It is the right to privacy that is the common thread. Take away Due Process and the right to decide how and when to have and raise children and the puzzle becomes clear. No abortion? The astronomical cost of children will force mothers to give their children up to strangers. (Alito decried the low ‘supply’ of adoptees in Dobbs). Don’t want your tax dollars to support church schools? You lost that battle when vouchers were approved. There is no private sphere left. The government holds all the rights. There is no part of life in the US that is safe from government control. Authoritarianism is the goal
And that is the way it should be...people should have the right to choose the life that is best for them, which includes, of course, the right to decide when to have children. The Founders of this nation never intended for people to live under government rule, as "we, the people...ordained and established..." the government that is supposed to serve the people's needs and desires for a "...more perfect union..." as we move along.
The pro lifer’s who are for IVF but against abortion don’t understand that abortion care is a big part of IVF treatment. What do they think happens when an embryo doesn’t take? I’ll answer that, a miscarriage and a dilation and curettage if needed. In other words, an abortion. You can’t have one without the other unless you are very lucky and the very first embryonic implantation takes and is able to grow to term.
Yes, exactly. Committed or extreme pro-lifers have opposed abortion, contraception, IVF, and euthanasia because they are all parts of the "Culture of Death." They claim the "Culture of Death" does not honor and respect the human person at all stages of life, but as you say here it's about controlling choices.
The Catholic Church coined the "Culture of Death" decades ago; it might have been John Paul II.
Thank you for writing so clearly about the continuity between supporting both abortion and IVF, something we can trace back more than 50 years. When feminists opened women's health clinics in the 1970s, they knew that women needed supportive places for the full spectrum of reproductive healthcare. We need to think more broadly about how attacks on women are attacks on queer people, too--and have been, for decades.
It is the right to privacy that is the common thread. Take away Due Process and the right to decide how and when to have and raise children and the puzzle becomes clear. No abortion? The astronomical cost of children will force mothers to give their children up to strangers. (Alito decried the low ‘supply’ of adoptees in Dobbs). Don’t want your tax dollars to support church schools? You lost that battle when vouchers were approved. There is no private sphere left. The government holds all the rights. There is no part of life in the US that is safe from government control. Authoritarianism is the goal
New and incisive framing of IVF as part of the continuum of women having the right to plan the best time for them to have children.
It feels like the strategic end goal is: once a man ejaculates in you, you have lost control of your body, your life, your right to make decisions.
And that is the way it should be...people should have the right to choose the life that is best for them, which includes, of course, the right to decide when to have children. The Founders of this nation never intended for people to live under government rule, as "we, the people...ordained and established..." the government that is supposed to serve the people's needs and desires for a "...more perfect union..." as we move along.
The pro lifer’s who are for IVF but against abortion don’t understand that abortion care is a big part of IVF treatment. What do they think happens when an embryo doesn’t take? I’ll answer that, a miscarriage and a dilation and curettage if needed. In other words, an abortion. You can’t have one without the other unless you are very lucky and the very first embryonic implantation takes and is able to grow to term.
Yes, exactly. Committed or extreme pro-lifers have opposed abortion, contraception, IVF, and euthanasia because they are all parts of the "Culture of Death." They claim the "Culture of Death" does not honor and respect the human person at all stages of life, but as you say here it's about controlling choices.
The Catholic Church coined the "Culture of Death" decades ago; it might have been John Paul II.
Thank you for writing so clearly about the continuity between supporting both abortion and IVF, something we can trace back more than 50 years. When feminists opened women's health clinics in the 1970s, they knew that women needed supportive places for the full spectrum of reproductive healthcare. We need to think more broadly about how attacks on women are attacks on queer people, too--and have been, for decades.