@meghansmith @gbhnews I wonder what the legal landscape looks like for keeping abortion legal under a Republican president who manages to pass a national ban.

There's no question that women deserve full bodily autonomy, including the right to make medical decisions about pregnancy with their doctor free from state interference, but we clearly have a religiously-motivated supreme court that wants to curtail that right (even over religious objections like those brought forth by Jews). Under a hypothetical three-branches-of-government Christian theocracy, how would/could Massachusetts fight to retain women's rights in our state?

I'm also curious about the related issue of trans rights: how has the astonishing success of Dodds for the Christian nationalist right emboldened other unconstitutional moves to take away personal freedoms, such as controlling how people dress in public, or denying them access to lifesaving medication based on religious edicts? To me they seem connected, nut I'm curious how deep that connection runs. Are the dame groups funding both movements, for example?

@meghansmith @gbhnews

My eldest got pregnant (her & her & husband had been trying for a long time). So, it's fantastic news. Sadly, one of my first thoughts was "thank goodness we live in a pro-choice states just in case something goes wrong."

So much can go wrong with pregnancies--even for the healthiest person. There are many bad things about the Dobbs decision. One of those things: the abject fear of being pregnant in a state where abortion has been removed as a medical tool.