\nBryan Zepp Jamieson
\nApril 10th 2024
\nwww.zeppscommentaries.online<\/p>\n
\nThe Guardian tried to cover Trump\u2019s ever-shifting stance on abortion rights again today, and wound up trying to pretend this was a coherent response:
\nAsked if Arizona\u2019s ruling went too far, Trump replied: \u201cYeah, they did. That will be straightened out. As you know, it\u2019s all about state\u2019s rights. It will be straightened out. I\u2019m sure the governor and everybody else are going to bring it back into reason and that it will be taken care of, I think, very quickly.\u201d
\nThe Guardian managed to miss that the ruling that caused this week\u2019s shitstorm was an exact example of what happens when the laws regarding abortion are left to \u201cstate\u2019s rights.\u201d Arizona\u2019s supreme court absurdly upheld a law passed by the territorial legislature in 1864, back before Arizona was even a state, that outlawed all abortion other than to save the life of the mother. Other states are considering even disallowing that one life-saving restriction as part of their holy crusade.
\nBut it gets worse. Trump has frequently brayed that he made the overturning of Roe vs. Wade possible. The Guardian failed to mention that.
\nThe Guardian utterly ignored a video Trump made LESS THAN TWO DAYS EARLIER in which he said, “They [Democrats] support abortion up to and even beyond the ninth month. The concept of having an abortion in the later months, and even execution after birth. And that’s exactly what it is. The baby is born, the baby is executed after birth is unacceptable, and almost everyone agrees with that.”
\nThat would be disgraceful coming from a drunken misogynistic wife-beater in a sleazy bar pissed on cheap whiskey. It would even be disgusting coming from an even lower life form, an evangelist drunk on Jesus. This is coming from a thieving, lying sewer rat of a man who wants to be President again.
\nHow much do you have to hate women to even believe that they would cheerfully terminate their pregnancies in the ninth month? Or even the third month? As for women getting abortions \u201cafter the baby is born\u201d that\u2019s a lie on the level of \u201cJews drink the blood of Christian babies.\u201d It\u2019s a disgrace, and no person saying such a thing can lay any claim to decency. Trump certainly cannot. Trump is trash. This proves it.
\nIt misrepresents what Roe vs. Wade stipulated. There\u2019s a reason\u2014and it\u2019s not medical\u2014why people speak of \u201ctrimesters\u201d in pregnancies. No sudden change occurs at the end of 90 days, or 120 days. It\u2019s just that Roe vs. Wade laid out restrictions states could impose on the fundamental right to an abortion: In the first trimester, governments could place no restrictions on women’s ability to choose to abort pregnancies other than imposing minimal medical safeguards, such as requiring abortions to be performed by licensed physicians [per Wikipedia, cited]. In the second trimester, increasing risks to the mother’s health gave states a compelling interest that allowed them to enact medical regulations on abortion procedures so long as they were reasonable and “narrowly tailored” to protecting mothers’ health [per Wikipedia, cited]. And finally, in the final trimester, \u201cFrom the beginning of the third trimester on\u2014the point at which a fetus became viable under the medical technology available in the early 1970s\u2014the Court ruled that a state’s interest in protecting prenatal life became so compelling that it could legally prohibit all abortions except where necessary to protect the mother’s life or health [per Wikipedia, cited].
\nDo I even have to say that no state has ever allowed the killing of an infant under any circumstances? Women-hating drunks might believe it. Religiously insane zealots might believe it. And Donald J. Trump may believe it. But it is not true.
\nEven as many Republicans are suddenly realizing that they went too far in trying to appease the zealots and alienated a huge majority of voters, a lot of them who were fulsomely \u201cpro-life\u201d last year are suddenly \u201cpro-choice\u201d or \u201clet the states decide.\u201d The first is hypocritical. The second is disingenuous as well as hypocritical.
\nAt the time Roe vs. Wade was delivered, only five states had it generally legal (and doctors were free to refuse for any or no reason). In 13 states it was legal in cases of risk to woman’s health, rape or incest, or likely damaged fetus. In 31 states it was legal in cases of risk to woman’s life. And in Pennsylvania it was illegal under all circumstances, a draconian and murderous stance that several states are now avidly pursuing.
\nA lot of Republicans are trying to have their cake and eat it too. They were \u201cpro-life\u201d before, but now they either want states like Arizona or Pennsylvania or Alabama to decide what rights, if any, you can have, or they have pretended to cave entirely and say Arizona went too far. Trump, of course, stands for both sides of that giant back-step.
\nRepublicans are not to be trusted. Zealots are definitely not to be trusted. (Their own bible approves of abortion when infidelity is suspected). And Trump was never trustworthy to begin with.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Bryan Zepp Jamieson April 10th 2024 www.zeppscommentaries.online The Guardian tried to cover Trump\u2019s ever-shifting stance on abortion rights again today, and wound up trying to pretend this was a coherent response: Asked if Arizona\u2019s ruling went too far, Trump replied: \u201cYeah, they did. That will be straightened out. As you know, it\u2019s all about state\u2019s … <\/p>\n