Letters: I remember 'horror stories of girls who died in desperate circumstances' before Roe
- Oops!Something went wrong.Please try again later.
Abortion is no easy matter
The leaked draft of Justice Alito's majority opinion in the Mississippi abortion case potentially shows us the demise of Roe v. Wade, and puts another extreme, conservative judicial nail in the coffin of stare decisis. Sad day for American women.
More: Who gets abortions in Ohio? Unmarried, twenty-somethings in their first trimester.
Male dominated legislatures in nearly half the United States are enacting more and more repressive anti-abortion legislation (with virtually no exceptions, even in cases of rape or incest). It's part of a larger migration towards the medieval that seems to fuel all Republican policy these days.
I grew up in the 60s, pre-Roe, and can remember horror stories of girls who died in desperate circumstances—having sought abortions from back alley practitioners (who operated without medical license and appropriate follow-up care), or at the hands of people who performed coat-hanger abortions.
A girl from my high school died in a botched abortion; in college, a sorority sister carried an unwanted baby to term, felt herself a pariah, and eventually died of suicide.
Other women, faced with what they perceived as no option, might as well have—they turned to drugs or alcohol.
Nobody goes blithely off, la, la, la, saying: I think I'll run over to the clinic and have an abortion today.
It's an unbelievably difficult choice, but it should remain a choice. A woman's choice.
Candy Canzoneri, Westerville
Babies born as a result of rape matter
'In the May 4 letter "Why support ‘archaic and misogynistic views'?" Mark Hiser ridiculed Rep. Jean Schmidt for her views on the opportunities afforded to a child who is not the victim of abortion when rape is involved.
He used the usual term misogynistic among others when debasing her views.
More: Letters: Ohio Rep. Jean Schmidt lacks 'empathy, humanity and sensibility' about rape, women
I would suggest that he and other like-minded people read the story of Kathy Barnette, who is running in a Pennsylvania primary election for a Senate seat.
She is a child of an 11 year old rape victim, an unthinkable, heinous act. She is also the first from her family to graduate from college, no small feat considering the poverty she came from. Were there somber issues for Barnette and her family to deal with as she grew up? It would be naïve to think otherwise.
But I think we all know the answer if we asked her if she's glad to be alive. Critics will say that was her mother's and family's choice and everyone should have the choice. But do the babies have any choice?
Brad Pence, Columbus
Don't be surprised if radical Supreme Court turn clock back to1896
I suppose when the radical right Supreme Court is done dismantling Roe v. Wade, they will not stop until they have reinstated Plessy v. Ferguson (a landmark 1896 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld the constitutionality of racial segregation under the “separate but equal” doctrine) and Dred Scott v. Sandford (a decade-long fight for freedom by a Black enslaved man named Dred Scott) too.
To heck with “rights”, long live injustice.
Mike Howard, Westerville
MORE TO THE CONVERSATION:: Sign up for our opinion newsletter
More: How to submit a letter to the editor for The Columbus Dispatch
Abortions should be 'procedure harder to need, not harder to get'
Recent news indicates the Supreme Court may reverse Roe v. Wade and radically change abortion access in much of the nation. Many conservative Americans and those who consider themselves pro-life will regard this as a great victory.
But is it?
I would say no. It won't reduce the number of abortions that happen, only the number of safe, medically-supervised procedures.
Those who feel abortion is their only option will now travel to jurisdictions where the procedure is legal, obtain the procedure in the black market, or try DIY options.
More: Crassness, Trump's antic would be worth if Supreme Court overturns abortion| Opinion
It is clear that to actually reduce the actual number of abortions, we must make the procedure harder to need, not harder to get. Pro-choice and pro-life factions spend so much effort shouting past each other that a real corrective to the situation gets ignored.
To be both pro-life and and pro-choice, both sides must stop arguing how, if or when- and put real effort into prevention. Real prevention is not blanket prohibition, but effective health education, access to contraception and economic stability.
Mark Passerrello, Westerville
No one said 'you' have to get an abortion
If you don’t support abortion, don’t have one. It’s that simple.
Why would your beliefs usurp someone else’s?
I would never own a gun, but my opinion would never cancel out the 2nd amendment. I am heterosexual but why would I ever dictate how anyone views their own sexual orientation?
More: I'm the mom I am today because I chose an abortion at 19
Why do some people believe that their opinions should be law and others wrong? Your religious beliefs are entirely yours and in America, you are entitled to them absolutely. However, you are not entitled to inflict your beliefs on others.
Over 70% of Americans do not want Roe rescinded. So why is this even an issue?
Debbie Fox, Bexley
Things would be different Clinton won, Ginsburg's ego was smaller
As we watch women's rights now begin to disappear with LBGTQ rights undoubtedly soon to follow it certainly is ironic that, amongst others, three women are in large part responsible.
First, Hillary Clinton who so massively misjudged her opponent that she actually lost to Donald Trump, second, Ruth Bader Ginsburg who's apparently huge ego kept her from resigning during the Obama Administration despite being terminally ill and third, Susan Collins who actually believed a Republican Supreme Court nominees' lies about Roe being settled law.
Had Clinton won, or had we actually run a popular candidate, the Court would be left leaning for a generation or two.
Had Ginsburg resigned, it would at least have one more decent justice. Had Trump's last nominee not been approved overnight we could have called the Merrick Garland rule on Mitch McConnell.
Jerome N. Smith, Columbus
Abortion is not about woman's bodies
The Dispatch's printing of Bob Englehart's cartoon re: the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade majority opinion only serves to misrepresent and inflame the issue.
It is not about women's bodies or even about abortion but about the Constitution.
The Court's majority opinion centers on the impropriety of the issue being decided by the Supreme Court in the first place.
It rightfully belongs to the states to decide. That means voters are the arbiters. President Joe Biden further politicizes and inflames the debate by warning Americans that this is only the beginning of individual rights being taken away.
One would think that the president would want to calm the furor rather than further antagonize and threaten citizens.
Suzanne Purdy, Dublin
This article originally appeared on The Columbus Dispatch: Letters: Things would be different if Hillary Clinton won
