Birth control laws : $b shall we keep them, change them, or abolish themDennett, Mary Ware
History
Birth control laws : $b shall we keep them, change them, or abolish them
Dennett, Mary Ware
Birth control; Birth control -- Law and legislation -- United States
_Delay in arranging hearings analogous to delay in sponsoring bill:
Joint Hearings by Senate and House Judiciary Sub-Committees held on
April 8 and May 9, 1924: Mr. Vaile in opening remarks pleads for
restoration of American freedom to acquire knowledge, which was taken
away 50 years ago: Birth rate in United States proves that people
want to get some information in spite of law: Catholic speakers
discuss birth control, not the bill: Wages of government employees
quoted as reason for passing bill: Prof. Field shows historically
that suppression does not suppress: Mrs. Glaser argues for freedom
for scientists to learn and teach regarding control of human
fertility: Mrs. Carpenter shows how Federal law operates to prevent
Chicago Clinic: Prof. Johnson gives eugenic view-point: Hearing
reopened at request of Catholics: Lengthy irrelevancies: Congressman
Hersey heckles the witnesses: Report of Senate Sub-Committee a sop to
the workers for the bill: Unique effort to get vote of full Committee
before adjournment, as aid to reducing inhibition in next Congress._
The Hearings on the bill, and the circumstances connected with them
offer further light upon the workings of the Congressional mind, or
rather the reaction of Congressional feeling concerning this subject.
With all due allowance for the fact that the Congressional calendar
is always “crowded” and that most legislation in the nature of things
under the present system may, and usually does, move very slowly,
there has been every evidence that the impulse to postpone committee
consideration and action on this bill as long as possible was most
compelling in the Judiciary Committee of both Houses. It was a replica
of the hedging about sponsoring the bill, which had characterized the
few preceding years, when the various desired sponsors “passed the
buck” by saying at the beginning of a session that they were so very
busy getting their “important” projects started they could not stop to
consider taking on this measure too, and toward the close of a session
they were similarly so driven finishing up their “important” projects
that they couldn’t think of anything else, and in the middle of a
session they were just as able to find “alibis” as at any other time.
As Senator Cummins has repeatedly said, “The men dislike the thing so!”
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account