Red Swingline

7 Responses to “On Alito…”

1. Lawtonfunk Says:
   November 3rd, 2005 at 10:36 am

   This is an honest question. I say that because I have been quite sarcastic, but why shouldn’t a woman be required to tell her husband she’s having an abortion?

2. awethern Says:
   November 3rd, 2005 at 11:23 am

   I think it boils down to law. Morally speaking, we should all be able to assume said discussion has taken place. We all know there are instances where it can’t, at least in reasonable manner. So, it comes down to what the state should and should not be able to do, legally (again, we can’t legislate morality). It’s the same arguement as a Parental Licensing program. Some people just shouldn’t be allowed to procreate. Outside of the people directly involved, who decides who can make babies and who can’t? How can you enforce it?

   To get back to it, the rights of the father and mother must be on as level ground as possible. But pregnancy is different in that the father has a stake, but is not directly connected to the child in the same manner as the mother, nor does he have to directly deal with the outcome either way (indirectly there is much dealing). An example: A couple have been trying to prevent contraception, but a failure has taken place, and wife is pregnant (or, if you will, woman is pregnant – I don’t think the act of marriage over-rules this one). Man says that abortion is an abomination, and even though he doesn’t want the kid, wants her to come to term and give kid up for adoption. In this scenario (man doesn’t want kid, woman doesn’t want kid), how can you FORCE her to bring an unwanted child into the world just because the man said so?
   It’s different if Man WANTS kid, and is willing to legally bind himself to said kid for the life of the kid. Even in that situation, can you really justify a FORCED pregnancy? Who is ultimately in charge of the womb? That’s what it boils down to. IF it is anyone OTHER then the woman in which the womb is located, then the ideas of personhood as we know it must change. Afterall, can my girlfriend/wife/anyone I am involved with FORCE me to get snipped (without committing a crime first)? You can’t have one without the other…

3. Lawtonfunk Says:
   November 3rd, 2005 at 11:31 am

   I will agree that we can’t legislate morality. That could quickley lead to a Big Brother country.

   It is shameful that a man who gets aids while cheating on his wife does not have to tell her. Or from my point of view, a woman can murder her child without telling the father.

   However, if we really start to legislate morality, the next thing you know, we’ll both be at those camps I spoke of earliers learning how to concentrate.

4. awethern Says:
   November 3rd, 2005 at 1:14 pm

   I tell ya, if there were a way to stamp people on the forehead and deam them fit for parenthood, a lot of these issues go away. But that would be completely and utterly unenforcable, not to mention Big Brother to the utmost degree. We all know what happened (and may continue) in China with the “One Child” policy and the treatment of female babies. The same things is happening in India right now, with Dowry becomming a major issue.

   Now, we CAN stamp foreheads and deam people fit for certain types of clothing, or lack thereof. I hereby submit my application to be a final chooser, not a pre-screener…

5. zamoose Says:
   November 3rd, 2005 at 2:51 pm

   I think Jeff Goldstein has possibly one of the best summations on the issue, inasmuch as it accurately captures my feelings, albeit in a far more verbose and logically-coherent fashion.

   His concluding twothree paragraphs are well worth reproducing (no pun intended!) in full:

   Again, Judge Alito’s dissent in Casey was based on strictly legal considerations (and, in particular, on a precise reading of contemporaneous law on abortion restrictions); so if we wish to have the debate on the righteousness of notification statutes, we should be doing so outside of the context of Alito’s nomination.

   Once there, any serious debate is going to require good faith on both sides. Drum and Franke-Ruta—in assigning to their opponents cartoon motives more properly relegated to the kinds patriarchal boogeymen who haunt the dreams of belligerent, second-wave gender feminists like Amanda Marcotte—miss the opportunity to have a discussion on reproductive issues that proceeds from the neutral ground where men’s interests and concerns are allowed into the equation, not simply dismissed as some fantastical desire to control a woman’s uterus.

   Sadly, though, I believe that reducing the debate to cartoon terms is precislely the point. Whether or not spousal notification is a good or practical compromise (and do remember that notification is distinct from consent or permission, words you’ve likely heard many on the left use to frame the issue) in reproductive and “property” rights disputes should be an open question, one that is hashed out inside an informed and honest debate; alas, some folks committed to women’s identity politics would rather just do away with the difficult work of having to weigh competing rights and interests, and instead assert the primacy of their rights by cowing their opponents into retreat by leveling charges of misogyny, or by insisting that the very desire for discourse or legal redress is, in its very nature, part of a conspiracy to subjugate women and re-institutionalize a system of perfidious male domination.

6. awethern Says:
   November 3rd, 2005 at 8:58 pm

   Now if I understand this correctly, he is saying we should talk about it; but without context. I don’t know why he brings up the “framing of the issue” and “some folks…” That’s like me saying, “Now not taking the south into account, everyone can agree that…”

   For the record, the wifey doesn’t necessarily agree with me. She has said in no uncertain terms that if I got snipped (something which I plan on doing at some point) without her permission (her word), whe would shoot me. Likewise, she is very hard pressed to agree to ANY reason for abortion. She did stutter and give up at my “test” above.

   I don’t have a womb. I don’t think I ever will have the opportunity, and even if I did, I really don’t think I will partake. So I don’t think I have any right telling anyone who does have one what to do with theirs, just like they don’t have a right to order me and my prostate around. Or for that matter, any of my organs. They are mine to take care of, for better or worse, and I live with the consequences, and the effects of my actions caused to others. I am free. Who am I to deny that to others?

7. Lawtonfunk Says:
   November 4th, 2005 at 8:46 am

   Batman!

Leave a Reply

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website