Tom
Doug Henwood wrote:
> X-From_: kpollitt at thenation.com Mon Nov 6 15:10:01 2000
> Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2000 15:07:19 +0000
> From: Katha Pollitt <kpollitt at thenation.com>
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> To: dhenwood at panix.com
> Subject: could you post?
>
> Hi Justin, actually I knew this, and had said this in a much ,longer
> version of the post I sent the list which I cut because it was too long.
> Casey was where the rot set in. But I think the dissenters in Carhart
> wanted to go a step further. they wanted to say: even if your health
> will de damaged, you can't have this procedure. the point about undue
> burden was that they were supposed to be undue -- not determinative of
> whether you could have a procedure or not. Just something you had to go
> through on the way to make you "think' or "be sure" or "have all the
> facts." I believe Casey left the door open for pro-0choicers to
> demonstrate that particular burdens were in fact preventing women from
> getting abortions. (as they are) But all attempts to make this case
> have fallen on deaf ears. Sandra Day O'connor in particular never met a
> burden she didn't like.
> Thing about kennedy is -- there is no way of performing a second or
> third trimester abortion that cannot be made to look gruesome. If he
> thinks "partial birth" is infanticide, why not the alternatives --
> poisoning that same fetus in the womb, or cutting it up into pieces.
> today it may seem to him like the crucial element is that in p-b the
> fetus is partially outside the womb. tomorrow, that may seem just a
> detail.
> of course nobody knows what kennedy would do in a case that offered
> the opportunity to overturn roe. But you should be able to understand
> why not everyone feels as comfy as you, or thinks voting for Nader is
> worth the risk of finding out.
> you know, every time a naderite scoffs at the danger to abortion or SC
> generally from Bush I feel my pro-nader feelings slipping away. It's not
> a winning strategy.
>
> katha
>
> > >Katha,
> > >
> > >Wake up! The Roe trimester framework is dead, killed by Casey, and
> > >replaced with the undue burden standard. Roe is not the law as far
> > >as trimesters goes. Really, abortion rights activists should know
> > >this.
> > >
> > >--Justin Schwartz (a lawyer)
> > >
> > >Katah Pollit says.
> > >
> > >Second, the
> > >>bans
> > >>clearly DO violate Roe, by permitting the criminalization of a procedure
> > >>performed during the second trimester, when such bans are explicitly
> > >>forbidden by Roe, and by disregarding women's health which Roe
> > >>explicitly says must come first at EVERY STAGE of pregnancy. file
> > >>>at
> > >>> http://profiles.msn.com.
> > >>
> > >
> > >_________________________________________________________________________
> > >Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
> > >
> > >Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
> > >http://profiles.msn.com.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <../attachments/20001106/ce6e6035/attachment.htm>