If a woman's right to privacy is denied, what else follows?
It was the 18th of April in 1775 that Paul Revere began his famous ride, alerting the citizens of Lexington and Concord that the British were coming with the intent to snuff out the Americans' quest for control over their own lives. What followed was "the shot heard round the world." So the question is: is the leaked draft of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision overturning the rights protected by Roe v. Wade our own Paul Revere moment? Is this the shot that reverberates across the length and breadth of this country? Is it a wake-up call? If a woman's right to privacy (which includes control over her own body) is denied, what else follows? The right to obtain and use contraceptives? Gay marriage? Interracial marriage? Religious freedom? And more?
Lillian Tamayo in her guest column, "Roe opinion is bad news for Florida," May 5, mentions Florida governor Ron DeSantis and his talk about "the free state of Florida." This reference brings to mind George Orwell's epic novel 1984 where he introduces the term "doublespeak." Gov. DeSantis wants to control virtually every aspect of our lives, including what the Walt Disney company can say as well as the content of what math textbooks can contain in our public schools and uses doublespeak (euphemisms, unsupported generalizations, deliberate ambiguity and outright lies) to sell his authoritarian agenda. As Robert Reisch just recently noted: "If you outlaw abortions, ban mask mandates, dictate what educators can teach in schools, and stop people from voting, you're not the party of "limited government."
I might add, when the current Republican Party went to war against the principle of "one person, one vote, majority rule," it began its war against democracy itself, a system that anticipates disagreement, discord and dissension, but which resolves differences peacefully in a process called elections. The first peaceful transfer of political power in the world took place right here in the United States in 1801 when departing President John Adams transferred the reins of political power over to Thomas Jefferson, representing a rival political party. It's this process that Donald Trump and his supporters wish to bring to an end.
Bill Cotterell, in his May 5 column "Politics in the court? We're shocked" concludes that what is coming down from the U.S. Supreme Court regarding abortion is "… just a lamentable reality." He's right, of course, and the track that we've been on for the past 30 years is more and more authoritarian rule that is making the rich richer and the very broad base at the bottom poorer. Given just a little more rope, Republican politicians will deliver to their benefactors what they've been advocating for some time now - the end of Social Security and Medicare. If you're not in the top 10% of wealth and rely on Social Security and Medicare in one form or another, be afraid.
Will the decision coming down from the U.S. Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade be enough to alert Americans that for the vast majority of us, today's Republican Party is not our friend? Time - the immediate near future - of course, is going to tell and the stakes couldn't be higher.
Richard Sutherland, J.D. is a 1973 graduate of Harvard Law School as well as founder and past president of the Lake Ashton Democratic Club.
This article originally appeared on The Ledger: If a woman's right to privacy is denied, what else follows?
