Two French films that came out within a few weeks of one another on the legalisation of abortion in 1975, following the MLAC activism in the previous years, the lawyer Gisèle Halimi‘s court pleadings, and Giscard’s underlying (and relatively) progressive presidency, which left Simone Veil endure the nasty flak of an exclusively male French Assembly. (Note: I have not watched either of the movies!)
Archive for legalisation of abortion
1975 ]two French films[
Posted in Books, Kids, pictures with tags 1975, abortion rights, Annie Colère, contraception, French cinema, French politics, Gisèle Halimi, legalisation of abortion, loi Veil, MLAC, Mouvement pour la liberté de l’avortement et de la contraception, Planning Familial, reproductive rights, Simone Veil, Valéry Giscard d'Estaing on December 24, 2022 by xi'anstates of the union
Posted in Kids, Travel with tags abortion rights, anti-abortion organisations, Catholic conservatives, Christian conservatives, legalisation of abortion, reproductive rights, SCOTUS, Supreme Court, US politics on October 5, 2022 by xi'anabortion in Québec
Posted in Statistics with tags abortion, abortion pills, Canada, CBC, doctors, International Safe Abortion Day, legalisation of abortion, liberalism, North, nurses, Québec, religious right, Roe v. Wade, Supreme Court, ultrasound, USA on July 28, 2022 by xi'anvendredi noir [Roe v. Wade]
Posted in Books, Kids, pictures, Travel with tags black Friday, Charlie Hebdo, Christian conservatives, Coco, cover, Je suis Charlie, legalisation of abortion, Libé, my body my choice, political cartoon, Protect Abortion, reproductive rights, SCOTUS, Supreme Court, US flag, US politics, Women’s Rights and Gender Equality on June 26, 2022 by xi'ana forecasted end to Roe v. Wade
Posted in Kids with tags ACLU, conservatism, legalisation of abortion, Protect Abortion, reproductive rights, Roe v. Wade, SOTUS, Supreme Court, The Guardian, The New York Times, US Constitution on June 25, 2022 by xi'an“After today, young women will come of age with fewer rights than their mothers and grandmothers had. The majority [of the Supreme Court] accomplishes that result without so much as considering how women have relied on the right to choose or what it means to take that right away. The majority’s refusal even to consider the life-altering consequences of reversing Roe and Casey is a stunning indictment of its decision (…) Now a new and bare majority of this court – acting at practically the first moment possible – overrules Roe and Casey. It converts a series of dissenting opinions expressing antipathy toward Roe and Casey into a decision greenlighting even total abortion bans. It eliminates a 50-year-old constitutional right that safeguards women’s freedom and equal station. It breaches a core rule-of-law principle, designed to promote constancy in the law. In doing all of that, it places in jeopardy other rights, from contraception to same-sex intimacy and marriage. And finally, it undermines the court’s legitimacy.” Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, June 24, 2022
“Judge Thomas noted that in its rationale, the court’s majority found that a right to abortion was not a form of “liberty” protected by the due process clause of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution — as the court had said in Roe. Then, he took aim at three other landmark cases that relied on that same legal reasoning: Griswold v. Connecticut, a 1965 decision that declared married couples had a right to contraception; Lawrence v. Texas, a 2003 case invalidating sodomy laws and making same-sex sexual activity legal across the country; and Obergefell v. Hodges, the 2015 case establishing the right of gay couples to marry.” The New York Times, June 24, 2022