You Gotta Be Kidding Me, Louisiana

Approximately 30 months ago I wrote about my amazement that the United States Supreme Court might reject decades of judicial precedent by overturning the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade decision:

”Abortion and Roe v. Wade: A Flawed Legal Decision, a Necessary Health Policy”
December 2, 2021

Then six months later after I wrote that initial essay, the Supreme Court did in fact overturn Roe v. Wade with its Dobbs v. Jackson decision. In response, many feminists promised a “summer of rage” in America. In response, I promised to enjoy my summer:

”The Demise of Roe v. Wade and a ‘Summer of Rage’”
June 25, 2022

A quick explanation: My job leads me to work in very liberal milieus, and I am sick unto death of the type. I might dislike far right Trump-types and consider them cretins almost unworthy of thinking about, but man I hate academic far lefties of the sort getting arrested on college campuses recently. So I enjoyed watching them quake with fury. The nation, and myself, survived their rageful summer of 2022.

At any rate, even as l luxuriated in the schadenfreude of American feminists two years ago, at the end of that essay I slipped in the fact that I was also in favor of a woman’s right to choose (with conditions). On this issue I was (mostly) with them. I consider aborting a developing fetus in the third term of pregnancy, absent a very good medical reason, to be akin to murder; but I am untroubled by abortions done in the first trimester of pregnancy – the earlier the better. Between the bad choice of having a safe and legal abortion, and the worse one of carrying an unwanted baby to term and then life as an unwanted child (or endure an unsafe, illegal abortion), I choose the “bad” over the “worse” choice (the earlier the abortion, the better). One person living inside another during pregnancy: the abortion controversy is almost mind-breakingly complicated and knotty, and society has to make choices about what the rules are. Predictably, the dogmatists on either side of the issue insist on reducing the complexity and trying to make a difficult dilemma a simple one. “Abortion is murder!” “My body, my choice!” It is like watching 15-year olds throw a tantrum.

On most issues, abortion among them, most Americans are like me: moderate, pragmatic, non-ideological. It is as described in the below video:

But in certain “culture war” issues like abortion or gun control, it becomes difficult to have any reasonable argument at all. And that is a shame. There is broad support across the American electorate to allow abortion on demand up until around 15 weeks for any reason whatsoever. After that it should be increasingly restricted, in my opinion and the opinion of many others. However, the ideologues get all the air time in this debate. The people of Alabama or Idaho who want to ban any and all abortions for any reason are unreasonable people, in my opinion.  There are others, like many in my native California, who support abortion on demand late into the second trimester, and even later, claiming it is a woman’s choice – period. Why not meet somewhere in the middle? Is this so hard? Cannot Congress pass a reasonable law for all the states? 

As a practical matter, the answer is of course, “no.” It is too “hot” a topic. The United States is far from consensus on abortion. That is reality. And that will not change in the foreseeable future. There will not be majorities in both houses of Congress approving such a bill anytime soon, in addition to a president who supports it. Likely there will never be major abortion legislation signed into law at the federal level which would clarify the rules for the nation. That is unfortunate.

The abortion laws in Europe seem pretty reasonable, in contrast. A quick Wikipedia search returns this:

“In most European countries, abortion is generally permitted within a term limit below fetal viability (e.g. 12 weeks in Germany and Italy, or 14 weeks in France and Spain), although a wide range of exceptions permit abortion later in the pregnancy.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_Europe

Are women gnashing their teeth in Italy or Spain about not being permitted abortions late in the second or even third trimesters? Are there significant political movements in France or Germany devoted to banning even early first trimester abortions? Do the Europeans devote oceans of ink and oogles of energy to fights unto death over abortion? It appears not. Abortion and “reproductive rights” appears to be a particularly American spasm of partisan political passion. That is not necessarily seen in other countries. Maybe the issue is easier in smaller countries with less viewpoint diversity.

But here I come to the real point of this essay. In my first contemplation of a post-Roe v. Wade world, I asked myself these questions: In a post-Roe v. Wade landscape can the individual States restrict abortion medication in intrastate trade? Or intrastate travel between the states to attain a legal abortion? Those might be thorny constitutional questions, not to mention the ability to enforce them. But yesterday I read with alarm that Louisiana has classified mifepristone and misoprostol (the two drugs used in a majority of American abortions) as “dangerous controlled substances” whose possession can land you in prison for decades. To my non-lawyerly eyes, they appear to be trying to put abortion medication in the same legal category as hard street drugs like crystal methamphetamine, cocaine, heroin, and fentanyl. Is that appropriate?

And this is while the emergency contraception “Plan B” medication is available “over the counter” all throughout the United States. The drugs are so safe anyone can buy them without a doctor’s prescription, per the FDA. But abortion opponents have tried to get this overturned, also. Not because “Plan B” is so dangerous they need to be controlled. They are doing it to try and prevent day-after emergency abortions, period – and claiming to find made up medical rationales for this.

My God, I dislike your smoldering women’s studies professor from Oberlin as much as the next person. But on this issue of abortion medication I am with her.

I guess I should not be surprised at this latest action from Louisiana. They come up with a hair-brained idea to restrict abortion, and the population will vote for it through their elected representatives in the state legislature; this latest anti-abortion law goes with the grain of anti-abortion sentiment in Louisiana. In California they have the same dynamic on display with a raft of state-level gun control laws which do next to nothing to make the place safer. If they don’t like abortion in Louisiana, they don’t like guns in California. They pass corresponding laws. Vox populi, vox dei. So now the Bayou State wants mere possession of abortion drugs to be felony illegal.

Really, Louisiana? You are going to start using law enforcement to search through the mails looking for contraband mifepristone and misoprostol? The State of Louisiana will seek to prosecute people in other states for mailing abortion medication in? You are going to raid the homes of Louisianans looking for contraband abortion drugs? You want to arrest some 19-year old and charge her with a felony for having the pills in her possession? Have you lost your mind?

But hey, it’s Louisiana?

Anything is possible.

But is it legal?

What will the federal courts say about this? What will Congress do? How might the issue affect opinion polls? Upcoming elections and future legislation?

Republicans, if you want to follow the anti-abortion fanatics into electoral irrelevance by pursuing such extreme measures and choosing this hill to fight and die on, then go ahead.

But you will do so without voters like me. And I am far from being the sort of convinced voter who will never be persuaded to vote with you otherwise. I am a reasonable person. A confirmed centrist. Your arguments have some good points. There is room for compromise. My mind is open.

But trying to make it a felony to have abortion medication in your possession? No abortion exceptions at all for rape, incest, or the health of the mother? Go so far as to try and ban birth control for consenting couples?

You are out of your freakin’ mind.

It is entirely plausible that some “ethnic studies” professor on the ramparts at Columbia University wearing a keffiyeh and screaming “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free!” has spent too much time smelling her own farts in academic “decolonization” circles on campus, and needs to get out more among the general electorate.

It is equally plausible that some “pro-life” zealot in Louisiana who lives in a similarly homogeneous “echo silo” of conservative Christians from the south should get out and meet a wider swathe of Americans, or even Louisianans.

I think it was Thomas Jefferson who said, “Where common sense is lacking, everything is lacking.” That is so true.

And it is worth contemplating in an America full of angry “culture warriors” engaged in “performative politics” on “hothouse social media” – a lot of sound and fury signifying nothing, or next to nothing – that unless you have moderate “normies” on board, you will never achieve the critical mass in Congress necessary for legislative majorities. Most of the country is neither California nor Louisiana. Grown ups should know better.

In 1873 federal agents started searching the mails in search of birth control information which had been labeled as “pornography” under the incredibly stupid Comstock Laws. In 2024 Louisiana currently seems perched to do something similar, for much the same reason. 

Even in a world where many laws and regulations are brazenly wooden-headed and pointless, this would stand out.

Think about it, Louisiana: good judgment, common sense.