I saw someone beat me to this one but ima still post it.
I saw someone beat me to this one but ima still post it.
Since the midterm elections this past November, a reenergized Republican party has forged ahead with plans to dismantle abortion rights on every front, at both state and federal levels. The developments are coming so fast and furious that it can be a little overwhelming, but here’s a recap of some of the recent highlights, in order of publication date.
1. “The Man Who Loves Women Too Much” — Contributor Sara Blustain profiles Harold Cassidy, the lawyer behind a legal strategy that reframes abortion restrictions not as simply protecting the unborn, but rather as protecting women from the consequences of their decisions—in other words, chipping away at a woman’s right to choose in the name of…women’s rights. (January/February issue )
2. “Are You Sure You Want an Abortion?” — Using information provided by the Guttmacher Institute, I put together these maps showing which states have imposed abortion restrictions such as waiting periods, obligatory ultrasounds, or mandatory counseling that includes discredited medical information. (January/February issue )
3. “The House GOP’s Plan to Redefine Rape” — Pretty much all abortion restrictions, in this case a ban on the use of federal money for abortions, contain a rape exemption. But DC-based staff reporter Nick Baumann exposed a recent Republican attempt to redefine rape as only “forcible” rape. Boy, did that piss people off. Baumann’s story spread like wildfire—even showing up on Jon Stewart. The GOP caved on that provision. (Jan. 28, 2011)
4. “Is Providing Abortions Creating a ‘Nuisance’?” — In Wichita, Kansas, ground zero in the abortion wars, Dr. Mila Means wants to replace the murdered Dr. George Tiller as the area’s last remaining abortion provider. But thanks to threats from anti-abortion groups, and the ruling of a judge who had previously donated to pro-life causes, nobody will rent Means any office space. Kate Sheppard reports from MoJo’s DC bureau. (Feb. 4, 2011)
5. “If You Thought the GOP’s ‘Rape Redefinition’ Bill Was Bad…” — MoJo editorial fellow Maddie Oatman reports on a proposal that would let doctors refuse to abort a woman’s baby even if an abortion was necessary to save the life of the mother. (Feb. 8, 2011)
6. “South Dakota Moves To Legalize Killing Abortion Providers” — Kate Sheppard reports on a bill under consideration in the Mount Rushmore State that would have made preventing harm to a fetus a “justifiable homicide” in many cases. Her story caused a national uproar, forcing state legislators to table the bill. Nick Baumann later reported on similar bills introduced in Nebraska and Iowa. (Feb. 15, 2011)
7. “Revealed: The Group Behind the Bills that Could Legalize Killing Abortion Providers” — Nick Baumann and Dan Schulman, our DC-based senior editor, show us who’s pushing all these “justifiable homicide” bills. (Feb. 28, 2011)
8. “Texas Considers Bill to Ban Almost All Abortions” — DC staff reporter Tim Murphy reports on a mind-bogglingly restrictive bill that was penned by anti-abortion activists and introduced in the Lone Star state without even the usual exemptions for rape and incest. Christ.
9. “GOP Bill Would Force IRS to Conduct Abortion Audits” — Were you raped? Was it incest? These are the types of questions the government’s tax police would have to ask women who’ve terminated pregnancies if Congressional Republicans have their way, Nick Baumann reports. (March 18, 2011)
10. “The Limits of Tax Jihadism” — Citing the article above, political blogger Kevin Drum makes the case that Republicans are willing to push their anti-abortion agenda even at the expense of their anti-tax orthodoxy.
Click here for more Mother Jones coverage of reproductive rights.
This is why we need to get loud, get out there, and let these politicians know that we will not let this go by unnoticed. There are MORE pro-choice supporters than there are antis, and we need to be visible.
Want to know what you can do?
And be VOCAL- to your friends, to your family, to the internet, to everyone - show that we are many, we are strong, and we will not give in.
- * a bill sponsored by Sen. Ronda Storms, R-Valrico, and Rep. Carlos Trujillo, R-Miami, that would prohibit abortions after 20 weeks gestation, provides no exceptions for rape, incest and health issues. Called the “Pain-capable Unborn Child Protection Act,” that bill reasons that an abortion shouldn’t be performed at a gestational stage when the unborn child might experience pain. Current law allows abortions up to the 24th week of pregnancy.
- A proposed constitutional amendment backed by Sen. Anitere Flores, R-Miami, would prohibit using public money for health insurance policies that include coverage of abortion (already the situation in many cases). It provides no exception in cases of rape or incest, if the pregnancy would jeopardize a mother’s health, or if the fetus is not developing properly.
- The Health and Human Services Committee passed a bill sponsored by Rep. Rachel Burgin, R-Riverview, that would limit third-trimester abortions, require doctors performing abortions to receive ethics training and mandate that abortion clinics be owned by physicians.
- the Senate banking and insurance committee passed a bill that would prohibit private insurers from covering abortions if the policy is paid for using any public money.
- The most significant proposal is a bill from Rep. Charles Van Zant, R-Palatka, that would challenge the U.S. Supreme Court decision that guaranteed a woman’s right to choose. But without a companion in the Senate, it isn’t likely to progress.
- The ultrasound measure requires a woman to get one before undergoing an abortion and be asked if she wants to review the results. “This is about the right of a woman considering the termination of a pregnancy to possess all of the relevant information made available to her so she can make a fully informed decision,” the bill’s sponsor, Rep. Elizabeth Porter, R-Lake City, told members of the House Health and Human Services Quality Subcommittee. “Knowledge is never a bad thing.” Opponents, though, say the measure interferes with the doctor-patient relationship and forces doctors to perform a procedure that may not be medically necessary.
At least 18 bills are filed so far this year specifically targeting abortion rights.
Haha, Can do!
Please read what aerialcircus wrote as a response to this post that I put earlier today. I love it, love it, love it.
[Image of Eddie Vedder from 1992 with the word “Pro-choice” written in black marker down his arm.]
From Wikipedia: “During Pearl Jam’s 1992 appearance on MTV Unplugged, Vedder stood atop his stool, took out a marker pen, and wrote “PRO-CHOICE” down his arm in large letters when the band performed the song “Porch”.”
Young women are heavily influence by their idols, I know I was. I can’t imagine being a young girl who’s a victim of rape hearing Justin saying “Meh, it happens”.
I came to be aware of the pro-choice movement, and “No means no” (which we were taught at school, but it didn’t ring true enough there) through my teenage love for Eddie Vedder. At 16, a group of us watching MTV Unplugged as he scrawled ‘Pro-choice’ on his arm, and sang about “Saying no.. when she says no, you’ve got to stop”, that fired us up in a way that comprehensive school sex/relationships education never could. We looked up to him, this worldly American man, who sang songs and made statements that moved us. One friend got up the courage to report someone who was molesting her, because of the message she heard in a song, and she wasn’t the only one of us inspired by those we looked up to.
It seems almost silly to say that now, as a 33 year old, but it was true. We didn’t have internet then, being ‘alternative’ was not cool and we were frequently beaten and spat upon for daring to be different. So we decided that if we were going to be different anyway, we might as well put that to good use. No use taking beatings for nothing, when we could have strength in numbers and prove that our people weren’t ‘bad’ because of how we dressed, or the music we played.
Our little collective of rock/metal/hippy ‘losers’ gathered informally on saturday afternoons in a local city, listening to new music (awful fifth-hand bootlegs on c60 tapes) and talking about politics. We marched against racism in our city, and for women’s aid groups that operated refuges, and organised little music festivals that gave the proceeds to charity. Music did that, it sparked something in us. It’s important to people, whether it’s pop-fluff like Bieber and Miley, or politically inspired rock. Justin may only be sixteen, but people look up to him. Being sixteen isn’t an excuse for anything.
I was ten years old when this happened, not a Pearl Jam fan at the time by any stretch of the imagination (I was still hovering around here somewhere), but it was so cryptic and passionate and moderately disturbing to me that it prompted me to approach my mother and ask her what “pro-choice” meant. I learned about abortion when I did entirely because Vedder’s actions opened up dialogue between my mother and I, which contributed to my receiving both sides of the debate at once. If it had never happened, I’m not sure she ever would have broached the subject with me (especially not at that age), and if she had it’s likely she would have explained it from a strictly anti-choice standpoint (since those are her personal beliefs). Because Eddie Vedder went on tv and wrote “pro-choice” on his arm in sharpie, I didn’t ask “what’s abortion?”, I asked “what’s pro-choice?”
(Source: , via mywholeeternity)
One night as I sat alone in my bedroom, listlessly exploring Stumble Upon the interweb’s presented me this:
I try, as a rule, not to question the serendipitous nature of the Internet but I couldn’t help be amazed at the timing of such a link dropping into my lap. The premise is that hedgehogs (or porcupines depending on who’s translating), must huddle together to keep warm in cold weather. The catch is that if they huddle close they will hurt and be hurt by each-others spines. This parable is meant to be a metaphor for human social interaction, first told by Schopenhauer and then referenced by Freud. Now I’ll be the first to question psychoanalysis but the fact that it’s something that I’m currently navigating lends it a sort of legitimacy in my mind.
Friendships are networks of support and love however there are certain boundaries that need to be maintained for every-one’s comfort and well being. This seems like decent Dr. Phil logic however most people are not in possession of some sort of psychic link that would allow them to maintain this balance seamlessly. The unexplainable inconsistencies of human nature and of course unfortunate events will prevent this ideal seamless balance. There are going to be times when there is an inequality to the support available and miscommunication as to when and how that support should be available. If/when that support fails to come through there is going to be inevitable hurt and confusion.
What is important is this: Will this resulting pain result in emotional scarring? Will this individual pull away from the larger society after they are disappointed in order to avoid further pain? Or will the cold/loneliness be enough to drive the person back to the inevitable pain of personal relationships. Schopenhauer suggests that if an individual has enough personal warmth and strength they will able to avoid the pain of society and maintain and independent happiness. Apparently, empirical data (I’m just going off of wikipedia here after all) suggests that the solution is often not so as extreme as this.
In my personal situation, who knows? It remains to be seen. However, in a related/unrelated note, my space heater seems to have died and this goddamn room is getting pretty cold.
Thank you and goodnight.
Daniel Craig in drag (for gender equality)