Death penalty? The rule of law run amuck, that is what this is with dangerous consequences everyday as we hear new stories. I used to be enthralled with this country for its adherence to the 'rule of law" because law is for the common good, is logical, rational, and by definition must result in predictable outcomes as in conditions under A or B are the same, the outcomes for A or B will be the same. That is the ideal which has been deformed beyond recognition in this trump era with the culprits using the 'rule of law' for egregious and nefarious purposes. I have also realized courts cannot be the only answer to negate the adversity we find ourselves in. We need a strong arbiter for the truth in the press and the media especially with all the disinformation, which holds the culprits accountable, shames them to do the right thing -- you may say they are shameless but how did they become shameless? Because they were left to their own devices without consequences for much too long. The press and the media are not doing their job. Consider right now the 14 amendment debate. The plain language says insurrection and we all saw what happened on Jan 6 and any objective person would label it as a coup, an insurrection but since there was no strong press and media reporting to shame and hold the the party apparatus that was responsible to account, we now need the courts to decide whether it was that, rule of law run amuck. Imagine if there was a press that blared headlines that made Lindsey Graham and his ilk run for the hills, and a party that said enough is enough and policed its own, the perversion to look for the courts to bring accountability would be unnecessary.
Well said Padma. Appreciate your insight and you are right if no one calls a person out for egregious conduct they will keep on going. In my personal experience with bullies it only take a few well versed and vocal people to take them down. Remove the wind from their sails. We cannot trust the media to do it. They are owned by wealthy people who have agendas in my opinion.
There was a small window right after Jan 6 when the Rs were really afraid that it had gone too far but where was the press/media... I was watching every bit and nothing bad happened to them or their party that they went back to their old ways. We need to shame the press/media for not doing the right thing. We need to hold them accountable. Everything has become litigious that their part is not getting the attention it deserves and they are not held responsible. Courts should be the last resort when public opinion about bad politics can bring accountability.
To illustrate my point, NYT has an article where it calls the 14th amendment "an obscure constitutional amendment enacted after the civil war" and Lawrence had this history professor last night who described the circumstances that the amendment came into being and they were hardly obscure. They expressly wanted to prevent a second insurrection and now we want the corrupt court to decide if it was an insurrection when we all saw what happened on Jan 6. Frankly, I have not seen such occurrences in other countries, third world countries and every American should be ashamed that Jan 6 ever happened on their soil. Instead we have let the grifters and enablers distort the picture to save their ass.
The NYT is the paper of defending the status quo, they hire so many awful writers, with truly backward attitudes, that don't belong spewing their hateful attitudes, in polite society. They also ran an editorial back in 1938 that argued Hitler was merely misunderstood.
Megan McArgle-Bargle is never right, I mean she is writing from some Utopian bubble where the left are always the villains, and she is the only one calling them out. She also opined Elon Musk was right to buy Twitter, and that after firing nearly everyone, it wasn't "broken".
An excellent run-down, however, the NH Republicans proposed a 15 DAY restriction, not 15 weeks. No wonder Sununu called it crazy. (He claims to be pro-choice but he signed our new 24 week restriction into law.) Even some original co-sponsors have reneged. A few years ago, when the Dems had a majority in our huge legislature, some advocated for a constitutional amendment but it went nowhere. Now the Repubs have a slight (1 or 2 seats) majority and who knows what will happen!
Thank you for all you do to keep us informed. I wish it weren't such a huge job.
I’m a long-time reader and subscriber and I so appreciate what you and Grace do. But I’ve been meaning to ask—Any chance you could change the name of the newsletter? Abortion Every Day implies that abortion is not just necessary, but desirable. No one grows up wishing they could have an abortion some day. I realize what you’re trying to say is that there is abortion-related news every day and you’re going to cover it, but Abortion Every Day not only makes me cringe, but also raises the eyebrows of the anti-abortion crowd who can point to it and say, “See! They’re proselytizing (sp?) to make more women have abortions!” It’s the reason I don’t buy your merch. I don’t really have a good alternative suggestion, but something along the lines of “All the Abortion News that fits, we print.” Maybe other readers are more creative.
I should add - after I had my abortion to complete my second trimester loss, I was so grateful to have found this space - a space where I could be fully angry about the bans and also feel that the medical decision I had made (truly that I had to make, given the risk of sepsis) was understood, normalized, and valued. Having a space that fully embraces the value of abortion is so necessary, especially right now. And I say that as someone who was devastated to lose my baby. The abortion part of it wasn’t the problem. The devastating reality of my pregnancy was the problem.
I hear you, but abortion being available everyday *is* desirable. Having a society that values women’s bodily autonomy *is* desirable. For many (most?) women seeking an abortion, taking the pill or having the procedure is life-saving (physically and/or in terms of quality of life), which is desirable. All of these stories we are hearing about care being denied have made it pretty clear how dangerous it is to equivocate on the importance of abortion being available at all stages of pregnancy. These stories exist because of laws created by people who have internalized the stigma that abortion is bad. We need to come out swinging in defense of abortion because all of this is at stake.
I appreciate and respect different feelings and opinions.
I like the title Abortion, Every Day because it is desirable and is part of bodily autonomy. I use pro-abortion to help de stigmatize abortion.
I’ve been taught not to change myself because of what others think. I feel the same about what I wear or what I would title a paper I wrote.
I feel the title is appropriate for this substack. After all Jessica is the author and creator and gets to choose the name of her writing. In my opinion if she starts changing titles to appease others it is a compromise that does not reflect who she is as a reporter. ❤️❤️
First of all, I am sorry for your loss and glad that you were able to get the care you needed. I have also had an abortion and worked in an abortion-clinic. There is a difference between necessary and aspirational, and that is the reason I cringe at terms like “pro-abortion,” as opposed to “pro-choice,” and “Abortion, Every Day,”. I’m sure Jessica and Grace have given this a lot of thought, and they have their reasons, but personally (and I am apparently not the only one), I would prefer something that makes the point that abortion is NECESSARY, as I agree, it absolutely is. One doesn’t choose abortion the way one chooses, say, Botox, but the care should unquestionably be there when you need it. FOR ANY REASON.
Sorry I just have to get this off my chest. I'm an avid WaPo reader and I've literally never read a Meagan McArdle article that didn't piss me off. Her takes are either very Republican-sounding, hilariously stupid and one dimensional or both. I wish she wouldn't call herself "a Democrat" as if she actually speaks for other Democrats. It just triggers the shit out of me.
...I just read this to my husband and he exclaims "Wait... She says she's a Democrat?? She's CLEARLY a Republican!" After a lot of yelling and swearing he just walked off muttering.
🎯❤️She's so condescending, in a way that only the totally clueless can be. She claims to be a Libertarian, and used to write under the name "Jane Gault." Unless since I left WaPo, she has changed? Which is very possible.
I swear she was categorized as a Democrat somewhere, although I guess someone might have been like "younger woman, must be liberal". Ugh, no wonder all her opinions are bad, when you get right down to it [American] libertarian ideology is even worse than conservative ideology when it comes to cognitive dissonance.
She is just so ridiculous, I thought she was satire the first time I read her her. So I looked her up, and found this, my favorite description:
"Megan McArdle, a Koch-trained libertarian who used to make a lot of people angry by being excitingly wrong about a lot of things, now traffics now traffics in tired right-wing tropes and false narratives...McArdle’s 2022 column in which she castigated anti-abortion activists for making too much of the 10-year-old rape victim who couldn’t get an abortion in Ohio – and the deplorable tweet that laid bare her shocking lack of basic human empathy.]."
"McArdle’s biography can be written in one sentence: a shallow, mean rich kid is hired by billionaires to abuse poor people and praise kitchen implements. Every detail about her existence can be folded up like origami into that single statement, the way the whole Christian religion is contained in John 3:16.
The latest one I accidentally read I think was about how liberal women need to not be so picky about avoiding conservative men or else MARRIAGE is DOOMED! Give me a fucking break. I wouldn't have any liberal woman risk their lives on conservative men, ffs... Damn she got me again.
She is a paid flack for the enemy, (the Koch org) and again she is always wrong. I used to go straight to the comments, because they roasted her in better truth than her her original article!
Apart from the obvious, the big problem with the "personhood" approach to fetal rights is that it completely undermines the general concept of personal rights. If you look at the philosophical underpinnings of English common law and its American descendants, the whole concept of rights under law is tied to the ability to act -- or the government's constraints on that ability. Basically, individuals respected by law have agency, to act, to speak, to think, to worship, and the government may not constrain that ability. Moreover, it's understood that those who are limited by some physical disability should not lose righs as a result, but should be accommodated in the public sphere.
No problems with that, right?
But here's the problem: A fetus can't act. It can't be independent of its mother. And this is not a disability -- it's the fetus' natural state.
So when the state declares "fetal rights," what it actually is stating is that it will act, presumptively, "on behalf" of the fetus, with no input from the fetus (who is incapable of doing so) and against whatever feelings the mother might articulate. In other words, it takes the purported notion of "fetal rights" and uses it as a tool to override the mother's rights. Which, obviously, is fine by all the "right to llfe" crew.
But the problem (beyond the obvious) with this is that by granting the government presumptive rights over one sector of society, you've also granted the government the ability to declare presumptive rights in other areas -- terminal care, say, or the treatment of prisoners or immigrants, or in determining ceilings for health care. Maybe the "pro-life" folks are fine with this level of Big Brother-ism. But this is no slippery slope -- it's a fucking tobbagan run. And people need to be aware of that.
Oh shit. I hadn't actually thought that through completely because I stopped after "a fetus ISN'T a person, it's a POTENTIAL person" and that's super problematic, especially in the cases where pregnancy doesn't result in a live baby. Thank you for mentioning this other aspect!
Merry Christmas, Jessica. You are a true Light in the darkness. Stay strong and honest - I'm proud to call you sister.
Thank you for keeping me up to date on all these measures.
Thank you Jessica and enjoy your time off. You deserve it. ❤️
Death penalty? The rule of law run amuck, that is what this is with dangerous consequences everyday as we hear new stories. I used to be enthralled with this country for its adherence to the 'rule of law" because law is for the common good, is logical, rational, and by definition must result in predictable outcomes as in conditions under A or B are the same, the outcomes for A or B will be the same. That is the ideal which has been deformed beyond recognition in this trump era with the culprits using the 'rule of law' for egregious and nefarious purposes. I have also realized courts cannot be the only answer to negate the adversity we find ourselves in. We need a strong arbiter for the truth in the press and the media especially with all the disinformation, which holds the culprits accountable, shames them to do the right thing -- you may say they are shameless but how did they become shameless? Because they were left to their own devices without consequences for much too long. The press and the media are not doing their job. Consider right now the 14 amendment debate. The plain language says insurrection and we all saw what happened on Jan 6 and any objective person would label it as a coup, an insurrection but since there was no strong press and media reporting to shame and hold the the party apparatus that was responsible to account, we now need the courts to decide whether it was that, rule of law run amuck. Imagine if there was a press that blared headlines that made Lindsey Graham and his ilk run for the hills, and a party that said enough is enough and policed its own, the perversion to look for the courts to bring accountability would be unnecessary.
Well said Padma. Appreciate your insight and you are right if no one calls a person out for egregious conduct they will keep on going. In my personal experience with bullies it only take a few well versed and vocal people to take them down. Remove the wind from their sails. We cannot trust the media to do it. They are owned by wealthy people who have agendas in my opinion.
There was a small window right after Jan 6 when the Rs were really afraid that it had gone too far but where was the press/media... I was watching every bit and nothing bad happened to them or their party that they went back to their old ways. We need to shame the press/media for not doing the right thing. We need to hold them accountable. Everything has become litigious that their part is not getting the attention it deserves and they are not held responsible. Courts should be the last resort when public opinion about bad politics can bring accountability.
To illustrate my point, NYT has an article where it calls the 14th amendment "an obscure constitutional amendment enacted after the civil war" and Lawrence had this history professor last night who described the circumstances that the amendment came into being and they were hardly obscure. They expressly wanted to prevent a second insurrection and now we want the corrupt court to decide if it was an insurrection when we all saw what happened on Jan 6. Frankly, I have not seen such occurrences in other countries, third world countries and every American should be ashamed that Jan 6 ever happened on their soil. Instead we have let the grifters and enablers distort the picture to save their ass.
The NYT is the paper of defending the status quo, they hire so many awful writers, with truly backward attitudes, that don't belong spewing their hateful attitudes, in polite society. They also ran an editorial back in 1938 that argued Hitler was merely misunderstood.
Thanks forwriting about McCardle. Opinion writers rarely admit mistakes so your work here is appreciated.
Megan McArgle-Bargle is never right, I mean she is writing from some Utopian bubble where the left are always the villains, and she is the only one calling them out. She also opined Elon Musk was right to buy Twitter, and that after firing nearly everyone, it wasn't "broken".
Love the Bargle you added and I agree about her bubble.
😉
An excellent run-down, however, the NH Republicans proposed a 15 DAY restriction, not 15 weeks. No wonder Sununu called it crazy. (He claims to be pro-choice but he signed our new 24 week restriction into law.) Even some original co-sponsors have reneged. A few years ago, when the Dems had a majority in our huge legislature, some advocated for a constitutional amendment but it went nowhere. Now the Repubs have a slight (1 or 2 seats) majority and who knows what will happen!
Thank you for all you do to keep us informed. I wish it weren't such a huge job.
I’m a long-time reader and subscriber and I so appreciate what you and Grace do. But I’ve been meaning to ask—Any chance you could change the name of the newsletter? Abortion Every Day implies that abortion is not just necessary, but desirable. No one grows up wishing they could have an abortion some day. I realize what you’re trying to say is that there is abortion-related news every day and you’re going to cover it, but Abortion Every Day not only makes me cringe, but also raises the eyebrows of the anti-abortion crowd who can point to it and say, “See! They’re proselytizing (sp?) to make more women have abortions!” It’s the reason I don’t buy your merch. I don’t really have a good alternative suggestion, but something along the lines of “All the Abortion News that fits, we print.” Maybe other readers are more creative.
I should add - after I had my abortion to complete my second trimester loss, I was so grateful to have found this space - a space where I could be fully angry about the bans and also feel that the medical decision I had made (truly that I had to make, given the risk of sepsis) was understood, normalized, and valued. Having a space that fully embraces the value of abortion is so necessary, especially right now. And I say that as someone who was devastated to lose my baby. The abortion part of it wasn’t the problem. The devastating reality of my pregnancy was the problem.
Hugs to you, if you want them.
I hear you, but abortion being available everyday *is* desirable. Having a society that values women’s bodily autonomy *is* desirable. For many (most?) women seeking an abortion, taking the pill or having the procedure is life-saving (physically and/or in terms of quality of life), which is desirable. All of these stories we are hearing about care being denied have made it pretty clear how dangerous it is to equivocate on the importance of abortion being available at all stages of pregnancy. These stories exist because of laws created by people who have internalized the stigma that abortion is bad. We need to come out swinging in defense of abortion because all of this is at stake.
Well said Natalie. ❤️💞💕
I appreciate and respect different feelings and opinions.
I like the title Abortion, Every Day because it is desirable and is part of bodily autonomy. I use pro-abortion to help de stigmatize abortion.
I’ve been taught not to change myself because of what others think. I feel the same about what I wear or what I would title a paper I wrote.
I feel the title is appropriate for this substack. After all Jessica is the author and creator and gets to choose the name of her writing. In my opinion if she starts changing titles to appease others it is a compromise that does not reflect who she is as a reporter. ❤️❤️
First of all, I am sorry for your loss and glad that you were able to get the care you needed. I have also had an abortion and worked in an abortion-clinic. There is a difference between necessary and aspirational, and that is the reason I cringe at terms like “pro-abortion,” as opposed to “pro-choice,” and “Abortion, Every Day,”. I’m sure Jessica and Grace have given this a lot of thought, and they have their reasons, but personally (and I am apparently not the only one), I would prefer something that makes the point that abortion is NECESSARY, as I agree, it absolutely is. One doesn’t choose abortion the way one chooses, say, Botox, but the care should unquestionably be there when you need it. FOR ANY REASON.
Jessica, your dedication is extraordinary and so appreciated. Wishing you a wonderfully fun break & vaca with beautiful weather!
Jessica, thanks for the very complete update. Enjoy your time off and we will continue the push in 2024!
Sorry I just have to get this off my chest. I'm an avid WaPo reader and I've literally never read a Meagan McArdle article that didn't piss me off. Her takes are either very Republican-sounding, hilariously stupid and one dimensional or both. I wish she wouldn't call herself "a Democrat" as if she actually speaks for other Democrats. It just triggers the shit out of me.
...I just read this to my husband and he exclaims "Wait... She says she's a Democrat?? She's CLEARLY a Republican!" After a lot of yelling and swearing he just walked off muttering.
It's not just me!
🎯❤️She's so condescending, in a way that only the totally clueless can be. She claims to be a Libertarian, and used to write under the name "Jane Gault." Unless since I left WaPo, she has changed? Which is very possible.
I swear she was categorized as a Democrat somewhere, although I guess someone might have been like "younger woman, must be liberal". Ugh, no wonder all her opinions are bad, when you get right down to it [American] libertarian ideology is even worse than conservative ideology when it comes to cognitive dissonance.
She is just so ridiculous, I thought she was satire the first time I read her her. So I looked her up, and found this, my favorite description:
"Megan McArdle, a Koch-trained libertarian who used to make a lot of people angry by being excitingly wrong about a lot of things, now traffics now traffics in tired right-wing tropes and false narratives...McArdle’s 2022 column in which she castigated anti-abortion activists for making too much of the 10-year-old rape victim who couldn’t get an abortion in Ohio – and the deplorable tweet that laid bare her shocking lack of basic human empathy.]."
https://splinternews.com/megan-mcardle-is-taking-her-ill-informed-technocratic-n-1822969895
or this one:
"McArdle’s biography can be written in one sentence: a shallow, mean rich kid is hired by billionaires to abuse poor people and praise kitchen implements. Every detail about her existence can be folded up like origami into that single statement, the way the whole Christian religion is contained in John 3:16.
https://www.pastemagazine.com/politics/megan-mcardle/megan-mcardle-fails-upwards-again-this-time-to-the
..
https://presswatchers.org/2023/03/the-washington-post-opinion-section-is-a-sad-toxic-wasteland/
The latest one I accidentally read I think was about how liberal women need to not be so picky about avoiding conservative men or else MARRIAGE is DOOMED! Give me a fucking break. I wouldn't have any liberal woman risk their lives on conservative men, ffs... Damn she got me again.
She is a paid flack for the enemy, (the Koch org) and again she is always wrong. I used to go straight to the comments, because they roasted her in better truth than her her original article!
I always thought she was a Republican!
RIGHT!? I wish she'd just say that!
I'm hoping the more extreme they go, the more preposterous they reveal themselves to be. And people SEE them for who they really are.
Apart from the obvious, the big problem with the "personhood" approach to fetal rights is that it completely undermines the general concept of personal rights. If you look at the philosophical underpinnings of English common law and its American descendants, the whole concept of rights under law is tied to the ability to act -- or the government's constraints on that ability. Basically, individuals respected by law have agency, to act, to speak, to think, to worship, and the government may not constrain that ability. Moreover, it's understood that those who are limited by some physical disability should not lose righs as a result, but should be accommodated in the public sphere.
No problems with that, right?
But here's the problem: A fetus can't act. It can't be independent of its mother. And this is not a disability -- it's the fetus' natural state.
So when the state declares "fetal rights," what it actually is stating is that it will act, presumptively, "on behalf" of the fetus, with no input from the fetus (who is incapable of doing so) and against whatever feelings the mother might articulate. In other words, it takes the purported notion of "fetal rights" and uses it as a tool to override the mother's rights. Which, obviously, is fine by all the "right to llfe" crew.
But the problem (beyond the obvious) with this is that by granting the government presumptive rights over one sector of society, you've also granted the government the ability to declare presumptive rights in other areas -- terminal care, say, or the treatment of prisoners or immigrants, or in determining ceilings for health care. Maybe the "pro-life" folks are fine with this level of Big Brother-ism. But this is no slippery slope -- it's a fucking tobbagan run. And people need to be aware of that.
Oh shit. I hadn't actually thought that through completely because I stopped after "a fetus ISN'T a person, it's a POTENTIAL person" and that's super problematic, especially in the cases where pregnancy doesn't result in a live baby. Thank you for mentioning this other aspect!
Nicely said.