To the Editor:
I would like to respond to the letters written by Mr. Dresser (“On the draft decision overturning Roe v. Wade”) and Ms. Kinsman (“Supreme Court decision should be challenged”) in regard to the Roe v. Wade leak. Mr. Dresser wants to look at the issue from a historian’s perspective. I totally agree that the Dred Scott and Brown decisions restricted the rights of a certain group of individuals.Those decisions were reversed because they were found to be unconstitutional based on the fact that all citizens should have equal rights. The only thing the Alito leak shows was that they are basing their opinion on the facts that it was a bad constitutional opinion. You stated that the leak “denies the right to abortion for all women under all circumstances …” That is not true. You stated, “If a woman is forced to bear an unwanted child, how will that impact her life?” I would hope that you might do some research on how having an abortion has impacted a woman’s life, or how in very difficult circumstances when a woman decides to carry her baby full-term, how carrying that baby to full term has impacted their life.
As a historian, I’m sure you know that the Supreme Court does not make laws, Congress does. Later in your letter you did state, “Congress must legalize a woman’s right to choose.” That would be the democratic process. But you only stated that after all of the scare tactics and the untruth that the Supreme Court will deny all abortions. That brings me to your last example of hindering rights, the 19th Amendment. The 19th Amendment was voted on by representatives of the people, so ultimately by the people, and it was abolished by the 21st Amendment, also voted on. That is the democratic process in action.
Ms. Kinsman also uses scare tactics to try and show that a world without abortion would be “discrimination toward young women.” Do men have any rights or responsibilities when it comes to abortion? She makes it sound tragic and horrific for women. Reminder: The Supreme
Court will not do away with abortion. It puts it into the democratic process, where the people get to vote. It appears to me that her opinion of a woman is very degrading. She is stating that if a woman is forced to carry an unexpected child, she will probably have a “desolate future.” I have more faith in women to be able to navigate the world if they have an unexpected pregnancy. Adoption is never mentioned as an alternative. Right now there are more pregnancy centers that help pregnant women than there are abortion clinics.
These centers do not just help women until the baby is born, but for many years after. That is easily researched. She mentions the fact that men are privileged to have vasectomies. Last I knew, it was not against the law for women to have their tubes tied. Finally, she says that the Supreme Court would be enforcing their religious values. Another reminder, they are not doing away with abortion. They are stating that the Supreme Court made a poor ruling and they are turning the issue back to the voters, where it belongs.
I am against abortion for the one fact that it is the killing of a human being. Just as the overturning of the Dred Scott decision was based on the fact that Blacks were also very much human beings. Mr. Dresser said, “The fight has just begun.” I disagree, because this “fight” has been going on for 50 years, and even with the Supreme Court ruling, the “fight” will not end. Rather than a fight, I prefer to call it a debate. How great would it be if the different sides could debate the issue rather than vilify those who don’t see it the same way? I will continue to try and change the hearts of those who do not see the humanity in the precious unborn child.
Donna Gazaille
Edgartown