So today was the 39th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the controversial 1973 Supreme Court decision on abortion. And, although he didn't exactly break out an eight-tiered cake or send Harry Blackmun's relatives a novelty birthday card, President Obama commemorated the occasion by issuing a statement that reaffirmed his commitment to protecting a woman's right to choose, reiterating the contrast between his own position on the issue of reproductive rights, and those of the remaining GOP candidates. 

In the statement, President Obama wrote: 

"As we mark the 39th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, we must remember that this Supreme Court decision not only protects a woman’s health and reproductive freedom, but also affirms a broader principle: that government should not intrude on private family matters. I remain committed to protecting a woman’s right to choose and this fundamental constitutional right. 

While this is a sensitive and often divisive issue, no matter what our views, we must stay united in our determination to prevent unintended pregnancies, support pregnant women and mothers, reduce the need for abortion, encourage healthy relationships, and promote adoption. And as we remember this historic anniversary, we must also continue our efforts to ensure that our daughters have the same rights, freedoms, and opportunities as our sons to fulfill our dreams."

It kind of makes you want to forward a copy to all of your Facebook friends who post anti-choice rhetoric on their news feeds, with the subject line "BAM!!!" and the video for Montell Jordan's "This Is How We Do It" attached. 

The president's message of support for Roe v. Wade is particularly significant when compared to the four remaining GOP candidates' own stances on reproductive rights (if you need a refresher course, they have all stated that they would like to see Roe v. Wade reversed, so states could have the right to ban abortions). Indeed, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who won the South Carolina primary Saturday, reestablished his support at a Personhood Forum for a fetal "personhood" amendment, which would give fetuses full legal personhood rights and possibly make some forms on contraception, in vitro, and stem cell research illegal.


Commentarium (12 Comments)

Jan 22 12 - 10:42pm


Mar 24 12 - 11:03am

YOU KNOW if i was in charge EVERY LADY who KILLED a UNBORN CHILD unless it was Putting her life at risk WOULD be PAYING 10<000 EVERY time She did it And THERE would BE NO Abortion CLINICS BABYS put to death is worse than KILLING some one in COLD blood LETS tur the history YOUR MOM & dad DOING this To you Iwouldint have to be Telling you all this because you wouldint be on this earth

Jan 22 12 - 11:39pm

I just love that the fetus is apparently more worthy of protecting/being granted "rights to life" when there are thousands of infants, children and adolescents who don't have full rights to life because they are born into this world without extensive health insurance. Little Jimmy should be protected as a fetus, but if his parents can't cough up the dough to pay for his liver transplant, well that's just too damn bad, isn't it?

Jan 23 12 - 6:36am

It's the Republican way. Care about them when they're a fetus, don't care about them again until they're military age.

Jan 24 12 - 1:50pm

Let's just do the Roe v. Wade thing and kill little Jimmy off. Fair, no?

Jan 23 12 - 12:55am

Is this seriously still an issue? Couldn't Dubya have changed this when he had a majority in the beginning of his presidency?
Seriously, there is so much access to contraception this is the last ditch for those too stupid to fuck responsibly. Its not changing, ever, so stop talking about it...okay, I'll stop now.

Jan 23 12 - 12:27pm

No, W and the Republican Congress couldn't change Roe, which is a constitution-based decision. It basically takes abortion out of the political process so that no statute that, for example, bans first trimester abortions could ever be enforced.

Jan 23 12 - 3:43am

Isn't this just about the bare minimum of what we should expect of a Democratic leader?

Jan 23 12 - 2:45pm

Elizabeth Cady Stanton would be appalled.

Jan 23 12 - 3:48pm

I am amazed that those who wich to murder the unborn are against murderer being put to death.

Jan 23 12 - 6:04pm

Too bad men can't get pregnant. If we could then this abortion debate never would've occurred. Society would be so accustomed to seeing patients undergoing the procedure instead of women exercising decisions regarding their health. The strangest thing is all who decry abortion as murder are often the first who refuse to improve pre- and post-natal care, or are against donating a greater proportion of funds towards nurseries and pre-school programs, and pretty much do their utmost to shame single women who've brought their children to term. Look. If you can help, great. If not, stand aside and let women make the decisions best for themselves. Just as we would for men.

Jan 23 12 - 6:21pm

It is always astonishing how many people will basically admit that the main reason they're against abortions is because women should have to 'live with their mistake.' While I fundamentally disagree with the 'abortion is murder' crowd, it's a fuck of a lot better than people who want abortions to be banned as a kind of government mandated slut shaming.