Why thousands will march for women's rights on April 9

Scan page 15

Last November, pro-choice forces in Boston, Mass., mobilized over 2000 supporters to confront Operation Rescue's attempt There is a resurgence in the women's rights movement, especially in the fight to preserve reproductive rights. The call by the National Organization for Women (NOW) for the April 9 national march in Washington, D.C., is an example of the type of response that is needed.

The cutting edge of women's rights today is the right to control their reproductive system. This includes the right to birth control and abortion. Without these rights-and the right to socially provided childcare and child support-equality is just a catch word.

The roots of the women's rights movement of today are in the struggles of the 1950s and '60s, when a large section of the American people became involved in protests against nuclear weapons, for free speech and civil liberties, and in support of the massive drive against segregation in the South.

This was followed by the movement against the war in Vietnam. Many young women were activists in the antiwar movement. They were organizing demonstrations, sit-ins, teach-ins, and whole college campuses against the war. They were learning the skills of mass organization.

Even more important, they witnessed the fact that victories could be won by massive demonstrations in the streets—without relying on the promises of Democratic and Republican party politicians.

At the same time, however, women were able to see that they, as women, had special needs that were not being addressed by anyone on campus, in the civil rights and antiwar movements, or within the trade unions.

Independent women's groups sprung up all over this country. Women's magazines and newsletters were published. On campus, women began to insist on women's studies programs, just as Blacks and Hispanics had been doing. Reproductive rights, especially the right to a legal and safe abortion, were major demands.

Organizing for abortion rights Until women began to openly speak up about the reality of illegal, and often botched abortions, this horror was not widely known. It was something so secret that no one actually admitted to ever having had one. In response, abortion speak-outs were held where woman after woman would get up and tell her personal experience.

For the first time, women could see that they were not alone and that women all over the country—in fact throughout the world— were beginning to act in similar fashion. "Sisterhood is Powerful!" became an when a woman's life was endangered. In 1981, this funding was eliminated for pregnancies resulting from sexual crimes.

Current law allows abortions with Medicaid funding only if a woman's life is endangered.

There have been efforts to extend these restrictions to all military and federal health insurance benefits.

Only 13 states currently provide Medicaid Mand Up For Gnoce Alexei 10/CC close down clinics. funding of abortions. Four of these only do so under court order. The Supreme Court has sustained these rules when challenged by pro-choice advocates. Abortion-rights groups estimate that 1.5 million women are currently denied abortion as a result of the restrictions already in effect.

Women without private healthcare are also the biggest targets of newer federal legislation Folger/Socialist Action Choice that restricts family-planning agencies that receive any federal money from even informing women about abortion as an alternative. These new rules are being challenged by Planned Parenthood and others, but implementation is scheduled to begin this year.

Parental-consent laws

Of the 1.5 million abortions that are performed each year in the United States, about one-third are teenage pregnancies. While the Supreme Court had previously struck down laws requiring parental consent, since 1981 they have upheld some of them.

There are now laws on the books in 25 states requiring parental consent-although only 10 states are currently enforcing them. Last year, contradictory judgments were made by federal courts on the constitutionality of these laws, which means they could also be referred to the Supreme Court for review.

In addition to the attacks on poor and young women, there have been a series of challenges trying to assert "fathers rights" to decide on abortion. The Court has overturned these challenges, but the litigations have succeeded in causing delays to women receiving abortions.

The anti-abortion forces have constantly introduced bills in state legislatures and the U.S. Congress seeking to further limit or eliminate abortion rights. Between 1977 and 1986, Congress dealt with 453 abortion bills, amendments, and riders.

Most serious is the recent Supreme Court decision to review a case (Webster V. Reproductive Health Services) involving a Missouri statute which defines life as beginning at conception. The law states that no public funds can be used to perform an abortion or to counsel women about abortion.

The Supreme Court can decide to consider not only the constitutionality of the specific provisions of the Missouri law but to reconsider the Roe v. Wade decision itself. The impetus to reconsider Roe v. Wade came directly from the federal Justice Department. A decision by the court to uphold any portion of the Missouri law would be a serious setback for the women's movement.

Outlawing abortion has never stopped abortions from happening. Making abortions illegal forces women who need them to risk death or maiming by going to illegal practitioners.

Countering Operation Rescue Along with the legislative and judicial attacks on abortion rights, groups associated with the "right-to-life" movement present another challenge for pro-choice groups.

Randall Terry's Operation Rescue-