No, Mr. Ryan, Voters and Legislatures Should NOT Make Medical Decisions for Women

It's pretty well established now that Paul Ryan was out of league, and that Joe Biden ran circles around Mr. P90X. But this was the most chilling moment of the debate:

Let me reiterate Ryan's response to the question as to whether those who believe abortion should remain safe and legal in this country should be concerned should Ryan and Romney be elected: Yes.
RADDATZ: I want to go back to the abortion question here. If the Romney-Ryan ticket is elected, should those who believe that abortion should remain legal be worried?

RYAN: We don’t think that unelected judges should make this decision; that people through their elected representatives in reaching a consensus in society through the democratic process should make this determination.
No. No, no, no, no, no. People through their elected representatives should NOT make decisions about individual rights, individual medical procedures and individuals' private lives. You do not get to vote on what another person can do with their own body. You do not get to vote on screwing with other people's rights. That is not democracy, Congressman Ryan, That is mob rule.

I think it's time we challenged this dangerous idea that democracy is only about votes, and thus anything voters decide - whether through direct election or through their representatives - is legitimate, regardless of whose freedoms get rolled over. I am done with that bullcrap. For way too long, conservative right wingers have gotten away with arresting individual freedoms guaranteed under the US Constitution and basic human rights by justifying it under "voters did it." This is what they have been doing with abortion, with gay rights, with everything they can think of.

Bull. Sh*t. Voters and legislatures have no more right to practice medicine on women than they do to ban a newspaper. Voters and legislatures have no more right invading medical and family privacy of women than they do to ban guns.

Since when is it that unelected judges get to tell us that corporations - entities in law - have a "right" to spend unlimited campaign cash but they cannot tell us that women have a fourth amendment right to medical privacy? This must be a sick joke.

Our freedoms, our inalienable rights, are not subject to whim of the voters, no matter how many voters feel how strongly about them. We get to vote to make overall national policy - to do things individuals can't do by themselves, and to provide for the common defense as well as the general welfare. Your ballot is your chance to influence policy on taxes, the economy, social programs, spending, regulations and the like. Your ballot is not your ticket to impose your theocratic beliefs on others.

This is what Paul Ryan and the anti-choice Right don't get. They talk a good game about freedom and liberty, but have no trouble subjugating the rights of women and gays and immigrants to the whim of voters. The truth is that if Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney get elected, you can kiss Roe v. Wade goodbye. The truth is that if they are elected, they will appoint judges who will overturn it, and they will push for an amendment to the Constitution that not only will ban abortions but will make it a crime. The truth is that, as Ryan said, they think that the most fundamental right of a person - to be secure in their person, which is to say to control their own body - should be put up for a vote.

To paraphrase Hillary Clinton, No way. No Romney, No Ryan.

Like what you read? Chip in, keep us going.

Battlground: Arizona

Nate Silver Just isn't that Good at Calling Close Races in Contested States