Baby Products

“Sin, young man, is when you treat people like things. Including yourself. That’s what sin is.”

― Terry Pratchett, Carpe Jugulum

As an unaffiliated voter, I’ve often said you can know partisanship is inherently toxic, and still recognize when one party has reached peak toxicity. I was only wrong in underestimating how much lower people could sink. The Supreme Court is poised to take personal medical decisions regarding reproductive healthcare away from individuals and “return” them to the States, which only began interfering around the time women sought the right to vote. Common law allowed women to end pregnancies up until the quickening when the Constitution was being written; abortion went unmentioned (as did women). It was their business, not a political matter.

(Religious texts generally prioritize the lives of mothers or say little on the subject, but it’s moot because the United States is not a theocracy.)

The draft regarding a challenge to Roe Vs. Wade, which had effectively restored reproductive healthcare to its original common law status, leaked a month early. Someone noted how strange it is the government seemed unprepared for a coup attempt even us nobodies saw coming, but they had barriers around the Supreme Court within an hour of the “leak”. Some of the same pundits who accuse women and children of lying en masse made baseless accusations regarding the identity of the leaker. Others countered the only strategic benefit was locking justices to their votes. The performative outrage feels like a distraction from the contents.

Alito, a so-called “originalist” judge (as dishonest a brand as “pro-life”), cites a 17th century English judge named Matthew Hale. The Englishman considered all rape accusations suspect, felt wives could not deny sex, and sentenced two women accused of witchcraft to death. The case served as the basis for the Salem Witch Trials. Yes, after years of the last president claiming any investigation into his criminal endeavors was a “witch hunt” (most witch hunts targeted independent women), his appointments built a partisan court with the audacity to reference a literal witch hunter to revoke bodily autonomy.

Some think people should not have more children than they can afford, and say women should “close their legs” if they don’t want any/more children, but SCOTUS references a man who didn’t think women have the right to deny sex. They claim they want women to take personal responsibility, but really they expect them to be available for both sex and pregnancy on demand. Another big tell is when these people mock women who do want to abstain. As men in particular mock women for being “hysterical” (historically used to diminish women’s health concerns) it feels important to note the leading cause of death in pregnancy is homicide, often linked to domestic violence.

The SCOTUS draft notes a decline in the “domestic supply of infants” available for adoption (bad enough in the CDC report, but even worse in this context). Their rationale not only reduces infants to a commodity and smacks of human trafficking, but it also erases what they might call the “surplus” of children who age out of foster care for failing to meet consumer specifications. Part of the decline in adoptable infants is due to a decline in teen pregnancy rates and better support for families. Their win is a loss for the adoption industry, but the goal should be providing children with homes, not providing homes with children. I’m reminded of the private prison industry, which measures success not by crime reduction but by maximizing occupancy.

SCOTUS already turned a blind eye to Texas placing bounties on anyone who helps someone seek an abortion, including child rape victims, just as Texas leadership turns a blind eye to its ongoing foster care crisis, which leads to more victims, abusers, or both. Other states have passed similar laws. Sexual predators can sue for parental rights in many of these states. Meanwhile, activists still fight to end child marriage. For the past few months, politicians have accused public schools of grooming as part of the ongoing push for privatization – even as they embolden or empower those who violate children. It’s not the educator that respects a child’s humanity we need to worry about, but creepy administrators who demand to see their private parts and sketchy politicians who allow child marriage or force pregnancy.

Feigning concern for the rights of the unborn just to revoke them upon menses is nonsensical at best, but there’s little evidence the goal is preventing abortion rather than regulating reproduction. Politicians have expressed interest in overturning Griswold vs. Connecticut next, which determined states could not ban married couples from using contraceptives. People who do want children get denied necessary medical treatment when pregnancies fail. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t. As the saying goes, the cruelty is the point.

You can save lives without harming people. Here’s some resources with important information and helpful ways to support human rights: