Papa is a mean old waffle

     "Waffle," I said, one morning at breakfast a couple weeks ago, as our hostess passed around these delicately browned beauties. "Now there's an interesting word. I wonder where it's from?"
     Out came the smart phones, several at the same time, like Western gunslingers on the draw — I've noticed that people are rapidly losing whatever inhibitions they may have once had about consulting their phones on a moment's notice, even at meals, checking them when a question arises and often when one doesn't. I imagine someday soon it'll be rare to ever put them away.
    "It sounds Dutch," I said quickly, guessing, trying to lay out a claim before technology revealed the truth. Like placing a small wager: I'll put $2 on the Netherlands.
    Up popped the e-definition: "a crisp cake of batter baked in a waffle iron" and this etymology, dating to 1744: "Dutch wafel."
    Bingo!
    But there was more.
    As a verb, waffle means "to fail to make up one's mind" (not how I would define it. I would say it is closer to "vacillate, waver between two different courses of action.") 
     But the second definition led me to play one of my favorite etymological games: connect the meanings. Is there a link between "waffle" the foodstuff and "waffle" the politician's friend? And which came first?
     The Oxford English Dictionary defines waffle as "a kind of batter-cake, baked in a waffle-iron, and eaten hot with butter or molasses" (do the Brits not use maple syrup? Poor blighters) and traces "waffle" to "wafer"—obvious, though I had never considered it before. A footnote cites the source of wafer as the Teutonic, wabe which, to this day, means "honeycomb" in German. The Shorter Oxford adds a wonderful bit of US slang, "waffle stomper" for a boot with a ridged sole. 
     My 1978 full OED only offers waffle as a verb meaning "to yelp" but nothing about going back and forth. The 1993 New Shorter OED elaborates "of a dog, yap, yelp"  then pushes on to "waver, vacillate, equivocate," which makes me think it's a fairly recent usage. The OED traces waffle the verb to the Scottish, "waff," which means flap and flutter in the wind, so the path to waffling as indecision is obvious. The Dictionary of Slang and Unconventional English ponders the connection, defining waffle as an aircraft term, "to be out of control" and "to fly in a damaged condition and/or uncertainty," dating it to the Royal Air Force around 1925 and wondering "Hence (?) to dither."
     Two different routes then, the breakfast treat arriving through the Netherlands, tracing back to the honey-loving Teutons (though it should be noted the French "gaufre," sounds awfully similar, and dates to the 12th century) while the personality flaw goes back through Scotland, evoking the fluttering sound of pennants. ("Waffle" and "wave" share the same heritage).
    Though both terms disappear quite quickly—no "waffle" in either Noah Webster's 1828 American Dictionary or Samuel Johnson's great 1755 Dictionary.  So no common ancestor for both breakfast treat and rhetorical blunder, though allowing a similar expression to stand-in, I found both crisp batter cake and inconsistency mingling in a single passage in the Second Act of Shakespeare's Henry V, written about 1599: "Trust none;" Pistol tells his wife. "For oaths are straws, men's faiths are wafer-cakes."
    Ain't that the truth? The Riverside Shakespeare interprets "wafer-cakes" as "fragile" as in easily-broken, but that's very close in meaning to wavering.
       There are a few obscure definitions worth noting. The Dictionary of American Slang defines "waffle" first as "a difficult or dangerous task" and then moves on to include "A disliked person, esp. an old person with wrinkled skin" and offers this 1934 gem from Damon Runyon: "[her] papa is a mean old waffle," noting that the usage was "never common." 
    Well, maybe it should be common. It's never too late. Some words slumber until needed. A "cursor" in my OED is defined as "a part of a mathematical, astronomical, or surveying instrument, which slides backwards and forwards." Where it stayed, esoterically—chiefly to describe the clear plastic sleeve on a slide rule—until about 30 years ago, when we all started using flashing electronic cursors every day. So as the Baby Boom proceeds into its senescence, I have a feeling we're going to be encountering a lot of mean old waffles, and will need a solid, unfamiliar, mildly-derogatory, slightly-humorous term to describe them.

Margaret Sanger, we need you again

"The past isn't dead," William Faulkner wrote, famously, in 1951. "It isn't even past." That's true for some groups more than others. Religious fanatics keep trying to drive women back into the past and, perhaps because no one takes them seriously except the Supreme Court, their successes don't seem to cause much distress.  

     Timing is everything, in book publishing as in everything else. 

     OK, maybe more so in book publishing. 

     So I do not want to suggest that by not being published until October,  The Birth of the Pill by Chicago writer Jonathan Eig will be in any sense “late.” 

     His previous books — about Lou Gehrig, about Al Capone — were excellent and best-sellers, and this next one is excellent and will be a best-seller, too, or at least should be.                 That said, it’s a shame it’s not available right now—I read an advance copy—because to read of the arduous struggle of American women to gain access to contraception at the precise moment when the U.S. Supreme Court is rolling back those hard-won rights, well let me tell you, it’s special. A chilling kind of privilege. 

     It’s like reading Upton Sinclair’s stomach-turning meatpacking novel The Jungle if the government were in the process of lowering food inspection standards. It’s like reading The Shining at the Stanley Hotel.

     Yes, that’s overstating the case. The Supreme Court did not say all women lose access to contraception, just women working for Hobby Lobby and, on Thursday, Wheaton College.     
     And only if they want it covered in their medical plans. They’re still free to buy it themselves, for now, assuming their pharmacists don’t balk, which is next.

     The ruling, in case you’ve been asleep, says the family owners of Hobby Lobby, because of their “sincere” religious convictions against contraception, can opt out of the federal Affordable Care Act. The Wheaton College ruling suggests even signing a form seeking an exemption is asking too much. This is not through any constitutional reading but due to the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act, a bill designed to help faithful sorts take their ball and go home whenever it pleases them. 

       People who think that is a good thing point out that nobody is forced to work at Hobby Lobby. True, but that is like saying it would be OK for Holiday Inn to ban blacks because they can stay other places. What if every business took this path and tried to tailor-fit the law to suit the religious whims of owners? If the court respects the sincere belief that sex is for procreation only and women who insist on having protected sex are whores who shouldn't be served by the company medical plan — the Hobby Lobby position, plainly stated — why shouldn't sincere religious belief in barring blacks or literally anything else not have equal weight under the law? A big book, the Bible is.
     Eig's book starts with Margaret Sanger, the pioneering advocate for women's reproductive rights, kick-starting birth control pill research in 1950, then backtracks to how women were treated when she began, around World War I. Maybe we've forgotten: One hundred years ago it was illegal to send information about contraception through the mail, forget the contraception itself. Not "illegal" as in one of those laws that sat on the books and nobody enforced. Illegal as in your pamphlets would be seized by postal authorities and you'd go to prison.
     Sanger opened the first clinic for birth control in New York in 1916, helping women desperate to get off the maternal treadmill. Shortly thereafter she was arrested for breaking the law: New York was one of 30 states that barred all contraception.
      I truly believe, if women of today understood how their grandmothers lived — baby machines under the thumb of men and religious men at that — if they had any sense of what life for them was like even 50 years ago, the babies they were forced to have, their constricted life choices, they would fall upon Hobby Lobby with a howl and tear it down brick by brick rather than let them prod our nation back toward that world.
     But they don't know. We're crazy about liberty, and miss, as the Supreme Court did, that here we're talking about the liberty of rich business owners and smug college deans to constrain the ability of minimum-wage clerks and struggling sophomores to run their lives. The Supreme Court gives that a kiss of approval and we shrug and sail into summer.
     No one's religion is violated by participating in the Affordable Care Act. As Eig points out, "There is no mention of contraception in the Bible," and the Roman Catholic Church had no official position on birth control until 1930. What you have is a divide, between those who want to live and let live under neutral civic laws and those who want to shanghai those laws to drag us all back to Christian theocracy, assuming we ever left.
     I should tell Eig I'm sorry for jumping the gun on his book. I promise I'll leap on the bandwagon come fall, if there's room. Alas, it'll be even more timely then, as women's rights keep sliding backward into history.

Calla lilies

     "Calla lilies!" I thought to myself, trucking north on Franklin last week. "What an odd place for calla lilies, in a glass vase, next to a white plastic bucket, beside that cement truck."
     I can't say for certain those actual words coursed through my brain, but some sort of enzyme flash that approximated those words. I slowed down, diverted my path to investigate.

Calla lillie

     But first, an explanation. As much as society today celebrates knowledgeable, sensitive men, in theory, I'm not sure that recognizing a calla lily on sight is something for a guy to brag about. In my defense, my wife had us focus intently on the top 50 or 100 flowers used by humanity over the past century when planning our wedding, and this particular flower must have lodged in some little-used antechamber of the brain, where it flashed catching glimpse of orange after laying dormant for nearly a quarter century.
     And my further defense, I was wrong. When I saw what my supposed calla lilies really were, I smiled, and took the above photograph, which sent two cement workers, standing nearby in their yellow vests and hard hats, hustling over to see what I was photographing.
     Nobody wants to get in trouble.

   I must have perfected a certain disarming manner, however, because within moments I had explained the nature of my confusion, and we were happily talking cement, particularly its quality of heating up as it hardens. I explained that not too long ago I had been out to tour Prairie Materials, in Bridgeview, for a pending concrete story—fascinating stuff, concrete, the trucks are everywhere this summer—and they insisted I include their company, Ozinga, which is another big cement concern in Chicago.
     By the time we parted, we were old pals. They took my card, and assured me the top bosses at Ozinga—fourth generation cement guys—would leap to be involved in my story, and explained how construction workers put decals on their helmets, as tokens of their jobs, like fighter pilots painting kills on the sides of their jets. They gave me an attractive Ozinga sticker for my hard hat, and they were ready to give me a hard hat too, but I insisted that I already have a serviceable one my friends at the CTA had given me.
     I parted in maximum good spirits, hurried to my office, dug out my hard hat, and put my trophy upon it, at the very back, in the place of honor. If you had told me that knowing a calla lily on sight, perhaps coupled with not the best eyesight at a distance, would help me make a good connection at a cement company for a story, well, I would have been dubious. But that is indeed how things work in the city. Wonderful world.        

   
   

Saturday Fun Activity: Where IS this?

     This struck me for several reasons, in the few seconds after the el car doors slid open.
     The colors, first of all: light steel blue tiles with a reddish orange trim. Quite smart, for public transit.
     And then the whimsical typeface on "LOOP," the odd little split between the "LO" and the "OP," almost rendering it into a different sort of word. There was something sweet about it. 
     And oddly, there is no stop called "LOOP" on the el—I know it's officially 'L', but that looks ugly to me. If "el" was good enough for Nelson Algren, it's good enough for me. The CTA is going with 'L' now, officially, but it also created Ventra cards and we'll see how long those last.  Better to stick with the old standards.
     Sorry, where was I? Ah yes, so there is no "LOOP" stop to the el. This signage, though whimsical and perhaps even helpful, in a rough kind of way, won't tell you what station this is.
     Where is it? Googling won't help you here—I checked. You'll have to have just noticed it, as I did, which means you have an eye for design, and thus might appreciate one of my super-rare blog posters, which I will send to the person who correctly identifies the line and station this is. Post your guesses in the comments section below. Good luck. 

"Everything comes off—skin gone, muscles gone..."

    “Degloved,” is a term I had never heard before Dr. Brian Sayger, chairman of emergency medicine at Advocate Christ Medical Center in Oak Lawn, used it to describe a certain ...
     But first, a warning to those who might be squeamish or eating their breakfasts: Our subject today is fireworks and how truly dangerous they are. Given that a certain number of Chicagoans will be hurt by nightfall, maybe maimed — last year a woman had her right foot blown off — maybe even killed, this column will stray into the grim specifics, and a person digging into his poached egg or her porridge might prefer to set this aside for consideration later in the day. ...
     Imagine the "Jeopardy" theme playing: Doo doo doo, doo-doo, doo doo dooo. Doo doo doo doo DUP, dah doo dah doo dah...
     Back? So, where were we? Ah yes, “degloved.”
     “Children will hold firecrackers in their hands thinking they will feel little pop,” Sayger said. “Sometimes it will deglove a hand: blow off all the soft tissue of a hand.” 
     The true experts at this are drunk teens.

     “It’s usually a teenager, or a young 20-year-old who has been drinking,” Sayger said. “They’ll hold an M80 in their closed hand. It has enough explosive power that everything comes off: skin gone, muscles gone, blood vessels, tendons, pretty catastrophic injuries that create permanent disability.”

     Not to overstate the case. Most of the 11,400 fireworks injuries that send people to the emergency room last year, according to the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, are not life-threatening.

     Minor hand and finger injuries are most common, along with burns. While professional-quality mortars do the most damage when they get into the hands of amateurs — that's what took off a Chicago woman's lower leg last year — sparklers are notoriously dangerous because people have a habit of handing them to small children, who like to jam the burning ends, hotter than molten glass, into themselves or other children.
     "Sparklers cause thermal burns, even after the sparkler has gone out," Sayger said. "A child steps on it, picks it up, easily suffering localized burns."
     Half of firework injury victims are children, and half take place in the two weeks on either side of July 4. You'll probably live: Only eight people died nationwide in 2013 due to fireworks, all adults. Average age: 41.
     Looking over the fireworks accident reports, four ironclad rules are clear. If you must handle fireworks and want to minimize your chance of being maimed or killed:
     1. Don't create your own fireworks. Half of the deaths — two couples in unrelated accidents — were emptying black powder into pipes or tubes to make more powerful fireworks. Smoking during this process also is unwise.
     2. Don't be drunk. Which is a conundrum because — for many, obviously — getting drunk is an essential element of setting off fireworks. They fumble and hurt themselves and others. Just as you designate a driver, designate a sober person to light fireworks.
       3. If a firework fails to go off, toss it in a bucket of water and call it a loss. Do not pick it up and try to relight it. Especially do not — heck, let's emphasize this, because the subtlety of this next suggestion eludes so many — DO NOT PLACE YOUR FACE OVER PROFESSIONAL-GRADE MORTARS TO SEE WHY THEY ARE NOT FIRING.
     4) Do not light a firework and expect to throw it because a) gunpowder residue can be on the fuse, exploding immediately and b) thrown fireworks are extra dangerous.
      Oh, and most fireworks are illegal in Chicago.
      No matter. The sad truth is those who will be injuring themselves and others at 11 p.m. are not reading the paper with their coffee and orange juice saying, "You know ... holding that M80 in my teeth and lighting it ... I don't think I'm going to do that, based on the wisdom of this column."
     But maybe bystanders will read it and will edge themselves a little farther from the impromptu firework orgy in the corner park. Maybe someone will nudge the drunk with a lighter back toward the keg and encourage the sober guy to do the honors.
     The good news is that Sayger and his fellow surgeons try to save degloved hands because, as he put it, "people need their hands." The bad news is doing so might involve your hand being sewn into your stomach for six months to develop scar tissue.
     "Not very fun at all," Sayger said.
     Far, far easier is to show a little common sense and caution before it even happens.
     "Always have a very healthy appreciation of fireworks," he said. "Don't underestimate their potential. Always be cautious."
     Happy Fourth of July. Be safe and sane.

Shopping Spree

The brain is a mysterious thing
About three pounds
Pinkish gray, meatloaf shaped
Containing our entire worlds
Which sometimes get out-of-whack
Over the silliest things
Like mine did yesterday.
So much so that I have to pause
and ask.
Am I really going to tell this story?
Yes, because it might help you avoid the night I had
And maybe, in telling, I can find a way to render it
Less embarrassing.

So on Wednesday....
Wait.

First, background.
My older boy is going off to college in the fall.
California.
A different climate.
He'll need a new wardrobe. Californian clothing.
Pastel colors. Light fabrics.
Which his mother set busily to collect
at Kohl's, and Filene's Basement, and the other discount outlets
we usually patronize.
But as summer progressed, I began to stew.
A boy also needs expensive stuff.
A few pricy things.
To boost the old ego.
I know I did.
Not something plucked off a pile,
not something second-rate, sagging on a plastic hanger.
Not something overlooked, damaged, left behind
Something new.
Something fancy.
Something bought with care, amidst wood, aided by an attentive clerk.
Something special. 
Enter Brooks Brothers' 50 percent Off Semi-Annual Sale.
The newspaper ad caught my eye.
Brooks Brothers.
Classy. Elegant.
Abraham Lincoln shopped there.
John F. Kennedy.
Why not us too?
I knew my wife, frugal, guarding our hoard of pennies, would not approve.
So, trying to smooth the way, I did some groundwork.
Called her upstairs. Spoke to her, softly but emphatically.
Explained the psychological value of a really expensive shirt
Maybe some summery shorts.
"Set a budget," she replied.
So I stretched my mind to the limits of excess,
and figured ... $200.
I would blow $200 at Brooks Brothers to send my son off to college properly.
The boy was willing
It seemed a plan.
Meet in Millennium Park after our respective jobs.
He's working, downtown, at 18.
Fine boy.
And we stroll up to Brooks Brothers,
we enter a fantasy world, clubby
Pants with turtles on them.
We held up shirts.
We run our hands over fabrics.
I subtly guide him. A Madras shirt perhaps,
Very California
Plucked, not coincidentally, off the "Two for $99" rack.
And since we'll need a second to qualify,
this blue and white striped Oxford.
Plus shorts, powder blue.
We fall under the care of Bradley.
A sharp young man himself.
Politely helps us into the dressing room.
The lad looks good in his Madras shirt.
Ditto in the Oxford. The shorts go with them both.
Bradley puts a dimpled blue searsucker jacket on him.
Only $398.
"No thank you," we decide.
Ditto for the white Stetson straw hat
So now we're checking out, two shirts, shorts,
$192 total.
Just under our budget.
I sign the Mastercard, the successful and generous dad.
Our boodle goes into the matte black Brooks Brothers bag.
We hit Michigan Avenue.
6:03. Just time to make the 6:19.
Hop into a cab.
My hand snakes into that luxe Brooks Brothers bag.
As if acting on its own volition
Hmmm...
Two shirts. One $55. One $65.
Not two for $99 at all.
My first wild impulse is to order the cab to turn around.
Figure this out.
But we'd miss the train.
And alarm the boy.
Happy with his transaction
It's only ... $21 more.
Eat the $21.
In for a dime, in a for dollar....
We just make the train, running. 
And so I try to go about my evening business.
Push the thoughts aside.
Yes, I should have checked the receipt,
but I was out of my element.
Out of practice.
Rusty.
Intimidated.
I had never been inside Brooks Brothers.
Always check the receipt -- a good lesson for $21.
A bargain.
Let it go.
Easier said
Than done.
Every time I walk away from the thing.
It hops up and
circles around to meet me..
This echo.
This phantom.
Hi! Miss me?
I keep thinking of the story in the New York Times that morning.
Walgreen's perhaps moving its corporate headquarters overseas.
The great titans of wealth, amassing more.
Already rich.
Yet relocating around the globe, maybe, to save another 10 percent.
As opposed to little me, timid mousing myself into Brooks Brothers
Dragging my elder son.
Not managing to save anything at all
While trying to be something I'm not.
And disguise him as something he isn't.
To rub a little of that luster off onto our shabby lives,
so he can pretend to come from a fancier place than he does
with the genuinely rich swells he's going to encounter.
Both of us, lured in by 50 percent.
That I did not in fact get.
Through some kind of accident
The sort of thing that happens to me
A lot
Life seemed one long rigged game
That I naturally lose.
Pick a shell! It's easy.
It looks so easy
For other people
The incident sat there.
And vibrated.
A high pitched sound
Something like a shriek
Something like a sigh
I laid awake at 2 a.m., knowing it was nuts,
the whole thing nuts
discussing the whole nuts thing with my wife,
again; she, patience itself.
This big Brooks Brothers gaffe sitting on the foot of our bed.
Giving off a smell
A sound of wasps
And 3 a.m.
And 4 a.m.
"This is crazy," I thought, feeling genuinely crazy.
When you meet insane people
And realize with horror they're locked
On a single triviality
This must be how it starts
I'll end up with a shabby sandwich sign
marching back and forth in front of Brooks Brothers...

Eventually we slept.
Morning.
The thing sat there, smaller
But still there.
Morning! Miss me?
I dressed—no Brooks Brothers here—went to work
Shabbily in my Kohl's chinos
But took the sales slip with me.
A plan.
Not ambitious.
I would call Brooks Brothers
And ask them to explain
Because I wanted to understand.
That's all.
What happened?
Maybe each shirt was two for $99
But not paired with each other
That must be it.
I wanted them to explain it.
So I could understand.
I figured I had bought that right
For my $192
Brooks Brothers opens at 10 a.m.
I phoned at 9:15, thinking I'd get them early.
Again at 9:45.
Again at 10:05.
Got Allen.
Or Alan.
I didn't have him spell it.
He called up my purchase record.
No problem, he said, apologizing for the inconvenience. I'll make a price correction.
He took my address to send the receipt.
And that was it.
Unexpected.
I had never thought of that.
Never imagined it would go that way.
I thanked Allen.
Or Alan.
Profusely.
The sour chemicals in my brain drained away.
The thing that had tailed me for 12 hours.
Gone.
Suddenly it seemed very clear
All my anxieties
My kid leaving for college before his dad got rich
My squeaking through a world where  my ship isn't even a smokestack on the horizon
Never mind coming in.
The bills that come faster than the paychecks.
And still trying to be something I'm not.
All of those concerns tap-dacing on my head
At 3 a.m.
Unwilling to leave.
Ignoring my request that they please leave
Gone now on their own
All so clear.
We are creatures of emotion and status, yearning and disappointment.
At least I am.
And I hope you too.
Otherwise I'm going to look really stupid.
Our brains are electrochemical mush that can do the oddest flips for the oddest reasons.
When I told this all to a friend of mine,
she mentioned something her mother says.
"The hardest rains are over soonest."
Meaning, sometimes a cloudburst will drench you,
and the stronger it is, the sooner it passes.
The clouds part and the sun comes out again.
Boy that feels good.
I had forgot what feeling good felt like
Quickly too
Knew that it would pass, and tried to hurry it along.
But these things work on their own sweet time
While it was there at two
and three and four a.m., 
it seemed as if it had always been there
and would always be there.
Horrible.
Over a few shirts, and twenty bucks.
To a guy who bought a house, a car and once
watched autopsies for eight hours
I hope that isn't crazy, that it's just human.
It seems very human to me.
Which true, at times, is very close to crazy. 
That's my story
And I'm sticking with it
Sometimes the big problems are easier to than the tiny ones.
Solutions are always there; usually involving waiting
Of course the Brooks Brothers folks took care of me.
How could I not suspect they would?
I never imagined it.
Only good business and I hope someday I feel flush enough to go back.
Nice stuff.
Quality material
I almost have to go back, someday.
Dust myself off, get back on the horse.
Thought next time
I'm checking the price on that receipt before I leave.


Postscript

I got a lot of feedback from this piece, but the most apt came from my cousin, Harrison Roberts, who shared this line from Thoreau, in the passage where he warns about endeavors requiring new clothing: "Our moulting season, like that of the fowls, must be a crisis in our lives."

The pendulum keeps swingiing ....

    In all the excitement over the Supreme Court ruling to limit the availability of contraceptives to women who work for Hobby Lobby, Monday's column, on last week's Supreme Court ruling limiting the right of women to walk into an abortion clinic unmolested (gosh, anybody else notice a trend here?) got lost in the hubbub. So I thought I would post it here. 

    Though I will ask again, because it can't be asked too many times: what's wrong with letting individuals decide their religious practices for themselves? And why do women, still, represent a second class group of inferiors whose moral decisions must be made for them? 

     If only women got divorced, but not men, then they might, on their way to consult divorce lawyers, have to push through a gantlet of abuse from self-proclaimed advocates of the sanctity of marriage, urging them to cling to their marital vows, no matter how dismal a prospect that might be.
     But men also get unhitched, thankfully, so society permits both sexes to breeze through the process unencumbered, or at least unencumbered by the unwelcome intrusion of strangers telling them what to do.
     Only a woman can get an abortion, however, so the rules change. Women, even in the United States, even in 2014, represent a second class of citizen who can be harassed to a degree seldom directed toward men.
     Don’t get mad at me for pointing it out.

     There are many angles to approach this: ethical, social and of course legal, as the U.S. Supreme Court reminded us last week, when it unanimously rejected a Massachusetts law requiring a 35-foot buffer zone between the protesters who gather to confront, howl at and, yes, occasionally “counsel” women trying to enter clinics.

     This is, it saddens me to say, the legally correct decision; we can't have laws handcrafted to stop a certain kind of speech at a certain sort of place (which is why a similar law in Chicago might withstand scrutiny, since it affects all health care facilities, even though nobody is confronting patients heading to get their flu shots, at least not yet). That urge, if indulged, could unravel the First Amendment. A law aimed to prevent the Westboro Baptist Church from showing up at military funerals with their neon "GOD HATES FAGS" signs would end up stopping people from showing up at Bruce Rauner rallies with "RAUNER'S A FRAUD" signs, and we need more, not less, of those.

     But law is only one facet, only a rough approximation of our values, a blurry mirror. Law often misses truth. It sure does if you read the SCOTUS ruling, with its fantasy of grandmotherly counselors leading confused teens away from the abortion abattoirs. The truth is, if women entering clinics only faced, in the words of the Pro-Life Action League, "this peaceful ministry consist[ing] of gently reaching out to women," then such "buffer zone" laws as the one struck down would never have been enacted. Nobody is trying to squelch those chipper young Save the Children canvassers who invade Michigan Avenue every summer. They might annoy, but they don't threaten the way anti-abortion protesters do routinely.
     The implicit threat, conveyed by tone, volume, proximity and past attacks, carries a burden that the law doesn't see. Like Westboro, they carefully choose a moment of vulnerability. We are so accustomed to these encounters, so inured with their talk of notional babies, we forget that, stripped of dogma, these are groups trying to press their religious beliefs upon the unwilling.
     Men would never permit it. Take another process that requires a person to enter a place - say, buying a car. Let's say my reading of the Bible led me to believe that buying new cars is sin, and I led bands of believers to try to persuade people not to buy cars.
     How long do you think society would allow my co-religionists to cluster around the doors of dealerships, displaying huge placards of starving children in Africa and fish killed by pollution and other supposed fallout from the evils of new car ownership?
     Answer: not long.
     Critics of the Supreme Court ruling point out that the Supreme Court itself uses law to keep protesters far at bay.
     "A painted line on the sidewalk is easy to enforce, but the prime objective of the First Amendment is not efficiency," sniffed Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., secure in the knowledge that he can go about his business without having to pass through a mob, which is not something abortion clinic workers nor their patients can claim.
     The powerful always see to themselves. The powerless, aka women, particularly young women entering abortion clinics, need society to have their backs. We allow this abuse to take place because abortion is a grotesque procedure we'd rather not think about. Maybe it's time we did instead of yielding the field to religious fanatics. We wouldn't allow it elsewhere. Wouldn't allow temperance bands to block bar entrances, nor church groups to block football stadium gates, trying to "counsel" fans to go to church instead. We can't look to law to solve this problem. Instead, we should ask: What can we do to change things? To stop living in a society where it can be sincerely suggested that women lack the ability to make moral choices for themselves? How can we thwart those who deny women their rights?