It’s not news, and is no less reprehensible. The Nebraska legislature is finding it necessary to write law with the specific intent of ending up in front of the Supreme Court of the U.S. While crying over activist judges, and claiming the illegitimacy of legislating from the bench, they are hoping to cause precisely that on abortion. Both sides are guilty of failing to deal with situation properly – with legislation that has even the slightest chance of being considered constitutional. Sadly, in all of this, no one stops to wonder whether or not we really need to be doing this.
But, on Nebraska, I have to say that I remember better drafted pieces of legislation in our National Forensic League competitions. Beyond stating that there were teens in the 1980s capable of writing meaningful legislation, I honestly don’t know what to say. It is mired in repetition, the apparent goal is close any perceived loophole, forcing another junk science finding – this time claiming pain of fetuses – down the throats of the people to prevent women from controlling their own lives. Like all other anti-choice legislation out there, it does not address the obvious consequences of the situation. Beyond stating what penalties doctors should suffer for non-compliance, there is nothing about what the people and government of Nebraska are supposed to do with the resulting unwanted children.
And therein lies the problem. Sure, these legislators care about the fetuses – even try to get people to stop calling them by their scientific names to elicit more emotional responses from the masses. They want to state that it is wrong to inflict pain on fetuses, and have recruited psuedo-scientists to back them in their endeavor. Ironic, since at the same time, we’re faced with headlines about adoptions gone wrong. The worst part is that while they are claiming to take the moral high ground, it is nothing more than hypocritical, sadistic, unethical, unfeeling, and irresponsible posturing. The legislators have no clue about the reality of life, are incapable of understanding the concept of motherhood, and have no desire to follow through on their convictions by providing the life-long support and social programs that would be necessary to deal with an increase in “damaged” population. People from good homes, with good support systems, and no financial difficulties don’t end up seeing the women from their families going to have abortions. It’s the women without help, without money, and without stability in their lives that end up going to the abortion clinics – or they are just plain too young to deal with motherhood in the first place. (Please don’t insult yourself, and bring up the exceptions to that, because they are statistically anomalous.)
So now we get to wait and see who ends up on the bench next. Hopefully the balance will not be tipped, simply because of this sort of case. Sadly, that will leave many other cases – on important issues like financial reform, immigration, and privacy issues beyond abortion – being decided on the liberal side. And a woman’s right to choose will remain a hot button issue when it comes to judicial appointments for the foreseeable future because of the hypocrisy of the radical right-wing and its blind obsession with legislating morality. But it’s worth it, right?
Secured by