Dr. Joanna Lahey: A History of Abortion Rights in VA
THE NEWS:
Former Republican Delegate Dr. David Ramadan analyzes the newly minted Republican congressional nominees who emerged from caucuses in VA-05, VA-08, and VA-10. He also discusses the possible Republican candidates in a primary to come later this year to contest Abigail Spanberger in VA-07 and Elaine Luria in VA-02. He also weighs in on how the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade could upend the midterm elections if Democrats are able to capitalize on it efficiently.
GUEST:
Dr. Joanna Lahey at Texas A&M's George W. Bush School of Government & Public Service is an expert on the history of abortion rights in the Commonwealth of Virginia. She explains how abortion went from legal to illegal and back again.
Learn more at https://linktr.ee/JacklegMedia.com
Michael Pope
I'm Michael Pope.
Thomas Bowman
I'm Thomas Bowman.
Michael Pope
And this is Pod Virginia, the podcast keeping you up to date on the latest developments from the 1840s.
Thomas Bowman
Very timely news and information from us, always. So later in the show, we're going to talk about that time Virginia outlawed abortion. It was not in 1776 when the Declaration of Independence was written. It was not in 1788 when the Constitution was ratified. In fact, abortion was totally legal in the 1700s, a time many conservatives say, "Original intent should guide decisions."
Michael Pope
It was not until 1847 when Virginia outlawed abortion. Now, you might be thinking to yourself, "1847? What the heck was happening in 1847?"
Thomas Bowman
We're joined by Joanna Lahey of Texas A&M University, who's going to explain everything, and the Hidden History of abortion rights in Virginia. So prepare to have your mind blown, is all I can say.
Michael Pope
But before we get into any of that, let's get to the news. This week, we're going to focus our attention on the three conventions, the three Republican conventions, that happened over the weekend, where Republicans selected candidates in three congressional districts. And to help us understand those conventions, and the candidates, we're joined by a longtime friend of the podcast, who is a former Republican member of the House of Delegates, now at the Schar School of Policy and Government at George Mason University. Hey, in his spare time, he recently earned a doctorate from Vanderbilt University. Dr. David Ramadan, thanks for joining us.
David Ramadan
It's always always always great to be with you guys. Thanks for having me back.
Thomas Bowman
And from vacation, no less.
David Ramadan
Yes, absolutely. From beautiful Smith Mountain Lake, Virginia.
Michael Pope
I'm jealous and you're making all of our listeners jealous too. But so let's get into politics, instead. Let's start in the 10th Congressional District up in Northern Virginia. This is a district, currently, represented by Democrat Jennifer Wexton. Now, she took the district from Republican Barbara Comstock back in 2018. Now, this is a district that was in Republican hands for many, many years represented by Congressman Frank Wolf, who was first elected to that district way back in 1980. Convention delegates in the 10th were considering 11 candidates. That's a huge number of candidates. Now, a lot of people seem to think that the front runner in the race was Prince William Board of Supervisors member Janine Lawson. Some people considered Brandon Marshawn a contender because he had the support of people close to Governor Youngkin. And then there was a lot of support for Caleb Max, who happens to be the grandson of Congressman Frank Wolf. But none of those people emerged as the candidate. Dr. Ramadan, you live in this district, you know, this, the politics here very well. What the heck happened in this convention for the 10th Congressional District?
David Ramadan
Oh, wow. Well, anytime you got 11 people running in a in a candidacy, it's anybody's anybody's race, especially when it is a convention with ranked choice. That means that candidates will put in their first choice, second choice, third choice, I mean, they can put in multiple choices. Theoretically, as many as 11 based on the 11 candidates. I think this went something like nine rounds yesterday, and Hung Cao is now the Republican nominee. Now you may ask, "Who?" He's relatively unknown name, but been working it hard for the last six to eight months. I think he announced before that, but working hard six to eight months, and he beat the front runner at the time, Supervisor Janine Lawson, from Prince William County, who raised the most amount of money, spent the most amount of money, and had pretty much the who's who of the conservative movement on her side endorsed-
Michael Pope
And to be fair, and to be fair, Dr. Ramadan, she was considered the front runner. I spoke to you last week and you seemed pretty confident that she had a really good chance of winning, and, clearly, that did not happen. What happened with her candidacy?
David Ramadan
So it wasn't what happened with hers, as much as what happened with Hung Cao's. Hung Cao was able to combine multiple forces that ended up with his winning. One, he is Trumpier than Janine Lawson. And this is, today, the the state of the party, where you need to be quite Trumpy in order to win. On several issues, he was quite Trumpy. Second, she had a record that was attacked by whisper campaign the last few days, she was called a, "liberal," and a, "rhino," and, "woke," by by the far right of the Trumpy team, which is not the case. Janine Lawson is really a very hardcore conservative. But for one vote on the Prince William County Board, where she had voted for some study that will consider equity, that made her, "woke," that made her quote unquote, "liberal," in the eyes of the far right. But to give him credit, he ran a good campaign. He raised enough money to win, not as much as she did. And he did multiple factors. He played his story well. He is a captain in the Navy, an immigrant living the American dream, served in multiple wars. He was able to galvanize the minority vote in Eastern Loudoun. Quite a bit of the minorities came out to vote for him. He is a Loudoun candidate, versus a Prince William candidate. That's always an advantage for the Loudoun person, in this Loudoun centric district. And he is one of the early T.J., Thomas Jefferson graduates, he played that, which worked quite a bit to galvanize the minorities, again, to come out, because he is a strong supporter of T.J. and the rights of minorities to get into T.J. And last, but not least, he attacked Biden again and again and again. He claimed that the President is not fit to be the Commander in Chief. He questioned election integrity. He played on the school choice and parents rights in the Loudoun schools issue, which is a galvanizing issue in this area, as well. And he belongs to a big church in western Loudoun, that was very involved in the school issue. All these factors together, allowed him to get, I think, 40% on the first round, and it took something like nine rounds to end up with 53% of the vote, while Janine was trailing about 10% behind him. Again, we're in an era, we are in an era of conventional wisdom within the Republican Party does not play anymore. Even a very hardcore conservative like Janine Lawson, who had the endorsements of Ken Cuccinelli, and Morton Blackwell, and the who's who off of the rank and file of the of the conservatives of the area, were not able to win, because they were not Trumpy enough. So my last-
Michael Pope
Well let me ask you about that. You mentioned that earlier, I want to make sure I understand that. So what was, what was Cao saying that was Trumpier than any of the other candidates, in general, and Lawson in particular?
David Ramadan
Yeah so, Biden's not fit to be Commander in Chief because of the requirements of vaccine to the military. He doesn't even want a vaccine requirements to the military. He had he had TV ads running on that. He had to he had statement after statement about the election integrity, talking about, questioning, how would quote unquote, "A candidate sitting from his basement, get more votes than Obama did." So he really played those quite a bit, and ended up with with winning, winning the vote. And while that was good enough, versus what Janine was saying, which was the straight points, was not good enough. And as much as she said, she is anti woke, anti liberal activities, and it's wall against that as an elected Republican. One vote whereby she accepted a study into equity, ended up to be the base for a whisper campaign, claiming that she is woke, and she is liberal, and she is a rhino, and then add that to all other factors that that Hung got, cost her the election and a million dollars in spending.
Thomas Bowman
You know, vaccines have been mandated for military members since, you know, the start of vaccines and our military. I'm just kind of astonished, coming from this district, growing up in the 10th District, and I actually cast a vote or two for Frank Wolf in my early voting days. It's astonishing to me to hear a Republican run on having a weaker military that doesn't have forced readiness. You know, we need our military fighting fit. We can't not be deploying them because of COVID outbreaks within the within the troop. That's ridiculous.
David Ramadan
Correct. Correct. Look, few other things prove the point of not Trumpy enough as well in the district, even though most of the candidates were trying to be as Trumpy as possible. But it didn't work for for most of them either. So you got, you got Frank Wolf's grandson, that didn't help at all. That didn't work for him. You have the Youngkin candidate, really, in the race, or the Youngkin light candidate in the race, Brandon Michod, who was being wrapped or that his consultants were axiom strategies, that's Youngkin's folks that were running him. They got him on Fox News, they got him national attention. They said person who moved from from New York. I mean, the whole story trying to replicate the Youngkin game here, and he came a distant third.
Thomas Bowman
So is this somebody that can actually beat Jennifer Wexton?
David Ramadan
Look, this district- a lot of people are saying this is a flip district. I don't see it. Even with the tide that Youngkin had last year, and the incredible spending that he did, McAuliffe still won that district by two or three points. Normally, that's a 10 point spread district. So will the next election be even more of a of a wave for Republicans, than the Youngkin election was? If it is, and if that person would be able to run a Youngkin style campaign, and have as much spending, and have that wave, and even beat Youngkin's numbers, sure, it's doable, but that's highly unlikely.
Michael Pope
Would Lawson have been a more formidable candidate against Wexton than Cao?
David Ramadan
Not necessarily, no. On the contrary, she has a among the general electorate, she is more of a known name, and known as a hardcore conservative, than Cao is. Cao is an unknown name and the general electorate, as he was in the primary. So he can define himself to be a middle of the road candidate. He can, not necessarily he will. So depending on how what kind of campaign is gonna run for the general electorate, how much can he define himself to be a centrist candidate? We'll see. If he walks away from these far right issues, or far right messaging, not necessarily the issues, and there is there signs of that. For example, he did not oppose ERA, and he was attacked by Janine Lawson, in the last part of the campaign, on the ERA issue. And he was like, "What, ERA is fine, pretty much. They just wanted to find woman and woman. There's no big deal here. There's no ramifications on everything else that others are claiming." So there are signs that he may be able to run without being the far right, Trumpy candidate in the general election. But would he do that? I don't know. Can he do that? I don't know. And we'll see if he hires a campaign staff or campaign consultants that will will position him as such.
Thomas Bowman
Okay, well, we got to move down to the 5th Congressional District now, where incumbent Republican Bob Good, was challenged by the Republican Chairman in Charlottesville, Dan Moy. Moy tried to portray Good as someone who is, "Missing in action," particularly calling attention to his vote against the National Defense Authorization Act. But the challenge fell flat, and Moy got about 300 votes, as opposed to the 1500 votes for Congressman Good. Dr. Ramadan, what do you make of that convention in the 5th District?
David Ramadan
You know, that's a typical telltale of where the party is at today. It's full convention, not a firehouse primary, one location, everybody gathered in one place. And Bob Good is, as crazy of a candidate, as far right of a candidate, as obnoxious of a candidate, as one can be today. And he got 85% of the vote. Only 15% by a traditional conservative who was challenging him. If that doesn't tell you where the Republican Party is today, nothing else will.
Michael Pope
Okay, well on that- on that note, let's move to the 8th Congressional District. This is the bluest of the blue. It's currently represented by Congressman Don Beyer. Now, this is the seat that was held for many years by Congressman Jim Moran, first elected in 1990, when he knocked off a Republican Stan Paris, so that was a different era, with a different Republican Party. In this election cycle, Republicans didn't even have to recruit anybody. Normally, they've- Republicans, have to recruit somebody to run against Beyer. This year, there were five Republicans that came out of the woodwork to run against Beyer. Now, the convention ended up selecting Karina Lipsman, which if you heard our show last week, you heard audio of her calling for Anthony Fauci to be jailed. Dr. Ramadan, what do you make of the Republicans in the 8th Congressional District selecting a candidate who wants to jail Fauci?
David Ramadan
In a blue of the blues of areas. So I guess I'll retract my last statement. If what happened in that district doesn't tell you where the Republican Party stands today, then nothing else will compare to the 5th. It's truly truly truly a problematic state of of a party, where the Republican Party is. Whether Trump is still there or not, that's the that's the problem today that that continues, is that that Trumpy like movement, that Trumpy like persona, incredible amount of of just talk the means nothing, accusations, and being able to say somebody like like Fauci needs to be thrown in jail, because they disagree with him, that's going to outlast Trump, it already outlasted Trump. There's a small faction of the party that keeps arguing that, you know, "Trump will be gone and this will subside." It doesn't look like it's subsiding and, and it looks like this state of craziness keeps increasing, which is not- definitely not good for the Republican Party, and definitely not good for America. America needs two healthy parties that are competing, two healthy parties that are arguing and debating issues, two healthy parties that have the acceptance of each other, despite differences in ideology, in differences in style, and differences in in how we govern. And unfortunately, the Republican Party has exited that arena at this point, with such candidates. There are still many in the Republican Party that that are good old conservatives, and that are center right. However, they are sidelined.
Thomas Bowman
Delegate Ramadan, you also have said now, a couple of times, that the results of these conventions are emblematic of the state of the Republican Party, not just in Virginia, but throughout the country. And I'm wondering, from a high level, what's the solution here, because a lot of people compare the Republicans and Democrats to voting between drinking spoiled milk or drinking arsenic. And it's not sustainable to have one of America's two main parties being this, like, from my point of view, insane, right? So like, what do we do about that?
David Ramadan
Nothing can be done at this point, Thomas. The problem is, they keep winning, these extremist candidates keep winning, and this on both sides, there are more of them on the Republican side, at a much higher percentage at this point on the Republican side, but they also exist on on the Democratic side, you have the far left candidates that keep winning. And it looks like from all the numbers that are out there today, that in the midterm elections, the Republicans are likely to take the House. So it's pretty hard to be able to do something against a winning message, regardless how unhealthy, or how extreme that message is. When when candidates keep winning the primaries, and then keep winning the general elections, not necessarily in the 10th, in the 8th where we were talking, but in the 5th certainly, than in many, many other districts around the nation. There's not much you can do about it. I mean, you can't argue that they're not winning. They are, they're getting the jobs. And for that, we just we just sit and wait, and see where this, where this burning, smoldering fire is going to take. Is it gonna end up, you know, just stopping at some point, or is it going to continue and end up burning and crashing the party? I hope not. I hope that the Grand Old Party will be able to come back to the party of Reagan and come back to mainstream conservatism. I always was, always will remain to be conservative. But unfortunately for people like myself, there is no party today, for us to be involved in.
Thomas Bowman
You've mentioned that Republicans are poised, potentially, to pick up the House. Democrats could lose anywhere from 35 to 40 seats, potentially. But I'm wondering, since we're talking about abortion later today, how do you think overturning Roe v. Wade might change the narrative, if at all, at least the political momentum in the midterms?
David Ramadan
That's going to depend, in my analysis, on how the Democrats, for lack of better word, use this issue, or utilize this issue, in the election campaigns. The lines are drawn. I don't think anybody in America today has conflicting beliefs on should or should not abortion be legal. You're either for or against, and people have made up their mind on this issue for years and years, and decades. And everybody thought that was settled issue at the time, not settled law but settled issue. It changed. And now it's going to become a campaign issue, again. It's not a matter of can you convince voters one way or another, voters know where they stand on this. It's a matter of can you utilize that issue to bring the voters out. And if the Democrats are able to use slash utilize and again, not in use, not a negative connotation, but for for lack of a better word here, use the issue enough, to bring out voters that already believe in choice, then that may make a difference. If not, it may not make the difference that Democratic consultants are hoping that it would at this point.
Thomas Bowman
One last piece of news before we go to break, it just came across the wire. And thank you shout out here to Brandon Jarvis for your excellent reporting. So Paul Goldman sent out a mass text Friday stating that he's gonna withdraw his lawsuit seeking to force new elections in the Virginia House of Delegates this year. His text, allegedly said, quote, "It's clear no one in any branch of government cares that Virginia used unconstitutional old House of Delegates districts in 2021. I can't afford any more money and time is not a good time for me." Dr. Ramadan, what do you make of that?
David Ramadan
Whether they admit it or not? That's music to the ears of every one of the 100 members of the Virginia House. Republicans and Democrats, none of them, none of them really wanted to run for office this year, and run again next year. Although Paul was absolutely correct, that the current districts are unconstitutional. No, no, no there are no willingness by either side of the aisle to run these elections this year. And they weren't ready to do so. And therefore, everybody's happy that they don't have to do it this year.
Thomas Bowman
Yeah. My understanding is the reason that it was delayed, in the first place, is not because of the State House or the commission, it's because they got the they got the census data in April of 2021.
David Ramadan
Correct. It was too late for for the redistricting to be done with our session, and the General Assembly being in January and February until the beginning of March. So it wasn't due to a fault of their own. It was a delay in the census data. The General Assembly did their part on that, or would have done their part, had they gotten the census on time. Paul was correct that these were unconstitutional by that time, the districts that currently exist. And the debate in court wasn't about the constitutionality today. It was about did he or did he not have standing to file that case. He probably would have won it, had he had more time. But everybody's happy on both sides of the aisle not to run for election again. And it would have been incredibly costly, again, for candidates and for Virginia. And to be honest with you, I think Democrats are more so happy than Republicans, because they have quite a bit of multiple candidates living in the same districts because of redistricting that took place, especially in Northern Virginia, and with the quote unquote, "coup," that took place against the Speaker. I don't think the House Democratic Caucus was ready or willing to get into into a campaign this year where all of their members are going to be up.
Thomas Bowman
All right. Well, thank you for that analysis, Dr. David Ramadan with the Schar School of Policy and Government, it's always a pleasure.
David Ramadan
Thank you for having me. Always good to be back with you.
Thomas Bowman
All right, after the break, prepare to have your mind blown when we talk to Dr. Joanna Lahey at Texas A&M University, who will help you understand how abortion went from legal, to illegal, and then back again. We'll be right back.
Michael Pope
And we're back on Pod Virginia. Buckle up, because we're about to blow your mind. That's the experience I had when I talked to our next guest a few days ago. She's an Associate Professor at Texas A&M University's Bush School of Government and Public Service. She has conducted extensive research into the evolution of anti abortion laws in the 19th century. And she's here today to help us understand the evolution of Virginia's anti abortion laws. Dr. Joanna Lahey, thanks for joining us.
Joanna Lahey
Thank you.
Thomas Bowman
Let's start from the beginning, or at least the beginning of the country. Dr. Lahey, what did British Common Law say about abortion?
Joanna Lahey
So British Common Law, which it basically means, law that isn't in written down, it's not in the books, it's just what everybody knows, this is what happens. British Common Law basically said, you know, abortion was okay. And especially abortion is okay, if it happens before you can feel the baby, which they called, "quickening." Today, you would think, you know, until you could feel the baby start to kick. And, you know, there was absolutely no problem with getting an abortion before a woman could feel the baby kick. And that's pretty late in the pregnancy.
Michael Pope
So just to be clear, here, putting this on your mental timeline, if you think about the era that the Constitution was written in the 1780s, this is the founding fathers that, you know, conservatives are always talking about, "original intent, the Constitution." This is an era when abortion was legal, and, you know, sort of accepted, and not something that was punished. Is that accurate?
Joanna Lahey
Yeah, that's absolutely true.
Michael Pope
So your research shows that Massachusetts was the first state where abortion was illegal, although that was because of a court ruling. If you think about laws outlawing abortion, the first state to pass a law outlawing abortion, was Connecticut in 1821, followed by Missouri in 1825, and Illinois in 1827. What was happening in the 1820s, that so many of these states took action?
Joanna Lahey
So these early laws are not really what we would think of when we think of modern abortion laws. These tended to be laws that were meant to protect the woman. So they were often part of malpractice laws, or part of these, kinds of, omnibus anti-poisoning laws. And so you'd see like this is what happens if you poison the well in the town, it would be passed within the same bill as these anti abortion laws. And basically what they were intended to do, was they were intended to protect a woman from incompetent practitioners, and they were intended to add a penalty, or an additional penalty, if someone caused a woman to have an unwanted miscarriage. Previously, if you poisoned a woman and she didn't die, but it caused her to miscarry, and she didn't want to miscarry, then that might not have been something that could have been prosecuted. But what these laws did, was it made clear that there were penalties for causing women to have miscarriages against their will, or having incompetent medical care causing miscarriages.
Michael Pope
So one of the key figures in the story of how anti abortion laws evolve in the 19th century, is a Boston doctor named Horatio Storer, who started, what he called, "The Physicians Crusade Against Abortion." He started that in 1857. Who is this person, and how did he influence the debate in the conversation in the 1800s about abortion?
Joanna Lahey
So Horatio Storer, as you said, was a physician in Boston. He wrote two books, both anti abortion tracks. He was definitely a misogynist. He, if you read his books, you can tell that he thinks of women as vessels for boy babies and for daughters who are going to be having boy grandbabies.
Thomas Bowman
Sounds familiar? Did I just read that somewhere?
Joanna Lahey
I mean, one of the things that has struck me is that, you know, when I read these books by Horatio Storer, like maybe 15 years ago, it seems like exact sentences are now being lifted, and like you see them as tweets now, but from people in the 21st century, not from the 19th century.
Thomas Bowman
Okay, so Virginia outlaws abortion in 1847, but then they pass another law in 1877, strengthening it. What did the second anti abortion law do?
Joanna Lahey
Part of what the second anti abortion law did was to make it illegal. It bans advertisement and selling of abortion material. So it's not just illegal to successfully give someone an abortion, you're also not allowed to advertise for abortions, and you're not allowed to sell material that could, potentially, cause abortions. And this is part of a movement across the nation in the late 19th century, to, you know, not just ban procedures themselves, but to ban the ability to procure these procedures, or the ability for women to do these procedures on their own.
Michael Pope
So you talked about how abortion was legal in the early days of the country. And then in the 1820s, there was these laws aimed at poisoning of women, and trying to stop poisoning of women. Then there was this change in the 1840s that can be viewed as a reaction to the growing Abolitionist Movement. But there was something else going on, right around that same time period, which is the grow- the growing population in urban areas across the country. How did this conflict between urban areas and rural areas, influence the debate over abortion at this time period?
Joanna Lahey
So there were a lot of things going on in urban areas, particularly places like New York City, Boston, where, you know, they were kind of thought of as like dens of iniquity. There were- you could get illegal abortions very easily. You could buy, like there was there was a big concern about like these cities having smut, and lots of selling lots of obscene literature, obscene, you know, all sorts of obscene paraphernalia, drugs to procure abortions. Later, they would be worried about things like sodomy, and indecency, and, you know, all of these other things that, you know, they thought were going on and in the big city.
Thomas Bowman
I'm just absorbing that, give me a second. All right.
Michael Pope
I'm telling you, this is mind blowing stuff.
Thomas Bowman
This really is just fascinating. And, you know, it's kind of sad that we have to bring it all up again, in a way, but it's relevant now. So one of the possible explanations about why all these anti abortion laws happened in the early 1800s, is that it was all for political power. This was a theory outlined by James Moore at the University of Oregon, who suggests that the American Medical Association was trying to become a more powerful political organization. Can you explain the Moore Hypothesis and what you make of it?
Joanna Lahey
So the Moore Hypothesis was, it's, it's from his book, "Abortion in America," and he talks about how the American Medical Association was just starting out, like prior to this, you could just hang a shingle out and say that you were a doctor, you didn't actually have to have any kind of training, or any kind of certification. And the American Medical Association is trying to change this. But in order to do this, in order to become the, you know, powerful gild that they are today, they had to get some political power. And initially, they- he argues, that they had tried to get political power by regulating prostitution. And they completely failed on that. What happened was that political reformers, many of them, like, you know, middle class, urban women, took that fight and said, "No, we don't want to regulate prostitution, we want to ban prostitution." And so the American Medical Association did not gain power from that movement. And but they learned that, you know, if they put a little bit of prudishness in this, they might be able to kind of capture the Americans like guests. And so they decided that their next attempt would be to ban abortion. And part of this was so that they could take away power from midwives. So that childbirth would become the...would become something that you went to a doctor for, not something that you went to a midwife for. And it allowed them to become, you know, major players on this on the scene. The Moore Hypothesis is generally considered to be, you know, the leading hypothesis among historians. I test it in my paper with a couple of, you know, tests to see if there's like a correlation between states getting these laws and, you know, measures of medical power, like having a medical school and so on, and I don't really find very good evidence for it, but you know, I wouldn't, necessarily, rule it out either.
Michael Pope
So if you put all of the anti abortion state laws on a timeline, it becomes pretty clear that the emergence of all this anti abortion sentiment coincides, with the rise of the Victorian Era. What's the relationship here between anti abortion laws and Victorianism?
Joanna Lahey
Victorianism, I think you have to think about as being centered in the second Industrial Revolution. And what this means, in terms of economics, is that all of a sudden, we are able to have a middle class. Prior to this, you know, everybody worked, men, women, everyone worked. When, all of a sudden, we start having this additional surplus, that means that middle class, and upper class women, no longer have to work. You know, you can, you can also think about there being like a quality/quantity trade off of children, once we start having this prosperity, women start desiring fewer children, and the population rate starts dropping. But at the same time, there's this belief that we should be putting women on a pedestal, and not allowing them to dirty their hands, not allowing them to do anything, and that their places in the home, and that they should be, you know, having lots of children. At the same time that they have all of these incentives to have fewer children, but spend more, you know, spent spend more resources on the children that they do have.
Thomas Bowman
Hmm, well, they say history doesn't repeat, but it sure does rhyme. And I'm hearing a lot of rhymes from the 1840s, and 1860s, and 70s, all the way into the modern era. What's happening now? Like, how does abortion become, and stay, such an important part of a modern political debate, supposedly, decades after the segregationists have retired?
Joanna Lahey
All of these things are interrelated, all like slavery, immigration, and women's rights. They're all interrelated. And, you know, as I've been getting older, I have been embracing more the phrase, "I blame the patriarchy," It really does seem like there are systems of oppression that benefit, even people who don't necessarily want the benefit, but tend to benefit white men. And when you start trying to bring minorities up, when you start trying to make Black people and women no longer to be chattel to, you know, not be afraid of, you know, going grocery shopping, without losing their lives, or to be able to, you know, leave an abusive husband, without having to worry about who's going to pay for the children. You know, once once these like basic things start, you know, occurring so that, you know, maybe maybe it looks like, you know, Black people will no longer be murdered by the police with impunity, or maybe it looks like women are going to start reaching positions of equal power in the labor force, or immigrants may be welcomed or be safer here, that's scary to a segment of the population. And they start lashing out and they start attacking from all of these different fronts. And you know, it's it's, it's hard.
Thomas Bowman
Alright, well, always more to discuss, but this is a good place to leave it for now. And that's all the time we have for today. Dr. Joanna Lahey from Texas A&M, thank you for joining us.
Joanna Lahey
Thank you so much.
Michael Pope
Pod Virginia is a production of Jackleg Media. Our Producer is Aaryan Balu, our Social Media Manager is Emily Cottrell, and our Advertising Sales Manager is David O'Connell.
Thomas Bowman
Find us on Facebook or Twitter, subscribe wherever you get your podcasts and hey, write a review on Apple Podcast. It really helps people find the show.
Michael Pope
We'll be back next week with another episode of Pod Virginia.
