A world without Roe is, for women, a world of social standing cut in half

[Nevilledog]

https://www.editorialboard.com/a-world-without-roe-is-for-women-a-world-of-social-standing-cut-in-half/


There’s a way of looking at reproductive rights that doesn’t get the attention it deserves. With these rights, women have control over their bodies, yes, but they have something bigger – standing in our society.

Access to abortion is more than “freedom to choose.” It means parity, in theory, with men. It means having the political equality of a full and free citizen. It’s the Declaration of Independence made manifest.

The status of women (and anyone who might get pregnant) depends on the right to privacy. Take that away and you take standing away. In hearing Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the Supreme Court appears ready to rescind privacy so that governments can regulate anything done privately.

With that, the status of women will be degraded. In some cases, it will be gone in all but name. And with that, the court will begin an era closer to the age of disenfranchisement, before universal suffrage. As Lisa Needham told me, “women will be second-class citizens.”

*snip*

[Solly Mack]

1. K&R

[Joinfortmill]

2. Been there. Not going back

[crickets]

3. True. K&R for visibility.

[highplainsdem]

4. Too true.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

5. Thank you.

Whenever I come across someone totally opposed to abortion, I want to ask some questions.

Have you ever been pregnant?

Have you ever been pregnant but the father is no longer around?

Have you ever been pregnant and had the fetus diagnosed with a condition incompatible with life?

Have you ever been pregnant while in high school or college or graduate school?

Have you ever been pregnant?

Why do you think your answers to these questions should be the same for everyone else?

[niyad]

6. and the WAR ON WOMEN continues apace. Would you consider cross-posting this in

Women's Rights And Issues? Thanks in advance.

[Nevilledog]

7. Sure!