reprint

Some months back, a publisher contacted me about reprinting my Roe v. Wade essay. I just got a copy of the book in the mail, and I'm so pleased.

The piece is being used in a series called "Issues On Trial"; this edition is on Reproductive Rights. I believe they're mainly used in public and school libraries.

The main headings are: Upholding Involutary Sterilization Laws - Buck v. Bell (1927); Legalizing Contraception - Griswold v. Connecticut (1965); Legalizing Abortion - Roe v. Wade (1973); Disputing the Fate of Frozen Embryos - A.Z. v. B.Z. (2000). For each, there's an overview of the Supreme Court case and decision, then between four and seven opinion pieces.

It's just a wee bit strange to see my name in the brief table of contents, alongside Oliver Wendell Holmes, Harry Blackmun and Stephen Jay Gould! I have no idea why the editor chose my piece, but it was a nice bit of luck. Something every writer can use once a decade or so.

Comments

  1. James Redekop18 April 2006 at 06:47

    It's just a wee bit strange to see my name in the brief table of contents, alongside Oliver Wendell Holmes, Harry Blackmun and Stephen Jay Gould!

    August company indeed! Congrats.

    ReplyDelete
  2. doggerelblogger18 April 2006 at 07:16

    Congrats!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Scott M.18 April 2006 at 08:11

    Congrats Laura!

    "feminista thumbsucker."

    You got to love their creativity...

    ReplyDelete
  4. Granny18 April 2006 at 09:29

    Congratulations.

    I was called a feminazi once by a man who just couldn't understand why I wouldn't "put on a dress" and go to his church.

    He didn't say it to me - he said it to my grandson. I reported him to his Bishop but in a way it was a compliment.

    ReplyDelete
  5. laura k18 April 2006 at 10:59

    Thanks all. :)

    I figure I've "made it" when the right wingers call me names!

    I know! That's why I enjoyed the stupid attacks I used to get from wingnuts on this blog. After I while I tired of it and just found it irritating. But if our lives and ideas make the close-minded bigots angry, we're on the right track.

    ReplyDelete
  6. M@18 April 2006 at 12:06

    What, my snarky faux-comments don't count?

    Now I'm offended! You buncha commenazis!

    ReplyDelete
  7. laura k18 April 2006 at 12:23

    Your faux snarks are in a class by themselves. You've crippled the wingnut movement in ways you probably don't even realize. (Am I close?)

    You buncha commenazis!

    Commenazis! Oo, good one. :-D

    ReplyDelete
  8. David Cho19 April 2006 at 00:08

    Oliver Wendell Holmes, Harry Blackmun, and Laura?

    Wow, those are some big names there. Now I want to come to your party more than ever so at least I get to pee perhaps not next to you, but with you under the same roof. You will let me use your bathroom, right?

    And OMG! In a lakeside neighborhood :^D

    ReplyDelete
  9. laura k20 April 2006 at 04:36

    You will let me use your bathroom, right?

    I'll consider it.

    And OMG! In a lakeside neighborhood :^D

    :D You goof.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Masnick9620 April 2006 at 16:13

    Congrats!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

sharia

This morning I see that Dalton McGuinty, Premier of Ontario, is banning the Muslim religious court known as sharia . This ends months of debate about whether sharia would be legal and binding in Ontario. I'm quoting at length from the story in today's Toronto Star because many US readers are likely not up on this. In a surprise announcement that caught both supporters and opponents of sharia law off guard, Premier Dalton McGuinty says he will move quickly to ban all religious arbitration in the province. McGuinty made the announcement in a telephone interview with The Canadian Press yesterday after months of debate and controversy surrounding use of Islamic sharia law in family arbitration. "I've come to the conclusion that the debate has gone on long enough," the premier told the news agency. "There will be no sharia law in Ontario. There will be no religious arbitration in Ontario. There will be one law for all Ontarians." The announcement prompted t...
Read more

can of worms

I'm opening a sticky subject here, my need to understand causing me to throw caution to the wind. It's about Alberta. Alberta vs. the rest of the Canada. The Globe And Mail runs something about Alberta's gripes every day, and I try to follow along. If it weren't for wmtc's resident Albertan , and the ensuing arguments in comments, I would've had no warning. It's not something Americans know about. As is, observing for more than a year, I have only the smallest of clues. Here's what I know. Please pardon my ignorance and oversimplification, but I have to start somewhere. The province of Alberta is rich, because it has oil. The province of Alberta is conservative, relative to the rest of Canada. Hmm. Funny how those two go together. Because of its great oil wealth, Alberta revenue helps fund services in the rest of Canada. (These are transfer payments?) Apparently many Albertans resent this. They want to keep Alberta's money in Alberta. They don't...
Read more

low confidence

I'm excited about today's no-confidence vote . Only three months after moving here, we'll get to see a government fall, a campaign, and an election, in a system very different from what we're accustomed to. Even the expression "the government will fall" strikes us as oddly dramatic and revolutionary. My sense of current Canadian politics, for what it's worth, tells me that very little will change from the upcoming election. I'd be surprised if the Liberals didn't win. So it's kind of cool to see this happening without a lot at stake. On a semi-tangential note, have I mentioned I'm completely down with "Corner Gas"? Excellent show; I love the deadpan humour. (Great website, too; check it out .) So was that really Finance Minister Ralph Goodale ragging on Brent Butt's camera last Saturday night?
Read more