Untitled

on the topic of Roe v. Wade

I tried (and failed all day) to put together a somewhat scholarly take on what recently happened with the SCOTUS, Roe v. Wade, and the imbalance of humanity and power in this country. We saw what feels like a climactic statement on what’s truly important to the lawmakers and policy enforcers of the USA. I have too much emotion to be scholarly right now, so I’ll just riff.

Roe v. Wade, a landmark court case in 1973, was reversed with the majority opinion stating that abortion law is something that the States should handle. The argument also cites that there appears to be no mention of abortion in the Constitution that is the framework for a lawful society.

There are some facts and bits of thought-jerky that should be noted, chewed on, coughed up, reiterated, and noted again:

1. The Constitution was written by a group of wealthy, white, slave-owning men as a protection against the past. In this case, the past is a tyrannical Britain that enforced unfair laws on its subjects. Today, the recent past is [facetiously] the rise of the minority, the gay agenda, the revenge of the poor people, and the invasion of the illegal aliens.

2. The Constitution was designed to be elastic and flexible. It contains a “Necessary and Proper” clause, which grants Congress (but also the courts in a lot of cases) the power to legislate based on logically induced solutions to problems unlisted in the Constitution itself. Roe v. Wade in 1973 hinged on the Due Process clause, but a lot of the time, the “Necessary and Proper” clause allows the government to draw connections between things unmentioned in the actual text and the real issues our modern society faces. I say this because our current bench is majority strict constructionists, who adhere to the original text without modern interpretation.

3. It’s 235 years old. A lot of things have changed since then. I wish I could list off the technological feats we’ve achieved, but to give you an idea: Ben Franklin was famous for tying a skeleton key to a kite in order to get zapped by lightning in his “study” of electricity. Recently, a Google software engineer was released on paid leave after claims that their AI had the consciousness of a 9 year old girl. Somewhat significant, I’d say, especially when this 235 year old document is reviewed by the aforementioned strict constructionists.

What’s concerning to me is that the people who hold the power to overturn the reversal (if that’s even possible, I’m not a lawyer or a legislative analyst) can simply plug their ears, close their eyes, and blah blah blah us until we quit. The Supreme Court justices are not elected officials, they are appointed by those in power. They have no constituents to represent. Their responsibility is often with their party. They serve life terms, are extremely difficult to remove, and have the power to affect how millions of people live their lives.

Oh but we can just vote for people who promise to appoint the officials we want, right? That’s the Kool-Aid they serve at every convention. Name 1 candidate you want for a Justice seat on the Supreme Court… I can’t either. Voter turn-out and political participation is an entirely different conversation, though.

There are so many literary, philosophical, political, historical, and medical connections informing the discussion around Roe v. Wade and more broadly, body autonomy. It’s important to mention that undoing the protection for safe and legal abortion is an attack on many different kinds of people. It’s an issue that belongs to anyone who cares about their body and their privacy regardless of gender, sex, sexuality, race, and ethnicity. Remember that Roe v. Wade’s original argument was based on privacy. The linchpin was abortion, but overturning it makes room for many more invasive policies about sex, marriage, gender specific surgeries, and other things you definitely don’t want Uncle Sam’s disgusting sausage fingers to grope.

It’s exactly what we were warned about. We could talk about Huxley and state-sponsored medical mandates, we could bring in Brecht and talk about capital-informed decision making, we could invite Orwell and identify American institutions of dystopia. These dead people obviously won’t be voting in the next election, but they recorded ideas on paper that can make us all feel a little less alone, a little less doomed.

And that’s the point. I’m sure most of us can agree that overturning Roe v. Wade is not a net gain for American society. It’s frustrating for me because it’s such an individual issue that affects millions at a time. When 5 people named Clarence Thomas, Samuel A. Alito, Jr., Neil M. Gorsuch, Brett M. Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett decide what you get to do with your body, it’s a personal attack. It’s simultaneously 5 vs. 1 and 5 vs. millions.

It’s a situation that makes you, the one affected, feel as small as you possibly can. I’m here to tell you that it doesn’t have to be like that. There are intelligent people, both alive and dead, that are participating in this conversation. You’re not alone and you have a voice. Use it when you’re ready.

If you don’t have an opinion, form one. It’s really not enough to throw your hands up and “stay out of it.” This is an issue that affects your wife, your girlfriend, your partner, your fucking daughter. It affects your mom, sister, brother, the person you flirted with at the bar last weekend. Be empathic to the best of your ability and please, please listen to the stories, fears, and solutions of those who have been and will become victims of this abhorrent ruling.