Would overturning Roe save democracy?

[PA Mamma]

Would overturning Roe save democracy?

There's a lot to pick through in David Brooks column today on Roe vs. Wade. (Shorter: "If we had just handed women's bodies over to the whims of majority rule, this country wouldn't have had all these problems over the years.") But let's just settle in on the key phrase:


If had remained in the legislatures, we would have seen a series of state-by-state compromises reflecting the views of the centrist majority that's always existed on this issue.

Now in some senses this is right, and liberals have suffered somewhat for relying on the courts; they've grown fat and lazy, which has made it easier for the pro-life movement to chip away at abortion rights in the legislature. But that's very different from arguing that Roe has torn this country apart, which seems plainly wrong. As Barbara O'Brien writes, well before Roe vs. Wade the hardliners on both sides "were engaging in the same shouting-past-each-other arguments they engaged in after Roe v. Wade." Indeed, I'm not sure what country Brooks thinks he's living in if he thinks that state legislatures always produce "compromise" laws that everyone views as legitimate. (Would clinic-bombers go quiet down if "fetus murder" was enshrined by legislatures instead of the courts? Of course not.)

Even more interesting, though, is his contention that there's a "centrist majority" view on the issue. What exactly, I've always wondered, is that view? Polling usually shows that around one-fourth of Americans favor "abortion on demand," a small percentage think it should be banned outright, and a majority of Americans think it should be legal with certain restrictions. No doubt that middle position is what Brooks had in mind....

http://www.motherjones.com/mojoblog/archives/2005/04/would_overturni.html

[anitar1]

1. Overturning Roe will not "save" Democracy.

[Dr.Phool]

2. No it wouldn't

These bastards can smell a Theocracy, and they won't stop a just Roe v Wade. They've got a major, largely hidden agenda.

[unblock]

3. overturning roe v. wade would DESTROY democracy

it would reward the neo-cons and theocrats for every criminal and fraudulent and deceptive and immoral trick and stunt they've pulled to date.

it would only embolden them.

no. saving democracy involves dealing a series of MAJOR defeats and embarassments, and, hopefully, prison sentences, to these banana republican crooks and scumbags.

[gumby]

4. Why should women's freedom

and their ability to retain equal status in this highly capitalistic society depend on which state they live in?

Brooks clearly has little regard for women.

[DELUSIONAL]

5. exactly!

They won't be happy until they get their theocracy to rule our lives -- including what we think. Just believe. . . . and turn over your money to the church.

[ArmchairActivist]

6. Michael Berube on Bobo's piece:

Short, but good...

http://www.michaelberube.com/index.php/weblog/browns_birth_and_death/

[PA Mamma]

7. Thanks...

I saw a comment like that on MahaBlog but that was great !

[rodeodance]

8. silly question

[iverglas]

9. yup -- if "democracy" is defined as "mob rule"

Like it or not (speaking to the liberal-hating bunch, of course), what the US has is liberal democracy.

Majority rule subject to minority rights, paradoxical as it all is.

In a liberal democracy, people's fundamental rights -- the ones that tend to be enshrined in constitutions -- are not compromised. They are not, and cannot be, bargained or bartered away by anyone -- they're inalienable, y'know? And they most certainly cannot be bargained or bartered away by some third party.

I'll give you Joe's freedom of speech, if you give me something I want. Nah, don't think so; Joe's freedom of speech isn't yours to sell.

I'll give you my liberty, if you pay me enough. Nope, that would be slavery, and we don't allow it.

I'll give you everybody else's freedom of religion, if you give me a tax cut. Suuuure, buddy.

Somebody will hand over women's reproductive rights -- the reproductive rights of all women, including those who don't want to hand their own over, and those not yet even born, in return for ... what, anyhow? What is anyone, let alone women, being offered in return for this?

Nothing, it looks like. Just compliance with some non-existent "majority rules" rule. The attainment of some perversion of "democracy", in which might makes right, and everybody's rights are subject to the whims of someone else.

Those parodies of the column linked to in this thread -- using the Brown and Loving cases in place of Roe -- were absolutely bang on. Of course, the parodies might work better if they were to employ a case about some fundamental right that racists and bigots and misogynists actually care about ...

The courts are there precisely to enforce the principles set out in the constitution; without the courts, the constitution would be a meaningless bit of paper. Just like any contracts that individuals might enter into -- contractual rights would mean nothing either if the courts were not available to enforce them.

One has to wonder exactly what the "centrist majority" imagines the purpose of its constitution is, and what it might be thinking and doing if it were its rights that it was proposed to put to a vote.

[samilib]

11. Well said.

[samilib]

10. Roe has not torn this country apart.

Intolerance has torn this country apart.

Most of the polls that I read say that the majority of Americans want abortion to stay legal. The idea that we need to overturn it to save our democracy is saying that we need to let the minority trample the rights of the majority in order to keep our democracy; meaning it wouldn't be keeping our democracy at all. There are cases where the majority should be ruled against by the courts for the purpose of protecting the rights of the minority, but this isn't one of those cases.

If Roe was overturned today, I guarantee you that millions of Americans would be angered. Even more would take to the streets as soon as the results of overturning Roe became public.

I do believe that we should use Congress for our political purposes more once we get a Democratic majority again.

[Solly Mack]

12. Abortion has yet to bring civilization to an end

It doesn't harm democracy.
It can't cripple a republic.
It doesn't bring society to it's knees

What it does do is offer up women a choice..regarding their life and their medical options

That's all it does.