Friday 17 May 2019

The right to choose


I’m not a great student of Geography, but apparently, to get to Alabama you turn left at the end of the 20th century and walk on for 30 years.  When you get there, you’ll find that its State legislature goes back even further in time and is filled with dinosaurs; in this case 99 of them.  74 in Alabama’s House of Representatives and a further 25 in its Senate, who have just determined that it will be illegal to have an abortion in the state.  The ruling didn’t even pass with a slim majority; only three in the House and six in the Senate opposed the bill.

I’m a little apprehensive about commenting on this subject.  It’s a divisive issue and what I’m about to say may be offensive to some.  Of greater concern though, is that I am commenting on something I will never experience.  By default, any empathy that I have can only ever fall short.  It doesn’t mean, though, that I cannot feel and express my outrage at the decision and express my support for women everywhere.

The Alabama bill was near total in its ban.  It makes no exceptions for pregnancy resulting from rape or incest, an insanely wicked position.  There was an attempt to introduce an amendment to the bill in the Senate that would have provided exceptions for victims of rape and incest, but that failed by a vote of 21-11.  In what may come as no surprise whatsoever, all the votes against the amendment were cast by men.  Included among them was Sen. Clyde Chambliss of Prattville, AL; clearly a place named after him, who argued that the ban was still fair to victims of rape and incest because those women would still be allowed to get an abortion until she knows she's pregnant.  Never mind that the victim’s trauma may leave them utterly afraid and paralysed into taking the action that he is suggesting.  It’s an inhuman response from a privileged man who is utterly ignorant of the suffering a rape victim experiences.

Although Kay Ivey, Alabama’s Governor, is a woman, her gender didn’t make her any more sympathetic when she signed the ban into law on Wednesday.  In a statement that evening, Ivey wrote, "Today, I signed into law the Alabama Human Life Protection Act.  To the bill's many supporters, this legislation stands as a powerful testament to Alabamians' deeply held belief that every life is precious & that every life is a sacred gift from God."

She’s the same person who signed the authority to execute Michael Brandon Samra, whose life ended yesterday.  I’m not advocating capital punishment and I don’t condone Michael Samra’s crimes, they were horrendous; he murdered four people including two girls aged six and seven and he should be punished, however it’s the hypocrisy of Governor Ivey’s statement that I find extraordinary.  Clearly not every life is precious and the sacred gift from God that she claims.

Alabama’s Senate Majority Leader, Greg Reed, didn’t do much better when he said the legislature was carrying out “the express will of the people, which is to protect the sanctity of life,” yet according to a Tweet from the think tank Data for Progress, “there is no state in the country where support for banning abortion reaches even 25 percent.”

There is one exception to the ‘Human Life Protection Act’ which is when an “abortion is necessary in order to prevent a serious health risk” to the woman, according to the bill's text.  Presumably the damage to the mental health of a woman who has been raped and is carrying the child of her attacker wouldn’t be considered a ‘serious health risk’.

The bill also criminalises an abortion procedure, classifying it as a Class A felony which could result in a custodial sentence for the doctor performing the act of up to 99 years.  It’s not inconceivable that the punishment meted out to a rapist causing the pregnancy could be shorter than that of the doctor who has terminated it.

Alabama is not alone.  Others are seeking to systematically dismantle women’s rights.  At least 15 other states have either enacted, or propose to enact, abortion bans, underpinning a broad strategy from anti-abortion activists who are seeking to persuade the U.S. Supreme Court to reconsider the 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling, which legalised abortion nationwide.

Americans aren’t remaining silent on the subject, civil right advocates and pro-choice organisations such as the ACLU and Planned Parenthood will mount legal challenges in order to stop the law from taking effect – there are many battles to be fought.  Other groups such as Alabama’s The Yellowhammer Fund and the National Network of AbortionFunds are working to provide finance and support to women who will need to cross state lines to seek lawful abortion procedures.

America’s legislators are failing in their duty to protect women’s health.  They are choosing to pander to a core of constituents with sanctimonious views that suit their interpretation of scripture.  Senator Chambliss stated, “that if we terminate the life of an unborn child, we are putting ourselves in God’s place,” and he doesn’t see any irony in his words.

Sen. Vivian Figures attempted to provide him some perspective when she addressed him, “You don't have to raise that child, you don't have to carry that child, you don't have to provide for that child, you don't have to do anything for that child, but yet you want to make that decision for that woman, that that's what she has to do.”  Perhaps she should have gone a bit further and asked him to imagine if the victim was one of his daughters.

I find it astonishing that the American people are even facing a risk to the landmark legislation that Roe v Wade represents.  How is it that America’s law makers can even contemplate make anachronistic decisions that are morally bankrupt and utterly insensitive to women’s health?  Whilst legislators continue to propose and pass these draconian bills, consider the impact they will have on the health of thousands of American women.

The actions of legislators in Alabama and other states that are threatening the rights of women should be under the microscope, and they should be held to account at the ballot box and removed from office, replaced by officials better equipped to govern in the 21st century.  That is an opportunity that presents itself infrequently and can only be exercised by the local electorate.  There is more though, that can be done.  There are links in this post to the organisations that are resisting the threat to women’s freedom to choose.  If you feel in anyway compelled, give generously.


No comments:

Post a Comment