The law has yet to go into effect, and politicians have explicitly stated their desire for legal challenges to make it up to the Supreme Court as part of a long-standing effort to overturn Roe v. Wade. And given the bench's conservative slant after Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh's confirmations under President Donald Trump, that may be a real possibility.
Where does Trump stand on abortion? After years of saying he was pro-choice, Trump changed his tune when he decided to run for President. It's useful to revisit a long-forgotten town hall from March 2016, when then-candidate Trump told MSNBC's Chris Matthews he was pro-life. When pressed on what the law should be, Trump said, "The answer is that there has to be some form of punishment." Matthews tried to clarify, saying, "For the woman," to which Trump responded, "Yeah, there has to be some form."
Days later, Trump tried to walk back his comments in an interview with New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd, saying he was answering Matthews' questions hypothetically. She wrote, "Given his draconian comment, sending women back to back alleys, I had to ask: When he was a swinging bachelor in Manhattan, was he ever involved with anyone who had an abortion?"
Trump's response? "Such an interesting question. So what's your next question?"
On a roll toward the Republican presidential nomination, Trump artfully dodged the question, never to face it again.
Imagine this for a moment, three years later: President Trump standing next to a world leader at a joint news conference while an aggressive reporter asks, "Mr. Trump, have you ever paid for an abortion, impregnated a woman and encouraged her to get one, or in any other way supported the termination of a pregnancy?"
Even the gutsiest reporter might have hesitated to ask that question in previous years. Why? It's incredibly personal, not to mention the fact that women -- not men -- are so often made to carry the burden of accountability in cases of unwanted pregnancies. Even as the leader of the free world whose life is under a microscope, Trump would likely be caught off guard with the question. The President would probably feign disgust and the reporter would no doubt face withering criticism from the public, if not from other members of the press.
I believe all of that is about to change for a number of reasons. We're now living in a wild world where many rules no longer apply. Trump himself has shattered many of the norms we have long expected from our presidents.
Who can forget his relentless attacks on a war hero and a gold star family? He even mocked a disabled reporter and body-shamed women without suffering much political damage. And his recorded comments that revealed the worst sort of misogyny didn't grab enough voters by the ballot box. Some may argue that it's fair game for journalists to ask Trump, a politician who holds the highest office in the land, where he has stood on abortion in his personal and political life.
With two nominees to the Supreme Court, Trump set the stage for pro-life conservatives, who are now taking on a more aggressive strategy to overturn Roe v Wade. (Trump tweeted over the weekend that he favors exceptions to a total ban on abortions: "As most people know, and for those who would like to know, I am strongly Pro-Life, with the three exceptions - Rape, Incest and protecting the Life of the mother - the same position taken by Ronald Reagan." )
The harder these politicians -- many of whom are men -- push, the more likely they are to face questions about their own pasts. How many politicians who have voted to restrict abortion rights and access have paid for or encouraged a sexual partner to get an abortion, or reaped the benefits of one who did? It's only a matter of time before this line of inquiry goes national, with the potential to pose a political problem for some pro-life politicians.
The hypocrisy is not unthinkable. In 2017, Rep. Tim Murphy resigned after an allegation that he had suggested abortion as a possibility to a woman with whom he had an affair, according to text messages obtained by the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Murphy had co-sponsored a bill banning abortion after 20 weeks and had a staunch anti-abortion voting record.
As we've seen in this past week, Democrats have come out strongly in favor of abortion rights and access. In the past, many have treaded lightly on the issue in fear of stirring up a backlash from the pro-life movement. That is no longer the case --Democrats believe protecting women's rights and the ability to control their own bodies is both a human right and a stone-cold political winner. So even if journalists don't feel comfortable raising the issue themselves, it may be Democratic politicians who confront their opponents.
It's also important to note that one reason why this question has not been put to President Trump or other male pro-life politicians more frequently, is sexism. Men have always been afforded more privacy and societal freedom than women when it comes to issues surrounding sex. And women almost always bear more of the emotional and legal burden when it comes to abortion in America. Progress along these lines should shift the burden at least partly back on the men involved in unwanted pregnancies.
The bottom line is politics is always an exercise in unintended consequences. Putting the constitutional issue of abortion rights aside, the legacy of Alabama's near-total abortion ban may also be a new, aggressive and normalized debate about the role men may have played in their sexual partners' abortion and how they might have benefited from it. In other words, Trump is going to have to answer Maureen Dowd's question sooner or later.
Because Roe v. Wade is legally based on the right to privacy, rolling back that fundamental principle should also apply to men.
Bagikan Berita Ini
0 Response to "Male politicians who oppose abortion rights are going to face some uncomfortable questions"
Post a Comment