Abortion as a health issue

And Also: I type this before the closer comes in, but if I wanted to see a close game where an error and failure to tack on runs led to a NL loss (with a tease late -- of late, a Phillie would have feasted off the bullpen), I would watch a Mets game. If they win, cheers.

The hearings provide an educational function* ...

Sen. Graham appeared shocked that abortion might be seen as a 'health issue,' but for millions of girls and women worldwide it is. As Michelle Goldberg discusses in Means of Reproduction, the U.S. government was more comfortable with that reality once upon a time, but it is no less true today. In fact, Sen. Feinstein just this morning had a back/forth with Judge Sotomayor of the important of "health" when interpreting abortion regulations.

He is also shocked that some advocacy group would strongly support the need of state sponsored abortions. Various state courts have held that the right to privacy includes an equal application of state funding of such health benefits. The US Supreme Court has held this is not constitutionally necessary. Justice Ginsburg recently noted this surprised her at the time, that "woman has a constitutional right to place a higher value on avoiding either serious harm to her own health" in such questions was the minority decision.

It is not shocking that a women whose pregnancy is a severe threat to her health and well being would deem it a form of "slavery" to -- because of her poverty -- force her to have a child. We speak of "wage slavery." The term fits here too:

By restricting the right to terminate pregnancies, the State conscripts women's bodies into its service, forcing women to continue their pregnancies, suffer the pains of childbirth, and in most instances, provide years of maternal care.

[More here] BTW, when she says "Latino," she sounds very Latina.

---

[Update] * (1) The NL lost again. (2) I turned it off because his tone annoyed me -- his suck-up voice -- but Sen. Schumer's time actually was informative too. It was clearly a "for the defense" effort (e.g., look she made some hard choices against sympathetic litigants), but that's part of the game.

And, her comments on use of foreign law (aside from dubious absolutes like "American law does not permit the use of foreign law or international law to interpret the Constitution") was actually quite useful ... if anyone paid attention. Contra Dahlia Lithwick who apparently rather hear protesters scream more "truthful" slogans. At times, her shtick annoys me.