Sunday, October 26, 2014

'Point 10' of Women's Equality Act revives political debate over abortion

Cuomo's Women's Equality Act has been met with broad support from almost all New York politicians — save for the tenth point, which would codify Roe v. Wade in New York law in the case the original ruling is one day overturned or eroded. Many groups are involved in the debate over whether to pass the act with or without the tenth point. Although Cuomo and head of Planned Parenthood Advocates of New York State M. Tracey Brooks assert that the tenth point would not expand abortion law to include unregulated abortions in the third trimester, anti-choice advocates of the New York Catholic Conference say otherwise. This issue has been a heated debate in New York ever since Operation Rescue in 1992, where many anti-abortion activists assaulted women at clinics trying to get abortions and the doctors giving them. Several politicians such as Mark J. Grisanti are personally opposed to abortion, but believe that abortion is a problem upon which a woman, her doctor, and her spouse should decide upon. However, anti-choice activists continue to barricade proceeds and advocate for the banning of all abortions, without question.

This article discusses the issue from a relatively neutral point of view, including input from Democrats, Republicans, Independents, and the two sides of the abortion-specific debate. I think that people like Kathleen Gallagher, the director of Pro-Life Activities at the New York Catholic Conference, are forgetting the law that separates church from state. Whatever one's personal moral beliefs may be, it is not one's role to impose those beliefs on other people if one is not directly involved in the situation (i.e., not the woman seeking an abortion, her doctor, or her spouse). As Assemblywoman Peoples-Stokes eloquently states, "I don't think God wants other people to make those kind of judgment calls."

http://www.buffalonews.com/city-region/buffalo-politics/point-10-of-womens-equality-act-revives-political-debate-over-abortion-20141025

5 comments:

  1. It is not a politcians right to decide what a women does with her body. This point does not expand abortion, but rather makes sure the right to choose is maintained. I do hope that this point will not prevent the act from being enacted since the other 9 points are widely agreed upon.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree. I think that restricting a woman from being able to have an abortion is cutting into her rights as a person and agree that even though some politicians have religious morals, they should not impose them on citizens because there is a clear separation between church and state in this country.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I believe in prochoice. I think that if a woman does not want a baby, they should avoid getting pregnant in the first place. But accidents happen and I think that a woman should have the right to have an abortion. It seems to me that abortions should be done in the early stages of pregnancy rather than further down the line when the fetus starts becoming recognizably human. The area becomes grayer when you start discussing at what point during a pregnancy is it immoral to have an abortion without any health concerns.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I don’t think that the tenth point expands abortion; it just reinforces the point that women have the right to choose. In any case, politicians should not try to impose their own moral views on others, especially where health is concerned.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Politicians shouldn't be able to decide what a woman can or cannot do with her body. If politicians are so against abortion because of religious mortals, why don't they just expand the availability of contraceptives for women.

    ReplyDelete