Lynne's

Here we go...

• Here's the question: Is it smarter to try to undo the nationwide legal right to abortion with one sweeping law - a "full-frontal attack" - or via a series of smaller laws that chip away at abortion rights and severely restrict access?




• Mississippi lawmakers appear poised to join their South Dakota counterparts in an effort to outlaw virtually all abortions in their states and potentially setting the table for a showdown in the U.S. Supreme Court.

"smarter" isn't exactly the phrase I would use...but I think it's probably a pretty effective strategy. This way the right to life movement can look like it's supporting states' rights in the face of a corrupting Federal power, instead of looking like it's using federal power to undermine civil liberties. Through a refocusing and rhetorical slight of hand, the movement gets to have the same effect as over-ruling Roe v. Wade while gathering mainstream support for appearing to support "choice" (i.e. each individual state's right to choose whether abortion should be legal.)

It is stupid to undo any of it!
Chris

It's never smart to look like a closed-minded ideologue. Not making exceptions for rape and incest is exactly that kind of mistake.

In this debate, you have to appeal for support from the people who are torn up about the issue, and who might lean one way or the other depending on the situation. This legislation will alienate those folks, who will be sympathetic to the plight of rape and incest victims.

I suspect it gives the Justices an easy way out, too.

(btw, "journeyman" is "Q" — I'm in the midst of an identity crisis.)