The more I sit and consider what the Roe v. Wade decision means at 40 years, the more I am sure that it actually means the same thing now as it did then. The question isn't what does Roe mean at 40. The question is who is the new Roe?
Every year, Congress uses the annual budget process to deny women access to a critical reproductive health service -- abortion. We must allow medical standards of care -- and not politics -- to dictate coverage once again.
Over the past few years, more and more Americans have felt less comfortable having their personal beliefs about abortion be put into a box. What does "pro-choice" or "pro-life" even mean? And why can't I be both?
Roe v. Wade has had a huge impact on the health and safety of women. In 1965, illegal abortions contributed to nearly one-fifth of all pregnancy- and childbirth-related deaths. Today, less than 0.3 percent of women who end a pregnancy sustain a serious complication.
Roe v. Wade was a triumph of American constitutional law. It changed the world in a fundamental way. Those who wish that Roe had never been decided would return us to a world of gender oppression, back-alley abortions and personal degredation.
This year, when the president submits his budget proposal to Congress, he can omit the restrictions on coverage of abortion. This small but bold act would send a strong signal to Congress and to women and families around the country.
What most people don't know is that lawful abortion clinics were in operation before Roe. One of those places was New York, and one of those clinics was started by Merle Hoffman, a true pioneer in providing for women's reproductive health.
Historically, evangelical Christians had stayed away from politics, believing that such engagement would taint their religion. However, opposition to abortion became a way for the Republican Party to appeal to this disenfranchised group, mobilizing huge numbers of new voters (and donors).
Provided that reproductive justice is indeed about all women having the right to make healthy and informed decisions about their bodies, advocates who continue to ignore the historical contributions of trans women of color are complicit in reproducing the very oppressions the movement seeks to destroy.
This year marks the anniversary of two powerhouse decisions of the Supreme Court: Roe v. Wade, in which a woman's right to have an abortion was established 40 years ago, and Lawrence v. Texas, which held 10 years ago that laws prohibiting same-sex sexual conduct are unconstitutional.
Fear pushed me into a decision I will carry the rest of my life. I made the decision to take the life of the precious baby growing in me.
In the years before the Supreme Court legalized abortion in its landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, clergy were among the staunchest supporters of women seeking an abortion.
It is time to reframe the issue away from "choice" versus "life." But can a broader justice frame be enough to bring together factions who will still have passionately different views on abortion?
Pew releases a new survey on abortion with a breakdown of views among the religious. No fallout yet over the pro-gay Episcopalian chosen to pray at Obama's inauguration but will there be? This and more in the latest religion headlines.
The cases documented in our study, as well as recent cases, make clear that, 40 years after Roe v. Wade was decided, far more is at stake than abortion or women's reproductive rights.
The Vatican argues that moral values are God-given and do not change as society evolves. But what exactly is God's position, if any, on sex?