Mississippi Clinic to Stay Open, But . . .

A federal judge ruled that the Jackson, Mississippi, clinic for women's health may stay open while it tries to meet the demands of the new state law, which requires all doctors performing abortions to have privileges at local hospitals.  This is good because the clinic can stay open and continuing servicing women's MANY different health needs.  However, it is really just a delay until the courts rule on whether the fact that the local hospitals are ignoring privilege requests so that the doctors will not be able to meet the state requirements.  Again, that sounds like causing the effect of an undue burden on the women of Mississippi who need abortions.

See the article here:  http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/48181044/ns/us_news-life/#.UAGQrByubmw

In a related topic, Jill Lepore with The New Yorker wrote a great piece following Cecile Richards, the President of Planned Parenthood.  In the article, Lepore follows the historical development of medical-supervised and -provided abortions and the legal and policy debates.  It certainly helps round out the picture.  Then, when you read that in conjunction with Jeffrey Toobin's book The Nine (available at amazon.com here), you get yet a fuller picture of how the ultra-conservatives have swung the abortion debate to the main stage (the past conservatives agreed that what a woman does with her own body is completely private) and to the right.  I recommend reading what they both have to say.  

Suroweicki on Fairness

I'm exhausted, so this will be  brief and have no deep thoughts in it, but I wanted to pass on some of what James Surowiecki wrote about the issue of fairness when considering the European financial woes.  Now, this was published back in the June 4 & 11 double-issue of The New Yorker, so the factual situation has changed; regardless, the concepts I've highlighted are still good for thinking about, especially in the terms of conflict resolution (which is where I believe I will use it in my course and in my book):

- "Similarly, a famous experiment known as the ultimatum game -- one person offers another a cut of a sum of money and the second person decides whether or not to accept -- shows that people will walk away from free money if they feel that an offer is unfair.  Thus, even when there's a solution that would leave everyone better off, a fixation on fairness can make agreement impossible."

- "From the perspective of society as a whole, concern with fairness has all kinds of benefits:  it limits exploitation, promotes meritocracy, and motivates workers.  But in a negotiation where neither side can have what it really wants, and where the least bad solutions is as good as it gets, worrying too much about fairness can be suicidal."

Shifting of economic power???

I just read this interesting article about how Africa (and yes, the author does point out that Africa is an extremely diverse continent and not a single country or even a generally unified continent) is rising.  It is developing a middle class, and it is beginning to take control of its natural resources and profit from them. The continent is beginning to recover from the centuries of abuse and plundering by Europeans, and it is beginning to take charge of its people in a responsible fashion.  Touching on the diversity issue, the continent runs from countries like Egypt and Libya, which are really much more Middle Eastern in culture, to Madagascar, which is still pretty wild, to Ghana, which is highly educated, to Somalia, which is ravaged by famine.  If the African countries are beginning to pull it together, I salute them, and I encourage them.  Europe is certainly struggling, and it is interesting to watch these long-standing colonies of places like Brazil and India develop into strong countries of their own.

On a related yet unfortunate note, I just read Charlayne Hunter-Gault's article "Violated Hopes" in The New Yorker's May 28, 2012, edition.  It focuses on the prevalence of rape of lesbians in South Africa.  I feel that by now, it is fairly well-known that South Africa has the highest rate of rapes in the world.  According to the article, in South Africa, a woman is raped every seventeen seconds, and obviously, the majority of rapes go unreported (one person speculated the report-rate is 1:9).  What is interesting is that, on its books, South Africa has progressive laws:   Following Mandela's 1996 election and sweeping reforms, "equality laws were tested and upheld in the courts, leading to equal protection for gays in the workplace.  Sodomy laws were overturned.  L.G.B.T.s gained rights in adoption, immigration, inheritance, and medical aid.  they were permitted to serve openly in the military, and to have their sex change recognized on identity documents.  The constitution mandated the creation of several state institutions to protect equal rights, including the Commission for Gender Equality and the South African Human Rights Commission.  In the fall of 2004, in response to an application brought by a lesbian couple, the Supreme Court of Appeal ruled that the common-law definition of marriage must include same-sex marriage.  In December, 2005, the Constitutional Court made any inferior status imposed on same-sex partners unconstitutional."  Then, as recently as 2011, South Africa introduced and voted for a resolution at the UN Human Rights Council to end "acts of violence and discrimination, in all regions of the world, committed against individuals because of their sexual orientation and general identity."  Despite these VERY progressive laws and public stances, South African men are raping South African lesbians in an attempt to "correct" them.  Women are being beaten, stabbed, and gang-raped.  Even when they report the abuse to the police, the police often do very little.  If the perpetrator is put on trial, there are accounts where he refuses to recant.  Obviously, the danger is heightened even more considering the prevalence of HIV in South Africa and the belief that if a man has sex with a virgin woman, he will cure himself of HIV.

Considering these two stories together, if South Africa wants to move onto a major economic stage and continue growing as a viable power, it will have to improve its rape (and murder, which I didn't even touch on) record/rate.  At this point, companies have no reason to move any of its current workers and their families to a country to be assaulted or murdered.  Additionally, unless it can verify the safety of its workers, the company will risk the world judging its policies purely by its location in such a violent place.  However, the argument is to be made that, if major companies begin moving into South Africa, they can begin changing the environment there and creating a safer country by providing people with "things they don't want to lose."  We know, as a societies, that people who have nothing to lose will commit crimes because the threat of jail or the like serves no deterrent.  However, if these people progress to having secure jobs and increasing their livelihoods, then they will have skin in the game  and not want to lose it.  Additionally, if lesbians become part of the workforce, they might be seen then as productive members of society and workplace partners, as opposed to outsiders or people to be victimized.  Furthermore, with more employment, people will have more of their time occupied, which then will also lead to lower crime:  they just won't have the time.  All just thoughts . . .  it's worth keeping these developments on the radar.

Toobin's take on Judge Brett Kavanaugh

Leading up to the Affordable Care Act's oral arguments at the Supreme Court, Jeffrey Toobin wrote a piece about DC Circuit Judge Brett Kavanaugh and his peculiar interpretations.  Like Toobin's later smack-down of Justice Kennedy's questions during that oral argument, Toobin provides a smack-down of Kavanaugh in his March 26, 2012, piece.  In that piece, he summarized Kavanaugh's 65-page dissent to the challenge of the Affordable Care Act, and he highlighted that Kavanaugh "appeared to offer some advice to the Republicans who are challenging Obama in the election this year."  Essentially, the judge suggested that "even if the Supreme Court upholds the law . . ., a President . . . could refuse to enforce ACA because he 'deems' the law unconstitutional."  Wait for it, wait for it . . . Toobin's next line: "That, to put the matter plainly, is not how it works."  (emphasis added).  Ha!  Presidents don't get to decide whether the law is constitutional, rather, that happens to be the one job of the courts (regardless of how much the court tries to expand its job title).  Toobin goes on to discuss the air of paranoia and misunderstanding and the danger of Kavanaugh (a judge who clearly is mistaken on the separation of powers) being appointed to the bench by a Republican president, but the best part was definitely the smack-down.  Enjoy.

The story behind an upcoming case . . .

I just read Ian Parker's "The Story of a Suicide" in the Feb. 6, 2012, edition of The New Yorker.  It gives the story of Tyler Clementi, the gay young man who committed suicide at Rutgers after his roommate filmed a romantic encounter between him and another man, and Dharun Ravi, the roommate who Tweeted and IMed about Clementi and watched Clementi's actions via webcam.  The story Parker portrays seems very much like immature teenage abilities to respond with any sort of control leading to an unfortunate outcome.  It also is very unclear about at what point Clementi became upset enough to kill himself and why.  Ravi is now headed for trial on the charges he faces.  He refused to take any plea deal (including one that didn't require him serving time).  It will be interesting what sort of precedent this sets:  how far are we going to make this case a landmark case setting the stage for bullying?  Was it even bullying?  Was it just teenagers in a new environment trying to adjust to one another?  As a result of Clementi's death and other gay teenagers' suicides, the "It Gets Better" campaign was launched to help gay teenagers make it through the teenage years.  However, Parker's story also points at a class-based issue between Ravi and Clementi.  That aspect has all but been ignored in the press I read previously about this case.  It will be interesting to see whether that issue arises at trial and whether any of the lessons will be geared towards more igniting issues than just sexuality.