(10s) Women, often the enemy of their own progress - Abortion as example

Who are often the biggest enemies of progress for women apart from the obvious men who try to secure their own positions at the top? Indeed, women. 

First of all, I understand why certain people are anti-abortion as they cannot understand that a woman doesn't want her baby, someone who should be someone to look forward to according them. Still, certain of these anti-abortion people are not interested in babies, for them this is a religious political issue to gain votes. It is similar with certain powerful politicians who claim people should not divorce but they have extramarital relations their partner doesn't know about; for the public eye they seem to be faithful but in practice they are not although they are not divorced. The below article discusses why abortion is sometimes important, just as contraceptives are important to pervent unwanted pregnancies, and thus abortions. It also describes how women can be used by men for their century old conservative agenda, even when women think they are in charge. 

The woman responsible for ending nationwide abortion rights: Ms Fitch.

Remember how Mrs Clinton lost from Mr Trump during the presidential election of 2016? If women wanted a woman as president, she should have at least 50% of the votes while also many men voted for her. But, as sufficient numbers of women voted against her because of their conservative views while others didn't vote, Mr Trump became president, even when it seemed he has not as much respect for women as for men. On the other hand, if Mrs Clinton as Secretary of State had stuck to rules such as use the official server and not a private one, she may have had more votes while because of this, she came in the news in a negative way after which many people distrusted her, no matter her earlier achievements and experience.

But, this BBC article describes an example of a woman named Lynn Fitch who climbed the career ladder to disadvantage women, in contrast to Mrs Clinton who progressed women's position. Indeed, both women are in favour of equal pay for men and women while Mississippi, where Ms Fitch was State Treasurer, is the only state where equal pay is still non-existent because conservative men (ie most of the politicians) didn't support Ms Fitch when she wanted to change this inequality. 

Ms Fitch progressed to become Attorney General, a position that allows her to reverse progress for women such as by advocating against abortion rights whereby conservative men support her in this, although she claims her opposition to abortion is because she showed as a career woman that women do not need to choose between work or children. Indeed, as a child of a very rich father who financially supported her election campaigns while another man saw her potential, she was able to be a SINGLE MOTHER who can look after three children AND WORK at the same time. She doesn't bother to understand all those single women without a rich daddy who cannot promote their daughters progress. In fact, Ms Fitch reminds me about UK's PM Thatcher who pleased rich men to advance herself while feminists, those who wanted equal rights between men and women such as in government, did not like her because, as a woman she didn't bring equality but ego-centrism. Once PM Thatcher lost the support of the powerful men, she was out, showing men still ruled. 

But, abortion is often not about a choice between work or children although Conservatives, together with religious leaders, often narrow abortion to only that as Ms Fitch does while many of these Conservatives also oppose contraceptives although that is the solution to avoid unwanted pregnancies. No, abortion is about much more than control by women over their own life and body, and often it is necessary when:

• the pregnancy is a danger to the life of the mother if not ended;

• the unborn baby may have serious malformations or even life-threatening conditions so its life will be seriously impaired or short when the pregnancy continues and is not aborted. By the way, many pregnancies end in a naturally way so nonviable fetuses will not survive. Further, fetuses of people with a genetic risk factor for disability to the child can now be screened to detect any possible genetic disorders in the fertilised egg so that only healthy fetuses will be implanted and thus the children can have a normal life while do not have the genetic defect so it can no longer be given to their children;

• women may have been raped, by family member (incest, see below for note) or strangers, and don't want the baby as that will remind them about the rapist who burdened the woman with his child while is himself absent;

• women may indeed not earn sufficient money to look well after the child - in such cases society should make sure everyone earns a decent living;

• finally, women at the start of a successful career may indeed have no time to look after their child as they first want to think about their studies or work - like so many men do but mostly men are excused when they work long hours to earn good money and become successful in their career.

As a note for religious extremists who even refuse abortion when a woman is raped by a relative, they should know that after the Exodus from Egypt under Moses, explicit prohibitions as ordered by God were written down against incest, something that was quite common in the old days before the Hebrews left Egypt during the Exodus. Because, we know now that incest can be harmful for descendants when a recessive genetic disorder is present in a family so two family members are more likely to both give the mutated gene to the child so the illness may show in the child; it even resulted in the collapse of kingdoms throughout history as royal family members married each other to keep power within the family but than had children with genetic disorders. But, likely, those who claim the child should not be aborted are also likely to condemn the child after it is born. 

Ms Fitch can only imagine her own position as a daughter of wealthy parents with healthy children. And thus, she cannot imagine that a baby may be seriously disabled, even die in the mother so it should be removed ASAP to save the mother's life, even after 15 weeks but before the nine months are over. Indeed, Ms Fitch fights for what will benefit her such as equal pay for men and women who do the same work, after which she can claim to fight for women rights. And I don't deny she may be good in her job, or she wouldn't have been at her current position. But, she can't imagine how to respond outside the normality of her own life. And thus, she is a blessing for conservative men as she speaks for them, so these men can claim they are right as an intelligent woman is on their side. But, if she wants to end abortion, she should also speak strongly in favour of contraceptives, including the so-called "morning-after-pill" that prevents a pregnancy in case "an accident happened" that may otherwise result in an unwanted pregnancy. When she would defend the use of contraceptives, abortion is only needed in emergencies as I listed higher in the first four bullet points and not to end unwanted pregnancies. But, many of these Conservatives who are anti-abortion also oppose birth control centers where people can receive information about contraceptives and how to use them correctly to avoid unwanted pregnancies. Yes, I agree with the so-called pro-life movement that abortion should not be another contraceptive because, as with any other medical intervention, there are risks when women have an abortion. 

(25/09/2022: Addition of text after first publication) That the latest High Court ruling about Joe vs Wade has serious consequences is explained in this short article. For anti-abortion campaigners, a life starts the moment an egg is fertilised by a sperm cell, thus even before implantation. The consequences are that, a child of a rapist cannot be aborted but women who have difficulties to have children in a natural way and need fertility treatment can no longer have this treatment because any fertilised eggs, whether one or 20, whether healthy or ill, cannot be destroyed or that is considered abortion. 

In addition, and another example of how women are used to end achievements that benefit them, is the candidate for a Michigan Senate seat Mrs Jacky Eubanks who campaigns for the eradication of birth control and thus contraceptives whereby for decades they suggested contraceptives are dangerous (yes, there are side-effects). She claims to be a good Christian and thinks that consequence-free sex does not exist whereby "Sex ought to be between one man and one woman in the confines of marriage.” The hypocrisy of these people is beyond belief as many of these Conservatives (mostly Republican) are married more than once, or have mistresses. It is mainly about control over women, just as their enemies the Taliban and ISIS (more general, anyone with another believe) preach. In effect, even their claimed "love" for Israel and Jews only goes as far as their self-interest and may end when they don't need them anymore. (End of addition of text. 25/09/2022)

It seems this movement accelerated after "Obamacare" came into existence because Conservatives don't like it that this legislation gives ordinary people the power to receive healthcare but also because they want to destroy the legacy of a black man who became president as I wrote years ago, a victory they think should never have happened. And thus many of these wealthy Conservatives who are themselves divorcees, often more than once, can't stand it that others also demand power over their own body and take decisions that concern their own life. And thus they condemn others that they want to make their own decisions. And while Conservatives were saying that the Covid-19 vaccines would inject a microchip in our bodies, they now may get data about who completed an abortion via social media; indeed, evil may use tracking devices to control people, not to advance them. 

It is decided

We now know that Ms Fitch, on behalf of many Conservatives (including female Conservative Federal Court judges), won, and thus abortion can become illegal in any US state that decides to make it illegal. Thus, at this moment the dark forces who know no nuances are winning. And possibly with worldwide consequences as often the USA is seen as an example, such as in Scotland, Poland and Hungary. Yes, people can oppose abortion as a contraceptive, but at least it should be possible during emergencies. But, as Supreme Court justice Samuel Alito shows during a speech at a conference in Rome, Italy, everyone is wrong while they are right, on every aspect, including when abortion can save the life of women. He claims that "freedom of religion or belief is a global issue" while he ignores those who don't want to be forced into how he thinks others should think but instead who want to think for themselves. 

In an earlier decision, the Supreme Court said it is unconstitutional that individual states have laws that try to protect the public against people who carry weapons, including semi-automatic weapons such as in New York where people needed a special license to carry a weapon when it is not visible for the public; now new legislation will come into effect to continue to protect New Yorkers such as create gun-free areas (indeed, clever people still exist). Thus, a Supreme Court ruling that intends to harmonise gun legislation in all US states while not every state agrees. 

Now this same Supreme Court says it is unconstitutional that a federal ruling exist that doesn't allow that individual states have their own laws to outlaw abortion, although this ruling also allows that states can allow abortion. Thus, a ruling so legislation concerning abortion becomes different between individual states as long as it allows states to outlaw abortion. 

Immediately after the ruling, the same people who celebrated the federal ruling by the Supreme Court that individual states can have no restrictions to carry weapons, those people celebrated that individual states can have laws that restricts abortion, even make it illegal. Indeed, they are less pro-life than they claim as they don't mind that people who are born may be killed (they are also in favour of the dead penalty). Now we may expect that the next step by the dark conservative forces may be to limit access to contraceptives as they claim that too is not pro-life. And against LGBTQ+ positive legislation to prevent e.g. gay marriages or adoption are possible throughout the USA as Conservatives consider marriage as a sacred bond between a man and a woman, although not sacred enough for many Conservatives to remain faithful until death separates. Further, many developing countries may use this judgement to restrict women rights in their own country. Not good.

And while anti-abortion advocates say this ruling makes sure women don't need to choose between children or a career, more often abortion is not about a choice but about survival when something goes wrong during the pregnancy with the mother or the child, as listed higher. Without this choice, more women may die during pregnancy and childbirth as specialists warn. Also more severely disabled children may be born who not only suffer themselves but also cost families a fortune in a society where good healthcare is often private and thus expensive so families may end in poverty. Therefore, abortion centers are going to court in states where legislation becomes much stricter and abortion even impossible, but often these centers lose the case. Maybe a next step will be that c-sections are no longer allowed as children need to be born in a natural way? Still, in the conservative state of Kansas, a majority of people voted in a referendum against removing the right to abortion from the State Constitution as that is considered too extreme, even for many conservative voters. This gives hope. 

Aftermatch of Supreme Court ruling

With Roe versus Wade gone, each US state can change abortion legislation as they wish, and some states already made it illegal. Thus, in certain states women agree that abortion should be banned as they voted Conservatives into power who they knew are against abortion, so they agree with conservative laws. Other women who don't recognise themselves in such laws can move to more progressive states so the conservative states will further impoverish. The problem is that US states with a low number of inhabitants have a disproportionate number of members in Congress, and thus these less populated conservative states have a larger influence, including on the judges. But, for women to return to their state after an abortion may not be possible as Conservatives want to use social media to track women's activities. Indeed, Conservatives and their conspiracy theory supporters feared healthcare professionals may implant a microchip because they understand that they may do it, but not to help people but instead track women, migrants,... .

Still, maybe it is good that abortion is no longer at federal level after the old Court ruling Roe versus Wade, but instead at state level so Conservatives don't feel ignored when in their states they can vote into law conservative policies while other states can be more progressive. In the end, when future mothers die because they can't have abortion, than people who are now anti-abortion may accept that sometimes abortion is needed while contraceptives and education how to use them should be available to prevent unwanted pregnancies and thus abortions. In progressive states, both contraceptives and abortion can still be available.