Can I get more pissed off?

Probably not. (I know, I know, a lot of things about religion piss me off.) I am going out of town to teach for a few days, so I don’t have time to ruminate on this and create an original post. This is by Peter Nuhn on, and I hope he won’t be too pissed at me for stealing it verbatim:

Catholic Majority on SCOTUS Upholds Abortion Ban

In a five to four decision, the Supreme Court of the United States today upheld the partial birth abortion ban. All five of the justices in the majority were Catholics. This case stands for the proposition that the Supreme Court of the United States will no longer adjudicate cases based on the Constitution or the laws of the United States. From now on the SCOTUS will decide cases based on the morality dictated by the Vatican who is now in charge of the law in the United States.

This is of course very bad news for all women in the United States, all gays and lesbians in the United States, and of course, anyone else not Catholic, especially Freethinkers, Agnostics, and Atheists.

Last year when the Court struck down the death penalty for minors, conservatives throughout the country condemned the Court for considering the briefs filed by Britain, EU, and else where about how it was no longer acceptable practice in the world to execute children. With today’s Catholic majority upholding the Vatican position on abortion, we all await those same conservatives condemnation of the Court for failing again to consider U.S. law and Constitutional right of privacy when it comes to decisions between a woman and her doctor over the state of her health and life.

More here on Yahoo! news.


Donna Druchunas is a freelance technical writer and editor and a knitwear designer. When she's not working, she blogs, studies Lithuanian, reads science and sci-fi books, mouths off on atheist forums, and checks her email every three minutes. (She does that when she's working, too.) Although she loves to chat, she can't keep an IM program open or she'd never get anything else done.

Related Articles


  1. Ahhhh, I didn't know if this was the same writerdd that left a comment over there (the NGB), but it is. Cool.

  2. My 8th day I made health care

    Cover everyone

    If you get sick, see a doctor

    That's how my government's run

    And by the way, abortion

    Is included in this plan

    No one tells a girl how to treat her body

    Least of all some man

    -Dan Bern, "President"

  3. Yes, that's me. I use the same writerdd name everywhere except on my knitting blogs :-) I used to think I wanted to keep my atheist identity separate because I might lose knitting readers who might be offended if they googled my name and found a bunch of atheist rants, but after giving it some thought, I decided I don't care. I recently told Rebecca it would be OK to use my real name with my bio on the new website.

    What really pisses me off about this is that the Supreme Court has essentially said that women do not count except as walking wombs. The woman's health does not have to be taken into account. I am also incredibly pissed at the Dems who voted for this piece of shit legislation. Having a 2 person majority is not enough. We need to kick the Republicans so far into oblvion that the do not regain any semblance of power again over the next 100 years.

    What I want to know, is why isn't every one else as fucking pissed off as I am?

    P.S. In light of my recent post on being a "Pink" atheist, I'm working on a long post about my views on atheism, how we should represent ourselves in public, when it is appropriate to be pissed off, and what the limits of tolerance should be. It's something I struggle with all the time. I really am quite jealous of those atheists who know their stand on issues like these, whether they are in the hardcore or softcore camp.

    (And, yes, I know that not all skepticks are atheists. But I am and I have to write from my personal pov.)

    OK, I'm off to my knitting workshop for a few days so I'll write more when I return.

  4. I'm plenty pissed, especially about this from the article:

    "The Republican-controlled Congress responded in 2003 by passing a federal law that asserted the procedure is gruesome, inhumane and never medically necessary to preserve a woman's health. That statement was designed to overcome the health exception to restrictions that the court has demanded in abortion cases."

    Last time I checked there was only 1 MD in Congress, what gives the rest of them the balls to declare something "never medically necessary"?

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Back to top button