as always, it's all about the courts

May 24, 2005 23:00

Random rant that I have to get out of my system first: I hate TV news and try to avoid it as much as possible. But I admit my curiosity was piqued when I saw an ad talking about how more teenage girls are going on the Pill but not because of sex. So I just watched 30 minutes of the local Fox news, which had all kinds of "scary" reports about different things that could be a threat to you and your kids (from raw sewage in the water supply to sex offenders), as well as the ubiquitous segments about the crazy things your tax dollars get spent on, to see this segment which was little more than anecdote about how some teenage girls are going on the Pill to avoid getting their period during important events. There wasn't even any evidence of this beyond some girls saying they've heard of other girls at their school doing this. And this counts as news? Besides the fact that it's not likely to be a huge health threat anyway. Total craziness.

So, yes, on to the political happenings of the last few days. I am still in shock that the Supreme Court is taking up the NH parental notification case. We never in a million years thought that they would but knew that both sides were going to file the obligatory appeals. It pains me to see all these anti-choice legislators (many of whom aren't even in office anymore because they lost in the last election) feeling vindicated by this. Interestingly, the attorney general filed the appeal against the wishes of the new governor, and she is two months past the end of her term. So if the governor appoints a new attorney general who shares his opinion and doesn't agree with the appeal, the state can abandon the appeal. Of course, it's politically very dicey for the moderate Democratic governor.

Of course, my favorite NH paper had a great editorial about it today. But in the bigger picture, I wonder what it all means. Is the Supreme Court going to change the standard that abortion laws should have a health exception? I certainly hope not - it seems like the minimum respect that should be accorded to women. (Of course, my personal beliefs go a lot farther, but respect for a woman's health should be a minimum standard.) Or are they looking to clarify for certain that the "undue burden" standard of Casey is the one that should be used in looking at abortion laws?

I don't know the answers, as no one does right now, but it certainly makes my head hurt. And it makes me feel antsy yet again that I'm not more thoroughly engaged on a day-to-day basis in these issues that have been my life's work for the last five years. Yes, the time off has been very good for me; I still do some consulting and volunteering for Planned Parenthood; and I'm going to school to be a better advocate for women's health, but it's hard for me to be on the sidelines like this.

The fight over the nuclear option made me feel that way, too. It seems so strange that it's over - it just feels so surreal. It was such a big issue for so long, and now it's done. In the long run, it's probably a good thing that they came to a deal, but it's awful that Owen, Brown, and Myers are going to be confirmed - they really are so far out of the mainstream that's it hard to even fathom. But the Democrats just have too few votes and too few tools at their disposal so it's good I guess that the filibuster hasn't been completely obliterated. I really wonder if Frist had the votes, but I guess we'll never know now.

Okay, time to watch the Daily Show for some comic relief, especially since I haven't seen it for the past two weeks with my illness forcing me to go to bed long before 11PM.
Previous post Next post
Up