“The decision whether or not to bear a child is central to a [person’s] life, to [their] well-being and dignity ... When the government controls that decision for [people], [they are] being treated as less than a fully adult human responsible for [their] own choices.”
“Justice Ginsburg wrote about women and women’s equality as she spoke about abortion. (At the time, there was not yet a broader awareness of the importance of abortion for transgender men and nonbinary people.)”
這句講得不錯: Another reality: Language and the law are inseparable. If we erase sex-specific words from our language, we erase, too, what it means to be a man or a woman. Where does it stop? There are people—you can look it up—who identify as not human. Is person an insensitive term?
昨天看完《RBG：不恐龍大法官》，因為有點好奇RBG對跨性別(tg)的想法，結果去查了一下找到這個:
美國公民聯盟(ACLU)為擅改RBG反墮胎發言的代名詞道歉
要不要生下小孩的決定，對女人的一生有重大的影響，尤其是對她們健康與自尊...當政府掌控女人是否該生下小孩的決定權，女人就不被當成一個能為自己的選擇負起全責的成年人。
當RBG發表對墮胎權的看法時，她是在指女性和兩性平等。(在當時，人們對跨性別男性和非二元性別者的墮胎權還沒有廣泛的認知。)
Another reality: Language and the law are inseparable. If we erase sex-specific words from our language, we erase, too, what it means to be a man or a woman. Where does it stop? There are people—you can look it up—who identify as not human. Is person an insensitive term?