is also likely they will be unhappy with the consequences of their own actions.  

Funds will be needed for:

• Additional pre-natal care, and labor and delivery costs;
• Feeding additional kids and larger families;
• Welfare programs, in lieu of significant improvement of employment opportunities;
• Child care for the lucky women who manage to get a minimum wage job, since she won't be able to pay the bill;
• Public education, and more schools and teachers; and
• Health care for children.

All of these areas will become more urgent as some states come face to face with their decision to make women’s health care unavailable to millions.  Women with advanced breast and cervical cancer diagnoses will come to the state for help, too late in receiving a diagnosis to make treatment affordable or effective. Advanced disease is very costly to care for, as common sense tells us.

States who failed women are going to see what their actions have brought to bear.  Failing to care for women is mean and unforgivable….and it will end up blowing budgets in many states across America.

It's a fact: