A now no longer innovative argument is that progressives might benefit if Roe vs. Wade gets defeated. In short it was a somewhat questionable judicial win
So via Yglesias, Scott Lemieux argues against abandoning Roe vs. Wade.
The legislative “compromises” celebrated by the contrarians involve sacrificing the rights of those women and allowing legislators to severely restrict abortion without paying a significant political price.
He also has a multi-part argument that the decision in Roe vs. Wade was not the only justifiable way to resolve the case, but that it nonetheless can certainly be support (part 2 and part 3). I think his judicial argument is persuasive to me but not compelling; however, I find the practical argument genuinely compelling. The compromises an end to Roe vs. Wade offers is one that throws poor women under the bus. Just trading away the parts of abortion rights I find problematic isn’t on the table. Moreover, it is far too easy to trade away rights that I personally don’t need.
Amanda Marcotte had a post where I thought she did a particularly good job of explaining her strong abortion rights position.
I’m one of those who thinks there’s a moral issue when it comes to killing a fetus that’s sentient. I don’t think that that moral issue has any bearing on the legality of abortion,* but I would be ooked severely by a woman who aborted at [like] 30 weeks for no reason. Lucky for me and my potential for ookiness, late term “convenience” abortions don’t happen-most are performed for health reasons...
*Because I think it’s immoral not to donate your organs when you die if you can, but it should be perfectly legal not to. Same principle.
I like that argument even if it’s not where I come down. I think there can still be a distinction, one between omission and commission. Nonetheless it does make quite clear the emphasis on bodily autonomy.
So in short, I think it’s worth fighting for Roe even I don’t find the judicial logic compelling. My analysis of the strategic situation is after the cut.
Anyhow, my general take is that winning controversial rights by Supreme Court decisions that don’t have compelling Constitutional support puts you difficult to defend but highly valuable strategic ground. When rights are won legislatively they tend to be built on majority support or majority acquiescence to an impassioned minority. That’s a fairly easy position to defend. It also can be easier to defend a judicial decision that leads to a demonstration effect. For example, practical experience with gay marriage leads most people to be more comfortable with it.
While the demonstration effect of gay marriage is pretty recent, I think trends in polling probably shows the impact of having many more gays out of the closet:
However, a fair number of women who oppose abortion rights have had abortions. I think the basic logic there tends to be that "I had mine for a good reason and felt bad about it, but these women are doing it flippantly or are having abortion for the wrong reason." But enough pop psychology, here’s the generational breakdown:
So, it isn’t that surprising Roe has been steadily eroded. Nonetheless, the is a wide range of good news for the abortion rights camp. First, the younger generation is socially liberal on most issues, more okay with cohabitation and even out of out of wedlock birth, so they are far less vulnerable to an anti-sex agenda that often ties in with ban abortion politics. Second, RU-486 is changing thingsin part by removing the easily attackable abortion clinic bottleneck. Third in good for everyone abortion rates and unintended pregnancy rates are dropping. They probably still have a ways down to go since they aren’t yet at European rates. I’m guessing innovations like the morning-after pill are part of the story there.
So, someday I’d be willing to work out a compromise with lots of contraception, general early term abortion rights, and abortions for health (including mental health) reasons after that. However, that compromise isn’t on the table. What is being offered is dropping abortion rights for poor women, and that’s not a trade I’ll make.
Comments