Jessica Gold Haralson:

Yesterday I traveled with pro-choice activists from Penn for Choice to stand outside the Supreme Court, where the crucial federal “partial birth abortion” ban (a misnomer if I ever heard one) is being decided—yet again—by the Supreme Court. (If you aren’t informed about the case, _Gonzales v. Carhart, you can find out more about the case here.) According to Carol Tracy, an acquaintance of mine and the director of the Women’s Law Project, this is the nineteenth time the abortion issue is being discussed by the court—an unprecedented phenomenon. How silly, and how sad, that stare decisis somehow doesn’t apply when womens’ lives and bodies are on the line.

I know everyone is excited about the political changes afoot. And rightfully so!

I know it is very heartening to see Madam Nancy Pelosi as the first female Speaker of the House.

I know that it might be easy for the ‘Crats—and for other liberals/libertarians—to be tempted at the prospect of sitting on our duffs for the next two years, as Bush and the Keystone Kops that is his band of cronies gets whaled by the libs.

I know we are all excited that Britney Spears kicked K-Fed to the curb. (Ok, maybe that’s just me. And Rosie O’Donnell. Gawd, that was hilarious.)

Yet let us not forget that we still live in a nation where a strong undercurrent of fundamentalism has taken hold of many in our society—especially (and I hate to sound all fascist/propaganda ad about it, but it’s true) our youth. I could tell you what I witnessed in front of the Court, but let me show you first:

This is a group of “normal” college kids, save for one fact: they believe that all abortions should be illegal. ALL. Even in cases of rape or incest. They aren’t some weirdo hicks from some unfortunate backwater—these kids were moderately affluent, dressed in the best Abercrombie and Hollister that Mom and Dad could buy them. They were certainly much more passionate than the pro-choice activists whom I was with—singing songs, dancing, even featuring a “Christian rock” singer who “entertained” the crowd. (The “entertainment” in quotation marks is no accident. I think FedEx probably does a better show.)

And not only that, they outnumbered us. I counted about 10 pro-choicers, tops. The rest were these kids, as well as Operation Outcry (a group of women who “regret” their abortions, so have decided to impose that regret on other women’s decision-making) as well as some suits that represent Operation Rescue, a group connected with abortion clinic bombers.

So the pro-choice movement in front of the Supreme Court: 10 peeps. (Some very amazing people from the RH Reality Check blog were there, btw, and I had a great conversation with Tyler Pard of that danged awesome resource). The pro-lifers: a swarm—at least 50. At. Least.

Granted, it was a rainy day—a day filled with the allure of staying inside, filling up on Nestle Hot Chocolate and watching Oprah on a comfy couch. Granted, it was the day after midterm elections—I’m sure the Gonzales case isn’t on the radar of most Americans. Granted, it would have been easier to stay home. Just stay home.

But the anti-choicers didn’t care about all of that—the rain, the post-election haze, the lack of media coverage—and they vastly outnumbered my pro-choice companions. Why?

A South Dakota ban on all abortions almost became a reality for an entire state. (I say almost because the citizens thankfully overturned it, but it is still unclear if another ban with some exceptions will go through.)

Abortion providers wear bullet proof vests every day to do their jobs—providing the valuable service of choice for American women.

Women are still forced to sit through condescending, anti-choice lectures before they are allowed their own decision. The idea that pharmacists can refuse emergency contraception to their patrons is still being debated. The number of abortion providers has declined over one third since 1982, leaving many women in poor and rural areas out of the cold, denied access.

Our rights are being threatened, yet pro-choicers are not mobilized. And an entire generation is becoming increasingly pro-life, motivated by the religious right which is rendering anti-choice views trendy and “hip.”

Why are we so complacent?

I think the answer lies in the emotional fervor of the anti-choicers. As anecdotal as this is, I think many pro-choice individuals view their stance dispassionately—we are concerned, sure, but we are not emotionally engaged with the cause. We don’t have the fiery passion of God’s potential wrath motivating us to preach the cause to other young, impressionable kids.

Yet we could. I think the answer lies not in arguing with the pro-lifers or trying to convert them. I think the answer lies in placing our passion with the real victims in this debate—the women.

Instead of focusing on the question of an embryo’s personhood, we need to focus on the fact that thousands of American women will die of illegal, back alley abortions. The fact that women and doctors may be jailed for participating in a routine medical procedure. The fact that abortion rates in countries which outlaw abortion invariably skyrocket, a reality which must be harrowing for the women who are forced to face criminal penalties for their own decisions. The fact that the prohibition of access limits the choices and opportunities for women to live independent, emotionally fulfilled lives. The fact that many strong women and men fought for our right to make an informed medical decision, and we are now making a joke of their fight by sitting home and watching reality television instead of taking part in the reality around us.

How do we do this without using the manipulation tactics of religion and fearmongering? I’m not sure—I’m no libertarian Karl Rove. But we need to remember that history is not a wave of irreversible progress; rights that we fought for can just as easily be reversed. Our civil rights will not magically be granted to us, we must demand them. We cannot be complacent. We just can’t.

My name is Jessica Gold Haralson, and I am a pro-choice American.