Wrong on Rights

Our grand Constitution is lacking a word.
So, therefore, six justices now have concurred –
an order has come from the land’s highest court:
Adieu, constitutional right to abort.

Liberty’s something that can’t be deprived;
the concept of privacy’s from that derived,
relying on several amendments and rulings.
But now that’s been tossed in the trash bin – no fooling.

Rejecting the concept of stare decisis
has set off this grim constitutional crisis.
Proclaiming this power belongs to the states,
a fifty-year standard this ruling negates.

Alito, the justice who wrote this opinion,
said over our bodies we don’t have dominion –
at least when it comes to abortion, he reckoned.
The fetus comes first, and the woman comes second.

This ruling does not ban abortion, that’s true.
But the standard, a “rational basis” review,
means a state can decide on its own to permit –
or deny – this procedure as each one sees fit.

Some states say life starts at the point of conception:
abortion is banned; there should be no exception
for incest or rape or the health of the mother.
Embracing that view, with no room for another.

But not every faction subscribes to these views.
In fact, a majority think right to choose
should remain as the law; Roe should not be rescinded.
And then Clarence Thomas weighed in, quite long-winded:
Forget contraception, and let’s ban gay sex,
and marriage should be what the right-wing expects:
a man and a woman – not two of a kind.
With six justices seemingly of one mind,
imposing their will, disregarding autonomy;
all women, take note: this is how things are gonna be.

Although several justices claimed Roe was settled,
the goods they’ve delivered are not what was peddled.
It’s time to regroup and rethink and retrench –
to overcome six useless slugs on the bench.