By
Margaret Kimberly, The Black Commentator. Posted March 17, 2006.
It is easy to see a connection between present-day yearnings for a
return to Dixieland and renewed efforts to threaten voting rights. It
is less obvious to see similar connections with trends elsewhere in the
country. South Dakota is a long way from South Carolina, but that state
recently joined the battle to turn back the clock on civil rights and
return to the bad old days when white men ruled and everyone else was
subservient.
The legislature in South Dakota voted to outlaw
abortion except in cases where the mother’s life was endangered. Even
rape, incest and fetal abnormality will no longer be legally justified
reasons for abortion. Republican state Sen. Bill Napoli described the
only instance in which he thought abortion would be justifiable.
“A
real-life description to me would be a rape victim, brutally raped,
savaged. The girl was a virgin. She was religious. She planned on
saving her virginity until she was married. She was brutalized and
raped, sodomized as bad as you can possibly make it, and is
impregnated. I mean, that girl could be so messed up, physically and
psychologically, that carrying that child could very well threaten her
life.”
Napoli has some very strange fantasies. Hide your
daughter if you see him coming. In South Dakota, rape victims who
aren’t pious or saving themselves for marriage are just out of luck.
The
right to abortion became the law of the land with the Supreme Court’s
Roe v. Wade decision in 1973. In the absence of that decision being
overturned by the court, the action of the South Dakota legislature
gives the finger to the United States Constitution and anyone who
believes in it. South Dakota has fired on Fort Sumter. Congressman John
Conyers stated, “Victory in the South Dakota case will give
conservatives renewed momentum to challenge all the other freedoms we
hold dear.”
When the Brown v. Board of Education Supreme Court
decision outlawed segregation in public schools, Southern states
decided to ignore the law. Some didn’t desegregate and dared anyone to
complain. Others closed their public schools and deprived black
children of their right to an education. South Dakota’s legislators are
like the segregationists of old. They have intentionally broken the
law. They are hoping for court challenges and expect Bush appointees
Alito and Roberts to live up to right-wing expectations and overturn
the Roe decision.
The 21st century Confederates are succeeding because no one is willing to stand in their way. The Argus Leader,
the largest newspaper in South Dakota, announced it will not take an
editorial position on the new law. Spineless editorial page editor
Chuck Baldwin made this amazing comment about his decision to gag
himself. “Rather than change anyone’s mind, we would create another
controversy.”
Translation: The powerful have spoken, and I’m not bucking the system.
The
Civil War of the 1860s came about when the South was not content to
maintain slavery but insisted on expanding its reach into new
territories and forcing nonslave-holding states to be complicit in
their crimes through the Fugitive Slave Law. A South Dakota-instigated
rejection of Roe will be felt in states that would never consider
banning abortion.
The boldness of the right wing isn’t restricted
to any single issue. In South Dakota civil rights for women have been
eliminated. In Georgia voting rights have been severely curtained.
The
Department of Justice gave Georgia approval to institute a photo ID
requirement for voters. The new law will effectively keep thousands of
black Georgians out of the voting booth.
In the days immediately
following the 2004 election, there were numerous jokes and cartoons
about blue state secession. All joking aside, what will New York do if
Roe v. Wade is overturned? It should be willing to uphold its own laws
and stop complying with the tyranny of the political majority. In other
words, we need a movement. That movement must loudly proclaim a refusal
to go along with right-wing fantasies of time travel to the 1950s.
Movements require civil disobedience and risk taking. Movements create
their own leadership. Movements tell the Hillary Clintons of the world,
“We may hold our noses and vote for you, but we won’t defer to you.”
Civil
rights and civil liberties are in grave danger. They will disappear if
there is no willingness to fight for them. Preserving them will mean
having to fight against some of our fellow citizens. We can fight with
nonviolent methods, but there has to be a fight. The only alternative
is to find ourselves back in the days when everyone knew his or her
place and didn’t dare step out of it.
Margaret Kimberley is a freelance writer living in New York City. She also maintains the Freedom Rider blog.