YDB95
Hopeless Romantic!
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2011
- Posts
- 14,107
Which is just what the anti-choicers want. They're trying to sow the seeds of a Supreme Court case that will overturn Roe v Wade.
Women's Issues
- Thread starter bodysong
- Start date
Which is just what the anti-choicers want. They're trying to sow the seeds of a Supreme Court case that will overturn Roe v Wade.
fuck! I hate typos
The 1% are bathing in Unicorn blood,
at the expense of the American people,
who are asked to reproduce quickly,
labor for the 1% like machines,
and die quietly, at their on (own) expense.
Nikki Haley, minion of the tRump Alliance,
is set into motion. 2020 is on the horizon.
Now that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is a cloud
on the tRump Alliance's horizon, they are
taking out the Great Socialist, Bernie Sanders,
with extreme prejudice.
Finland is the best country to be a mother,
according to Save the Children foundation.
OTOH, Despite high cost and advanced
technology, many American women are dead.
The pregnancy cost them their lives.
It all started when Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), a Democratic presidential candidate, tweeted about how much more expensive it is to have a child in the United States than in Finland.
In the United States it costs, on average, $12,000 to have a baby.
In Finland it costs $60.
We've got to end the disgrace of our profit-driven health care system and pass Medicare for all.
— Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) March 6, 2019
Haley decided to weigh in. First, she said that Sanders should not be the one talking about how much more expensive it is for women in the United States, because he is not a woman.
Alright @BernieSanders, you’re not the woman having the baby so I wouldn’t be out there talking about skimping on a woman when it comes to childbirth. Trust me! Nice try though. https:/*******LlmLmqdbNk
— Nikki Haley (@NikkiHaley) March 20, 2019
That’s an argument that will not be unpacked here, for Haley then went on to implicitly critique Finland’s health-care system.
Health care costs are too high that is true but comparing us to Finland is ridiculous. Ask them how their health care is. You won’t like their answer.
— Nikki Haley (@NikkiHaley) March 20, 2019
https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...world-someone-tell-nikki-haley/?noredirect=on
According to Haley’s logic, if drug giant Pfizer charges you $1,000 per pill while a generic drug manufacturer charges you $5 per pill, you should be angry at the generic drug manufacturer for “skimping” you.
(Big Medical, Big Pharma, Big Medical Manufacture, Big Chemical, all supply campaign funds. Not to mention Big Finance, Big Insurance and Big Investors.)
https://www.alternet.org/2019/03/nikki-haley-is-not-very-smart/
(Not to mention, last year the UN rated Finland and the happiest country in the world.)
The top three countries with the best quality and most egalitarian health services were found to be Finland, Switzerland and Iceland.
The researchers also examined health care quality versus their cost to patients, and Finland performed very well in that regard, too.
https://yle.fi/uutiset/osasto/news/..._care_system_among_best_in_the_world/10276968
The 1% are bathing in Unicorn blood,
at the expense of the American people,
who are asked to reproduce quickly,
labor for the 1% like machines,
and die quietly, at their on (own) expense.
Nikki Haley, minion of the tRump Alliance,
is set into motion. 2020 is on the horizon.
Now that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is a cloud
on the tRump Alliance's horizon, they are
taking out the Great Socialist, Bernie Sanders,
with extreme prejudice.
Finland is the best country to be a mother,
according to Save the Children foundation.
OTOH, Despite high cost and advanced
technology, many American women are dead.
The pregnancy cost them their lives.
It all started when Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), a Democratic presidential candidate, tweeted about how much more expensive it is to have a child in the United States than in Finland.
In the United States it costs, on average, $12,000 to have a baby.
In Finland it costs $60.
We've got to end the disgrace of our profit-driven health care system and pass Medicare for all.
— Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) March 6, 2019
Haley decided to weigh in. First, she said that Sanders should not be the one talking about how much more expensive it is for women in the United States, because he is not a woman.
Alright @BernieSanders, you’re not the woman having the baby so I wouldn’t be out there talking about skimping on a woman when it comes to childbirth. Trust me! Nice try though. https:/*******LlmLmqdbNk
— Nikki Haley (@NikkiHaley) March 20, 2019
That’s an argument that will not be unpacked here, for Haley then went on to implicitly critique Finland’s health-care system.
Health care costs are too high that is true but comparing us to Finland is ridiculous. Ask them how their health care is. You won’t like their answer.
— Nikki Haley (@NikkiHaley) March 20, 2019
https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...world-someone-tell-nikki-haley/?noredirect=on
According to Haley’s logic, if drug giant Pfizer charges you $1,000 per pill while a generic drug manufacturer charges you $5 per pill, you should be angry at the generic drug manufacturer for “skimping” you.
(Big Medical, Big Pharma, Big Medical Manufacture, Big Chemical, all supply campaign funds. Not to mention Big Finance, Big Insurance and Big Investors.)
https://www.alternet.org/2019/03/nikki-haley-is-not-very-smart/
(Not to mention, last year the UN rated Finland and the happiest country in the world.)
The top three countries with the best quality and most egalitarian health services were found to be Finland, Switzerland and Iceland.
The researchers also examined health care quality versus their cost to patients, and Finland performed very well in that regard, too.
https://yle.fi/uutiset/osasto/news/..._care_system_among_best_in_the_world/10276968
Last edited:
They lie about everything.
They fought a California law that had forbidden telling lies to pregnant women. Christian Pregnancy Centers"won" the right to lie.
Abortion rights and free speech wrongs
November 19, 2017 11:01 AM
The United States Supreme Court this week announced it would soon hear a major case that could redefine the legal landscape at the critical juncture where abortion rights meet free speech. In National Institute of Life and Family Advocates v. Becerra, the plaintiffs are challenging a California statute regulating so-called “crisis pregnancy centers.”
After concluding that the Golden State’s 200 pregnancy resource centers used “intentionally deceptive advertising and counseling practices that often confuse, misinform, and even intimidate women from making fully-informed, time-sensitive decisions about critical health care,” the New York Times reported, the legislature in Sacramento required these anti-abortion counseling services to post a notice letting clients know that “free or low cost abortion, contraception and prenatal care are available to low-income women through public programs, and to provide a phone number for more information.” In addition, the California Reproductive Freedom, Accountability, Comprehensive Care, and Transparency Act (FACT Act) mandates that all unlicensed centers disclose their lack of accreditation from the state. And that, attorneys for 110 CPCs operated by the faith-based Christian ministry of National Institute of Life and Family Advocates argue, amounts to unconstitutional “compelled speech.”
As it turns out, the claim that California law violates their First Amendment rights is more than a little ironic. After all, across the nation hundreds of new state abortion restrictions doubtless supported by the plaintiffs run roughshod over the freedom of speech by physicians and abortion clinics. That is, while California is mandating that crisis pregnancy centers simply tell women the truth about their services, GOP-led states are demanding that doctors lie to their patients about supposed “fetal pain,” mythical “abortion regret,” nonexistent side-effects, and so much more.
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/11/19/1716063/-Abortion-rights-and-free-speech-wrongs?
Abortion, free speech, and the right to lie
April 22, 2018 4:30 PM
In a recent episode of Last Week Tonight, host John Oliver led a 20-minute deep dive into the world of “crisis pregnancy centers” (CPCs). With more than 3,500 such locations around the nation (more than double the number of facilities providing abortion services in the United States), CPCs exist to dissuade women from choosing to terminate their pregnancies. In pursuit of their mission to prevent abortions by almost any means necessary, crisis pregnancy centers can and do deceive their clients about what “care” they do offer (counseling, literature, videos, and “jelly on the belly”) and don’t provide (most notably abortion information and procedures). And as Oliver highlighted, no falsehood is too egregious—whether about the nonexistent link between abortion and breast cancer, mythical “post-abortion syndrome,” fraudulent “facts” on fetal pain, or bogus statistics on the supposed dangers of the procedure—to keep it out of the talking points of the centers’ ardent anti-abortion proprietors.
But for all the eye-opening moments in his hilariously disturbing segment, John Oliver omitted two points of badly needed context when it comes to the disinformation campaign being waged by America’s crisis pregnancy centers. In March, the United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments in National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra, a challenge to a California law requiring the 200 CPCs there to notify women that the state provides free or low-cost health care, contraception services, and abortion. From their questioning, the justices seemed skeptical of California’s effort to limit the free speech rights of the Golden State’s crisis pregnancy centers. Yet even as the Roberts-led court seems likely to protect the principle that these anti-abortion enterprises may lie to American women, Republican-controlled states around the country continue to mandate that abortion providers must lie to their patients. At the heart of this and future cases are two considerations central to the free speech law in the United States.
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/4/22/1758251/-Abortion-free-speech-and-the-right-to-lie?
Supreme Court Sides With California Anti-Abortion Pregnancy Centers
The U.S. Supreme Court has reversed a lower court decision upholding a California law requiring anti-abortion crisis pregnancy centers to more fully disclose what they are.
The case pitted the right to know against the right of free speech. On one side are self-identified "crisis pregnancy centers" that seek to prevent abortions and on the other side is the state of California, which enacted a 2015 law to ensure that these centers do not intentionally or unintentionally mislead the women who walk through their doors.
In a 5-4 ruling, the court said the centers are likely to succeed in their claim that the law violates the First Amendment. That overturns an earlier decision by the Ninth Circuit upholding the law and sends the case back for further consideration.
https://www.npr.org/2018/06/26/6064...th-california-anti-abortion-pregnancy-centers
They fought a California law that had forbidden telling lies to pregnant women. Christian Pregnancy Centers"won" the right to lie.
Abortion rights and free speech wrongs
November 19, 2017 11:01 AM
The United States Supreme Court this week announced it would soon hear a major case that could redefine the legal landscape at the critical juncture where abortion rights meet free speech. In National Institute of Life and Family Advocates v. Becerra, the plaintiffs are challenging a California statute regulating so-called “crisis pregnancy centers.”
After concluding that the Golden State’s 200 pregnancy resource centers used “intentionally deceptive advertising and counseling practices that often confuse, misinform, and even intimidate women from making fully-informed, time-sensitive decisions about critical health care,” the New York Times reported, the legislature in Sacramento required these anti-abortion counseling services to post a notice letting clients know that “free or low cost abortion, contraception and prenatal care are available to low-income women through public programs, and to provide a phone number for more information.” In addition, the California Reproductive Freedom, Accountability, Comprehensive Care, and Transparency Act (FACT Act) mandates that all unlicensed centers disclose their lack of accreditation from the state. And that, attorneys for 110 CPCs operated by the faith-based Christian ministry of National Institute of Life and Family Advocates argue, amounts to unconstitutional “compelled speech.”
As it turns out, the claim that California law violates their First Amendment rights is more than a little ironic. After all, across the nation hundreds of new state abortion restrictions doubtless supported by the plaintiffs run roughshod over the freedom of speech by physicians and abortion clinics. That is, while California is mandating that crisis pregnancy centers simply tell women the truth about their services, GOP-led states are demanding that doctors lie to their patients about supposed “fetal pain,” mythical “abortion regret,” nonexistent side-effects, and so much more.
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/11/19/1716063/-Abortion-rights-and-free-speech-wrongs?
Abortion, free speech, and the right to lie
April 22, 2018 4:30 PM
In a recent episode of Last Week Tonight, host John Oliver led a 20-minute deep dive into the world of “crisis pregnancy centers” (CPCs). With more than 3,500 such locations around the nation (more than double the number of facilities providing abortion services in the United States), CPCs exist to dissuade women from choosing to terminate their pregnancies. In pursuit of their mission to prevent abortions by almost any means necessary, crisis pregnancy centers can and do deceive their clients about what “care” they do offer (counseling, literature, videos, and “jelly on the belly”) and don’t provide (most notably abortion information and procedures). And as Oliver highlighted, no falsehood is too egregious—whether about the nonexistent link between abortion and breast cancer, mythical “post-abortion syndrome,” fraudulent “facts” on fetal pain, or bogus statistics on the supposed dangers of the procedure—to keep it out of the talking points of the centers’ ardent anti-abortion proprietors.
But for all the eye-opening moments in his hilariously disturbing segment, John Oliver omitted two points of badly needed context when it comes to the disinformation campaign being waged by America’s crisis pregnancy centers. In March, the United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments in National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra, a challenge to a California law requiring the 200 CPCs there to notify women that the state provides free or low-cost health care, contraception services, and abortion. From their questioning, the justices seemed skeptical of California’s effort to limit the free speech rights of the Golden State’s crisis pregnancy centers. Yet even as the Roberts-led court seems likely to protect the principle that these anti-abortion enterprises may lie to American women, Republican-controlled states around the country continue to mandate that abortion providers must lie to their patients. At the heart of this and future cases are two considerations central to the free speech law in the United States.
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/4/22/1758251/-Abortion-free-speech-and-the-right-to-lie?
Supreme Court Sides With California Anti-Abortion Pregnancy Centers
The U.S. Supreme Court has reversed a lower court decision upholding a California law requiring anti-abortion crisis pregnancy centers to more fully disclose what they are.
The case pitted the right to know against the right of free speech. On one side are self-identified "crisis pregnancy centers" that seek to prevent abortions and on the other side is the state of California, which enacted a 2015 law to ensure that these centers do not intentionally or unintentionally mislead the women who walk through their doors.
In a 5-4 ruling, the court said the centers are likely to succeed in their claim that the law violates the First Amendment. That overturns an earlier decision by the Ninth Circuit upholding the law and sends the case back for further consideration.
https://www.npr.org/2018/06/26/6064...th-california-anti-abortion-pregnancy-centers
Stop the Trump Administration from Erasing Women
New bill demands Department of State stop neglecting vital data on reproductive health care from its annual report on global human rights
03.22.19 - The Trump administration has made no secret of its commitment to erasing women from the global human rights conversation—going so far as to literally remove important reproductive rights data from the U.S. Department of State’s annual report on human rights. To put a stop to this deletion, Congress introduced a bill on March 7, the Reproductive Rights are Human Rights Act, that requires the reinstatement of this information.
(The sections that were removed included vital reporting on rates of unsafe abortions; denial of family planning information; rates and causes of maternal mortality; and discrimination, coercion, and violence against women in health care settings.)
By eliminating this information, the Department of State is intentionally hindering the ability of researchers, healthcare workers, and activists to measure the negative impacts of the Trump administration’s regressive international policies—most notably the expanded Global Gag Rule, which prevents U.S.-supported international family planning groups abroad from using their own funds to provide safe and legal abortion services, or even information or referrals for safe abortion.
https://www.reproductiverights.org/Trump-Administration-Erases-Women
New bill demands Department of State stop neglecting vital data on reproductive health care from its annual report on global human rights
03.22.19 - The Trump administration has made no secret of its commitment to erasing women from the global human rights conversation—going so far as to literally remove important reproductive rights data from the U.S. Department of State’s annual report on human rights. To put a stop to this deletion, Congress introduced a bill on March 7, the Reproductive Rights are Human Rights Act, that requires the reinstatement of this information.
(The sections that were removed included vital reporting on rates of unsafe abortions; denial of family planning information; rates and causes of maternal mortality; and discrimination, coercion, and violence against women in health care settings.)
By eliminating this information, the Department of State is intentionally hindering the ability of researchers, healthcare workers, and activists to measure the negative impacts of the Trump administration’s regressive international policies—most notably the expanded Global Gag Rule, which prevents U.S.-supported international family planning groups abroad from using their own funds to provide safe and legal abortion services, or even information or referrals for safe abortion.
https://www.reproductiverights.org/Trump-Administration-Erases-Women
Pompeo Expands Global Gag Rule, Which May Actually Increase Abortions
The Trump administration’s opposition to legal abortion just became more aggressive. Reuters reported on Tuesday that the U.S. will expand its “global gag rule,” which prevents the aid groups it funds from performing abortions and even advertising the abortion services of other organizations. “We will refuse to provide assistance to foreign NGOs that give financial support to other foreign groups in the global abortion industry,” Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said. Pompeo also said he would “enforce federal law forbidding the use of U.S. funding, including foreign assistance, to lobby for or against abortion,” Reuters added.
Nick Schifrin Verified Account
@nickschifrin
@SecPompeo announces expansion to Mexico City policy: US now won't assist NGOs that fund third parties that provide abortions. And Pompeo announces US will reduce contributions to @OAS_official, prohibit US funds to OAS-related groups that advocate for or against abortion
6:35 AM - 26 Mar 2019
The policy is meant to reduce abortions, but there’s evidence that it does the opposite. Two studies found that the gag rule actually coincided with an increase in abortions in sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America. That may be because the same family-planning clinics that would perform abortions, or tell patients where they could receive abortions, provide contraception, too.
Pompeo also continued a practice begun by his predecessor, Rex Tillerson, which removed reproductive rights from the department’s annual human rights reports. Tuesday’s announcement was probably inevitable — and so is the human suffering that will follow it.
Pompeo
As a Republican representative from Kansas, he voted for bills that would have granted personhood status to fetuses, defunded Planned Parenthood, and eliminated the Title X family-planning program.
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019...gag-rule-may-actually-increase-abortions.html
The Trump administration’s opposition to legal abortion just became more aggressive. Reuters reported on Tuesday that the U.S. will expand its “global gag rule,” which prevents the aid groups it funds from performing abortions and even advertising the abortion services of other organizations. “We will refuse to provide assistance to foreign NGOs that give financial support to other foreign groups in the global abortion industry,” Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said. Pompeo also said he would “enforce federal law forbidding the use of U.S. funding, including foreign assistance, to lobby for or against abortion,” Reuters added.
Nick Schifrin Verified Account
@nickschifrin
@SecPompeo announces expansion to Mexico City policy: US now won't assist NGOs that fund third parties that provide abortions. And Pompeo announces US will reduce contributions to @OAS_official, prohibit US funds to OAS-related groups that advocate for or against abortion
6:35 AM - 26 Mar 2019
The policy is meant to reduce abortions, but there’s evidence that it does the opposite. Two studies found that the gag rule actually coincided with an increase in abortions in sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America. That may be because the same family-planning clinics that would perform abortions, or tell patients where they could receive abortions, provide contraception, too.
Pompeo also continued a practice begun by his predecessor, Rex Tillerson, which removed reproductive rights from the department’s annual human rights reports. Tuesday’s announcement was probably inevitable — and so is the human suffering that will follow it.
Pompeo
As a Republican representative from Kansas, he voted for bills that would have granted personhood status to fetuses, defunded Planned Parenthood, and eliminated the Title X family-planning program.
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019...gag-rule-may-actually-increase-abortions.html
US expands ban on foreign aid to overseas abortion providers
March 26, 2019
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Tuesday expanded the Trump administration's ban on U.S. aid to groups that promote or provide abortions to include organizations that comply with the rules but give money to others that don't.
"We will refuse to provide assistance to foreign NGOs that give financial support to other foreign groups in the global abortion industry," Pompeo told reporters at the State Department. "We will enforce a strict prohibition on backdoor funding schemes and end runs around our policy. American taxpayer dollars will not be used to underwrite abortions."
Critics of the policy that has been a hallmark of Republican administrations call it the "global gag rule." They say it hurts reproductive and maternal health care in developing nations by cutting funds to groups that offer critical non-abortion related services to women and children, including birth control and nutritional support for infants and HIV/AIDS treatment.
In addition to the revision of the Mexico City rule, Pompeo said the administration would also start to enforce legislation that bars all U.S. funds from being used to lobby for or against abortion. As a first step in enforcement, he said support for the Organization of American States would be reduced, although it was not immediately clear by how much.
Pompeo said the step came as a result of some OAS institutions promoting greater access to abortion in the Americas.
https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/national-politics/article228418184.html
March 26, 2019
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Tuesday expanded the Trump administration's ban on U.S. aid to groups that promote or provide abortions to include organizations that comply with the rules but give money to others that don't.
"We will refuse to provide assistance to foreign NGOs that give financial support to other foreign groups in the global abortion industry," Pompeo told reporters at the State Department. "We will enforce a strict prohibition on backdoor funding schemes and end runs around our policy. American taxpayer dollars will not be used to underwrite abortions."
Critics of the policy that has been a hallmark of Republican administrations call it the "global gag rule." They say it hurts reproductive and maternal health care in developing nations by cutting funds to groups that offer critical non-abortion related services to women and children, including birth control and nutritional support for infants and HIV/AIDS treatment.
In addition to the revision of the Mexico City rule, Pompeo said the administration would also start to enforce legislation that bars all U.S. funds from being used to lobby for or against abortion. As a first step in enforcement, he said support for the Organization of American States would be reduced, although it was not immediately clear by how much.
Pompeo said the step came as a result of some OAS institutions promoting greater access to abortion in the Americas.
https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/national-politics/article228418184.html
Nancy Pelosi Verified Account
@SpeakerPelosi
There is no end to the depths of the Trump Administration’s cruelty.
Millions of women around the world rely on U.S.-funded health
assistance – and millions more will be arbitrarily left without care
due to this shameful decision by @SecPompeo.
(link*)
8:25 AM - 26 Mar 2019
*
Reuters Top News Verified Account
@Reuters
JUST IN: Secretary of State Pompeo says U.S. will expand abortion gag rule by refusing to assist NGOs that aid other groups that support abortion
6:34 AM - 26 Mar 2019
@SpeakerPelosi
There is no end to the depths of the Trump Administration’s cruelty.
Millions of women around the world rely on U.S.-funded health
assistance – and millions more will be arbitrarily left without care
due to this shameful decision by @SecPompeo.
(link*)
8:25 AM - 26 Mar 2019
*
Reuters Top News Verified Account
@Reuters
JUST IN: Secretary of State Pompeo says U.S. will expand abortion gag rule by refusing to assist NGOs that aid other groups that support abortion
6:34 AM - 26 Mar 2019
"We take an oath that we must honor" to protect the Constitution," said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., speaking on her 79th birthday. "The choice is simple, between partisanship and patriotism. Between honoring our sacred oath or hypocritically, inconsistently breaking this oath."
The Pentagon sent lawmakers a list last week of hundreds of military construction projects that might be cut to pay for barrier work. Though the list was tentative, Democrats were asserting that GOP lawmakers were endangering local bases to pay for the wall.
Opponents of Trump's emergency warned that besides usurping Congress' role in making spending decisions, he was inviting future Democratic presidents to circumvent lawmakers by declaring emergencies to finance their own favored initiatives.
Trump supporters said he was simply acting under a 1976 law that lets presidents declare national emergencies. Trump's declaration was the 60th presidential emergency under that statute, but the first aimed at spending that Congress explicitly denied, according to New York University's Brennan Center for Justice, which tracks the law.
http://my.chicagotribune.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-116153993/
The Pentagon sent lawmakers a list last week of hundreds of military construction projects that might be cut to pay for barrier work. Though the list was tentative, Democrats were asserting that GOP lawmakers were endangering local bases to pay for the wall.
Opponents of Trump's emergency warned that besides usurping Congress' role in making spending decisions, he was inviting future Democratic presidents to circumvent lawmakers by declaring emergencies to finance their own favored initiatives.
Trump supporters said he was simply acting under a 1976 law that lets presidents declare national emergencies. Trump's declaration was the 60th presidential emergency under that statute, but the first aimed at spending that Congress explicitly denied, according to New York University's Brennan Center for Justice, which tracks the law.
http://my.chicagotribune.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-116153993/
Trump administration forces U.N. to water down resolution on rape as a weapon of war
April 23, 2019
The Trump administration has succeeded in its efforts to derail a U.N. resolution on rape as a weapon of war. The U.S. was threatening to veto any resolution that hinted at the necessity of abortion being available to the victims of this ongoing atrocity, and it won. The Security Council passed a watered-down version of the resolution, one that doesn't allow for enforcement.
The resolution that passed has eliminated language about providing "sexual and reproductive health care" to survivors of rape and abuse. Compared to an earlier draft obtained by CNN, the final draft has also eliminated, at the behest of the Trump administration, language referring to sexual health and "the training of journalists on the issue of sexual violence." China and Russia abstained from voting, having won by getting the Trump administration to do the dirty work of getting the language removed, and the resolution passed 13-0.
Dr. Denis Mukwege and Nadia Murad, who won the Nobel Peace Prize last year for their efforts to combat sexual violence, said in a statement that "there is simply no excuse for continuing to fail those who have already been victimized—as well as those who continue to be at risk of—devastating levels of sexual violence in conflict." The watering-down of the U.N.'s response to the use of rape as a weapon of war will certainly not reduce the occurrence of it. The Trump administration's efforts to eliminate abortion in conflict zones will possibly only exacerbate it, making it an even more effective weapon by forcing women to bear the offspring of violence.
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/20...er-down-resolution-on-rape-as-a-weapon-of-war
The Trump administration's opposition to abortion has led to the watering-down of a UN resolution on ending sexual violence in war.
The US removed all references to sexual and reproductive health.
The Security Council resolution, submitted by Germany, dropped all such references. The US, along with China and Russia, had threatened to veto it.
The Trump administration opposed a phrase on the grounds that it implies support for abortion.
The amended resolution passed 13-0, with Russia and China abstaining.
French UN ambassador Francois Delattre was scathing of the decision to exclude the reference to sexual health, saying it undermined the dignity of women.
"It is intolerable and incomprehensible that the Security Council is incapable of acknowledging that women and girls who suffered from sexual violence in conflict, and who obviously didn't choose to become pregnant, should have the right to terminate their pregnancy," he said.
The removed phrase read: "Recognizing the importance of providing timely assistance to survivors of sexual violence, urges United Nations entities and donors to provide non-discriminatory and comprehensive health services, in line with Resolution 2106."
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-48028773
April 23, 2019
The Trump administration has succeeded in its efforts to derail a U.N. resolution on rape as a weapon of war. The U.S. was threatening to veto any resolution that hinted at the necessity of abortion being available to the victims of this ongoing atrocity, and it won. The Security Council passed a watered-down version of the resolution, one that doesn't allow for enforcement.
The resolution that passed has eliminated language about providing "sexual and reproductive health care" to survivors of rape and abuse. Compared to an earlier draft obtained by CNN, the final draft has also eliminated, at the behest of the Trump administration, language referring to sexual health and "the training of journalists on the issue of sexual violence." China and Russia abstained from voting, having won by getting the Trump administration to do the dirty work of getting the language removed, and the resolution passed 13-0.
Dr. Denis Mukwege and Nadia Murad, who won the Nobel Peace Prize last year for their efforts to combat sexual violence, said in a statement that "there is simply no excuse for continuing to fail those who have already been victimized—as well as those who continue to be at risk of—devastating levels of sexual violence in conflict." The watering-down of the U.N.'s response to the use of rape as a weapon of war will certainly not reduce the occurrence of it. The Trump administration's efforts to eliminate abortion in conflict zones will possibly only exacerbate it, making it an even more effective weapon by forcing women to bear the offspring of violence.
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/20...er-down-resolution-on-rape-as-a-weapon-of-war
The Trump administration's opposition to abortion has led to the watering-down of a UN resolution on ending sexual violence in war.
The US removed all references to sexual and reproductive health.
The Security Council resolution, submitted by Germany, dropped all such references. The US, along with China and Russia, had threatened to veto it.
The Trump administration opposed a phrase on the grounds that it implies support for abortion.
The amended resolution passed 13-0, with Russia and China abstaining.
French UN ambassador Francois Delattre was scathing of the decision to exclude the reference to sexual health, saying it undermined the dignity of women.
"It is intolerable and incomprehensible that the Security Council is incapable of acknowledging that women and girls who suffered from sexual violence in conflict, and who obviously didn't choose to become pregnant, should have the right to terminate their pregnancy," he said.
The removed phrase read: "Recognizing the importance of providing timely assistance to survivors of sexual violence, urges United Nations entities and donors to provide non-discriminatory and comprehensive health services, in line with Resolution 2106."
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-48028773
*tip of the hat, to the man that posted a related article on the GB
https://rewire.news/article/2019/04...e-court-declares-abortion-rights-fundamental/
In Historic Ruling, Kansas Supreme Court Declares Abortion Rights ‘Fundamental’
“At the heart of a natural rights philosophy is the principle that individuals should be free to make choices about how to conduct their own lives, or, in other words, to exercise personal autonomy,” the decision states. “Few decisions impact our lives more than those about issues that affect one’s physical health, family formation, and family life.”
Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, said in a Friday statement that the court’s decision makes Kansas one of ten states “whose highest courts have affirmed at the state level what the U.S. Supreme Court has upheld for more than four decades: that every woman has a right to make her own decisions about her health and family free from political interference.”
“As this decision makes clear, attempts to undermine that fundamental right by banning safe and accepted methods of abortion cannot stand,” Northrup said.
PBS Newshour featured some information on it.
Trust Women
@TrustWomen
This morning, the Kansas Supreme Court ruled
that the STATE CONSTITUTION PROTECTS
THE RIGHT TO ABORTION!
The court took up the question after Drs. Herbert Hodes
and Traci Nauser challenged a 2015 ban on D&E abortions.
Congratulations to everyone!
9:03 AM - 26 Apr 2019
Trust Women
@TrustWomen
ICYMI: The Kansas Supreme Court ruled this morning that the state constitution protects the right to abortion!
3:09 PM - 26 Apr 2019
Anti-choice organizations and Ladies Against Women Are Trying Every Avenue To Restrict Abortion
The law would bar physicians from using forceps or similar instruments on a live fetus to remove it from the womb in pieces, using the non-medical term “dismemberment abortion” to describe the procedure. Such instruments are commonly used in dilation and evacuation procedure, which the Center for Reproductive Rights has described as the safest and most common abortion procedure in the U.S. in the second trimester.
The Kansas law was model legislation drafted by the National Right to Life Committee. The group says similar bans have been enacted in 10 other states — Oklahoma, West Virginia, Mississippi, Alabama, Louisiana, Arkansas, Texas, Kentucky, Ohio and North Dakota.
NARAL Pro-Choice NC
@NARALNC
"Friday's decision means the Kansas State Constitution protects abortion rights more vigorously than the U.S. Constitution."
@Rewire_News @Hegemommy
@ReproRights @TrustWomen
10:46 AM - 26 Apr 2019
Anti-choice organizations Desire That Planned Parenthood Be Starved of Funds, and to Re-purpose Funds into funding Christian offices posing as health clinics with No Doctors, No Healthcare, and staffed by brainwashed volunteers that are taught to lie pregnant women.
Christians fought in the courts of law, for the right to lie to pregnant women, as a matter of free speech. Under Trump, they won.
Pacific Standard Verified Account
@PacificStand
If the new Title X rule for reproductive health clinics takes effect next week it could: -strip millions in federal grant funding from reproductive health clinics -dramatically reduce abortion access -funnel federal family planning cash to pro-life groups
2:00 PM - 26 Apr 2019
https://rewire.news/article/2019/04...e-court-declares-abortion-rights-fundamental/
In Historic Ruling, Kansas Supreme Court Declares Abortion Rights ‘Fundamental’
“At the heart of a natural rights philosophy is the principle that individuals should be free to make choices about how to conduct their own lives, or, in other words, to exercise personal autonomy,” the decision states. “Few decisions impact our lives more than those about issues that affect one’s physical health, family formation, and family life.”
Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, said in a Friday statement that the court’s decision makes Kansas one of ten states “whose highest courts have affirmed at the state level what the U.S. Supreme Court has upheld for more than four decades: that every woman has a right to make her own decisions about her health and family free from political interference.”
“As this decision makes clear, attempts to undermine that fundamental right by banning safe and accepted methods of abortion cannot stand,” Northrup said.
PBS Newshour featured some information on it.
Trust Women
@TrustWomen
This morning, the Kansas Supreme Court ruled
that the STATE CONSTITUTION PROTECTS
THE RIGHT TO ABORTION!
The court took up the question after Drs. Herbert Hodes
and Traci Nauser challenged a 2015 ban on D&E abortions.
Congratulations to everyone!
9:03 AM - 26 Apr 2019
Trust Women
@TrustWomen
ICYMI: The Kansas Supreme Court ruled this morning that the state constitution protects the right to abortion!
3:09 PM - 26 Apr 2019
Anti-choice organizations and Ladies Against Women Are Trying Every Avenue To Restrict Abortion
The law would bar physicians from using forceps or similar instruments on a live fetus to remove it from the womb in pieces, using the non-medical term “dismemberment abortion” to describe the procedure. Such instruments are commonly used in dilation and evacuation procedure, which the Center for Reproductive Rights has described as the safest and most common abortion procedure in the U.S. in the second trimester.
The Kansas law was model legislation drafted by the National Right to Life Committee. The group says similar bans have been enacted in 10 other states — Oklahoma, West Virginia, Mississippi, Alabama, Louisiana, Arkansas, Texas, Kentucky, Ohio and North Dakota.
NARAL Pro-Choice NC
@NARALNC
"Friday's decision means the Kansas State Constitution protects abortion rights more vigorously than the U.S. Constitution."
@Rewire_News @Hegemommy
@ReproRights @TrustWomen
10:46 AM - 26 Apr 2019
Anti-choice organizations Desire That Planned Parenthood Be Starved of Funds, and to Re-purpose Funds into funding Christian offices posing as health clinics with No Doctors, No Healthcare, and staffed by brainwashed volunteers that are taught to lie pregnant women.
Christians fought in the courts of law, for the right to lie to pregnant women, as a matter of free speech. Under Trump, they won.
Pacific Standard Verified Account
@PacificStand
If the new Title X rule for reproductive health clinics takes effect next week it could: -strip millions in federal grant funding from reproductive health clinics -dramatically reduce abortion access -funnel federal family planning cash to pro-life groups
2:00 PM - 26 Apr 2019
Seattle Times Reporter Mike Rosenberg Suspended over Twitter Messages
May 6, 2019
Seattle Times real estate reporter Mike Rosenberg has been suspended.
On Sunday, New York-based writer Talia Jane posted screenshots on Twitter of a direct message conversation between her and Rosenberg, who is best known for his coverage of housing affordability issues in Seattle and the Bay Area.
https://www.thestranger.com/slog/20...ike-rosenberg-suspended-over-twitter-messages
May 6, 2019
Seattle Times real estate reporter Mike Rosenberg has been suspended.
On Sunday, New York-based writer Talia Jane posted screenshots on Twitter of a direct message conversation between her and Rosenberg, who is best known for his coverage of housing affordability issues in Seattle and the Bay Area.
https://www.thestranger.com/slog/20...ike-rosenberg-suspended-over-twitter-messages
Heidi Schreck
May 10, 2019
Christiane Amanpour speaks with playwright Heidi Schreck about her play “What the Constitution Means to Me.”
"Four women are murdered everyday, by male partners."
SOMETHING HAPPENED WHILE I WAS PERFORMING THE PLAY.
A YEAR AGO WHEN I STARTED FORMING DOWNTOWN, I LISTED THE STATISTICS THAT THREE WOMEN IN THIS COUNTRY ARE MURDERED EVERY DAY BY A MALE PARTNER.
THEN RECENTLY, NEW STATISTICS WERE PUBLISHED.
IT HAS GONE UP TO FOUR.
TODAY, IN THIS COUNTRY IN AMERICA, FOUR WOMEN ARE MURDERED EVERY DAY BY A MALE PARTNER.
I FIND THAT -- THE JUST IT HAS GONE UP WHILE I'VE BEEN PERFORMING THIS PLAY IS DEEPLY DISTURBING TO ME.
PARTICULARLY BECAUSE YOU POINT OUT OVER AND AGAIN THAT THIS DOCUMENT HAS ACTUALLY NEVER PROTECTED WOMEN.
WOMEN ARE NOT PROTECTED.
THEY ARE NOT.
I ALSO LEARNED OVER THE COURSE OF MAKING THIS THAT 179 CONSTITUTIONS HAVE EXPLICIT GENDER PROTECTIONS WRITTEN INTO THEM.
THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION IS NOT ONE OF THEM.
WE HAVE BEEN TRYING TO PASS AN EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT FOR 100 YEARS.
WE HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE DOTO DO IT.
WE ARE ONE STATE AWAY FROM RATIFICATION.
LET'S JUST PLAY THIS LITTLE MOMENT. (audio from Heidi Schreck's play is heard)
AS A KID, I BELIEVED THIS DOCUMENT WAS A TOOL OF JUSTICE.
I KNEW IT WAS CREATED BY SLAVE HOLDERS.
BY PEOPLE WHO DID NOT CONSIDER MOST OF US FULLY HUMAN.
I BELIEVED IN ITS GENIUS AND IN ITS ABILITY TO TRANSFORM OVER TIME.
TODAY, HOWEVER, I DON'T ACTUALLY THINK IT'S FAILING.
I THINK IT'S WORKING PERFECTLY.
I THINK IT'S DOING EXACTLY WHAT IT WAS DESIGNED TO DO FROM THE BEGINNING, WHICH IS TO PROTECT THE INTERESTS OF A SMALL NUMBER OF RICH, WHITE MEN.
I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE CLEAR, I DON'T ACTUALLY BELIEVE -- ESPECIALLY RIGHT NOW -- THAT WE SHOULD ABOLISH THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION.
THE DEBATE IS ABOUT RAISING QUESTIONS.
IT'S ABOUT INTERROGATING THE WAYS THIS DOCUMENT MIGHT BE FAILING US, INTERROGATING THE WAYS WE MIGHT IMPROVE IT.
WE HAVEN'T PASSED AN AMENDMENT I BELIEVE SINCE 1992.
IT WAS DESIGNED TO EVOLVE, TO CHANGE, TO BE AMENDED.
WE HAVEN'T DONE THAT IN A LONG TIME.
IT FEELS IMPOSSIBLE RIGHT NOW TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
https://www.pbs.org/wnet/amanpour-and-company/video/may-10-2019-9eenta/
Note:
(Heidi Schreck does not repeat these words about the olde 1% from colonial times protecting their interests, every time. It seems that she changes her argument, often.)
https://www.pbs.org/wnet/amanpour-and-company/video/may-10-2019-9eenta/
May 10, 2019
Christiane Amanpour speaks with playwright Heidi Schreck about her play “What the Constitution Means to Me.”
"Four women are murdered everyday, by male partners."
SOMETHING HAPPENED WHILE I WAS PERFORMING THE PLAY.
A YEAR AGO WHEN I STARTED FORMING DOWNTOWN, I LISTED THE STATISTICS THAT THREE WOMEN IN THIS COUNTRY ARE MURDERED EVERY DAY BY A MALE PARTNER.
THEN RECENTLY, NEW STATISTICS WERE PUBLISHED.
IT HAS GONE UP TO FOUR.
TODAY, IN THIS COUNTRY IN AMERICA, FOUR WOMEN ARE MURDERED EVERY DAY BY A MALE PARTNER.
I FIND THAT -- THE JUST IT HAS GONE UP WHILE I'VE BEEN PERFORMING THIS PLAY IS DEEPLY DISTURBING TO ME.
PARTICULARLY BECAUSE YOU POINT OUT OVER AND AGAIN THAT THIS DOCUMENT HAS ACTUALLY NEVER PROTECTED WOMEN.
WOMEN ARE NOT PROTECTED.
THEY ARE NOT.
I ALSO LEARNED OVER THE COURSE OF MAKING THIS THAT 179 CONSTITUTIONS HAVE EXPLICIT GENDER PROTECTIONS WRITTEN INTO THEM.
THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION IS NOT ONE OF THEM.
WE HAVE BEEN TRYING TO PASS AN EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT FOR 100 YEARS.
WE HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE DOTO DO IT.
WE ARE ONE STATE AWAY FROM RATIFICATION.
LET'S JUST PLAY THIS LITTLE MOMENT. (audio from Heidi Schreck's play is heard)
AS A KID, I BELIEVED THIS DOCUMENT WAS A TOOL OF JUSTICE.
I KNEW IT WAS CREATED BY SLAVE HOLDERS.
BY PEOPLE WHO DID NOT CONSIDER MOST OF US FULLY HUMAN.
I BELIEVED IN ITS GENIUS AND IN ITS ABILITY TO TRANSFORM OVER TIME.
TODAY, HOWEVER, I DON'T ACTUALLY THINK IT'S FAILING.
I THINK IT'S WORKING PERFECTLY.
I THINK IT'S DOING EXACTLY WHAT IT WAS DESIGNED TO DO FROM THE BEGINNING, WHICH IS TO PROTECT THE INTERESTS OF A SMALL NUMBER OF RICH, WHITE MEN.
I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE CLEAR, I DON'T ACTUALLY BELIEVE -- ESPECIALLY RIGHT NOW -- THAT WE SHOULD ABOLISH THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION.
THE DEBATE IS ABOUT RAISING QUESTIONS.
IT'S ABOUT INTERROGATING THE WAYS THIS DOCUMENT MIGHT BE FAILING US, INTERROGATING THE WAYS WE MIGHT IMPROVE IT.
WE HAVEN'T PASSED AN AMENDMENT I BELIEVE SINCE 1992.
IT WAS DESIGNED TO EVOLVE, TO CHANGE, TO BE AMENDED.
WE HAVEN'T DONE THAT IN A LONG TIME.
IT FEELS IMPOSSIBLE RIGHT NOW TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
https://www.pbs.org/wnet/amanpour-and-company/video/may-10-2019-9eenta/
Note:
(Heidi Schreck does not repeat these words about the olde 1% from colonial times protecting their interests, every time. It seems that she changes her argument, often.)
https://www.pbs.org/wnet/amanpour-and-company/video/may-10-2019-9eenta/
JackLuis
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2008
- Posts
- 21,881
Alabama Legislators Refuse to Fund Mother and Child Health Care as They Ban Nearly All Abortions
https://www.newsweek.com/alabama-abortion-ban-mother-child-health-care-1426643
State Senator Linda Coleman-Madison proposed an amendment to the bill that would require the state to provide free prenatal and medical care for mothers who had been denied an abortion by the new law. Her amendment was struck down by a vote of 23-6.
https://www.newsweek.com/alabama-abortion-ban-mother-child-health-care-1426643
State Senator Linda Coleman-Madison proposed an amendment to the bill that would require the state to provide free prenatal and medical care for mothers who had been denied an abortion by the new law. Her amendment was struck down by a vote of 23-6.
Missouri attempts to pass (not real) "Heartbeat" bill, and fails
Old, white Republican man decides the fate of women in his state.
Republican Gov. Mike Parson
Missouri Senate Passes Bill That Would Ban Abortions After 8 Weeks
The bill passed the Senate early Thursday morning by a 24-10 vote, as NPR member station St. Louis Public Radio reported.
A previous version of the bill also would have prohibited abortions at six weeks into a pregnancy.
The Missouri Senate vote comes less than 24 hours after Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey signed into law what is considered the most restrictive abortion law in the U.S. It bans nearly all abortions, at any stage of pregnancy.
https://www.npr.org/2019/05/16/7239...s-bill-that-would-ban-abortions-after-8-weeks
Lawmakers face a Friday deadline to pass bills
Senators approved the legislation 24-10 early Thursday with just hours left before lawmakers’ Friday deadline to pass bills.
Kentucky, Mississippi, Ohio and Georgia have approved bans on abortion once a ? ? ? (embryo does not have heartbeat, arseholes!) is detected, which can occur in about the sixth week of pregnancy. Alabama’s Republican governor signed a near-total abortion ban Wednesday.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...9e311e-7774-11e9-a7bf-c8a43b84ee31_story.html
Many of the six-week abortion bans are referred to as “heartbeat” bills, with the logic being that fetal heartbeats can be detected as early as six weeks. But the rhythm a doctor can pick up on an ultrasound at that time isn’t a heartbeat, because the embryo has no heart. The embryo is just 3 or 4 millimeters long with no developed organs. Cells are just starting to group together in ways that might eventually grow into hearts and brains. Thanks to the modern-day sensitivity of ultrasound technology, doctors can catch the electrical activity—a rhythmic pulsing—of these cells. But there is no beating heart or even a guarantee that one will develop. Miscarriages up to the eighth week of pregnancy are usually indistinguishable from a heavy period.
https://www.popsci.com/abortion-bills-pregnancy-facts
Old, white Republican man decides the fate of women in his state.
Republican Gov. Mike Parson
Missouri Senate Passes Bill That Would Ban Abortions After 8 Weeks
The bill passed the Senate early Thursday morning by a 24-10 vote, as NPR member station St. Louis Public Radio reported.
A previous version of the bill also would have prohibited abortions at six weeks into a pregnancy.
The Missouri Senate vote comes less than 24 hours after Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey signed into law what is considered the most restrictive abortion law in the U.S. It bans nearly all abortions, at any stage of pregnancy.
https://www.npr.org/2019/05/16/7239...s-bill-that-would-ban-abortions-after-8-weeks
Lawmakers face a Friday deadline to pass bills
Senators approved the legislation 24-10 early Thursday with just hours left before lawmakers’ Friday deadline to pass bills.
Kentucky, Mississippi, Ohio and Georgia have approved bans on abortion once a ? ? ? (embryo does not have heartbeat, arseholes!) is detected, which can occur in about the sixth week of pregnancy. Alabama’s Republican governor signed a near-total abortion ban Wednesday.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...9e311e-7774-11e9-a7bf-c8a43b84ee31_story.html
Many of the six-week abortion bans are referred to as “heartbeat” bills, with the logic being that fetal heartbeats can be detected as early as six weeks. But the rhythm a doctor can pick up on an ultrasound at that time isn’t a heartbeat, because the embryo has no heart. The embryo is just 3 or 4 millimeters long with no developed organs. Cells are just starting to group together in ways that might eventually grow into hearts and brains. Thanks to the modern-day sensitivity of ultrasound technology, doctors can catch the electrical activity—a rhythmic pulsing—of these cells. But there is no beating heart or even a guarantee that one will develop. Miscarriages up to the eighth week of pregnancy are usually indistinguishable from a heavy period.
https://www.popsci.com/abortion-bills-pregnancy-facts
Dumpington
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2001
- Posts
- 2,891
bodysong writes: "Old, white Republican man decides the fate of women in his state."
Maybe in Missouri - but in ALABAMA it was a FEMALE governor signing that state's new abortion legislation: KAY IVEY! Don't you think it's great that the state of Alabama has elected a woman governor, unlike New York & California, where they keep putting old white MEN in charge?
Meanwhile, in Georgia, Hollywood actress Alyssa Milano continues to push for a SEX STRIKE to lessen the number of abortions being performed there! I mean, less sex means fewer women getting pregnant, right? And fewer women getting pregnant will obviously mean fewer abortions necessary, correct? Perhaps the Democratic Party will offer Alyssa a speaking role at its 2020 national convention, right after Dr. Christine Blasey-Ford speaks!
And speaking of the Democratic Party, it is poised to nominate one of two OLD WHITE MEN to be the Dem's presidential candidate in 2020 - old white men, deciding the fate of the women in this country! The latest national polling has 'Gropin' Joe' Biden with 39.8% of the party's support, while old white male liberal Bernie Sanders is in 2nd-place with 16.3%. In a distant 3rd-place is Liz Warren with a paltry 8.3% of her party's support.
Maybe in Missouri - but in ALABAMA it was a FEMALE governor signing that state's new abortion legislation: KAY IVEY! Don't you think it's great that the state of Alabama has elected a woman governor, unlike New York & California, where they keep putting old white MEN in charge?
Meanwhile, in Georgia, Hollywood actress Alyssa Milano continues to push for a SEX STRIKE to lessen the number of abortions being performed there! I mean, less sex means fewer women getting pregnant, right? And fewer women getting pregnant will obviously mean fewer abortions necessary, correct? Perhaps the Democratic Party will offer Alyssa a speaking role at its 2020 national convention, right after Dr. Christine Blasey-Ford speaks!
And speaking of the Democratic Party, it is poised to nominate one of two OLD WHITE MEN to be the Dem's presidential candidate in 2020 - old white men, deciding the fate of the women in this country! The latest national polling has 'Gropin' Joe' Biden with 39.8% of the party's support, while old white male liberal Bernie Sanders is in 2nd-place with 16.3%. In a distant 3rd-place is Liz Warren with a paltry 8.3% of her party's support.
The New Yorker Verified Account
@NewYorker
“Laws like this have almost nothing to do with the fetus, or the embryo, or the fertilized egg, and everything to do with the role of women in society today,” the journalist Linda Greenhouse said.
7:02 PM - 15 May 2019
So you don’t interpret the aggressiveness of these laws as conservatives feeling emboldened and thinking they’re going to overturn Roe?
Linda Greenhouse:
Well, I think they’re doing a couple things with these laws. They’re appealing to a base. These are politicians who are passing these laws, and these are elected governors who are purporting to sign them. It’s a way of keeping issues hot and alive. It’s also a way of, as we’ve seen throughout this battle, carving abortion out of normal medical practice by turning doctors into criminals for providing a medical service that something like thirty per cent of all American women will avail themselves of during their reproductive lifetimes.
So, there’s something very strange going on here, and I’ll just say that I think laws like this have almost nothing to do with the fetus, or the embryo, or the fertilized egg, and everything to do with the role of women in society today. It’s all about the dignity and agency of the female half of the population. And that’s what’s at stake, frankly.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez:
"They're about controlling women's sexuality. Owning women," she continued. "From limiting birth control to banning comprehensive sex ed, US religious fundamentalists are working hard to outlaw sex that falls outside their theology."
"Ultimately, this is about women's power," Ocasio-Cortez wrote in a second tweet, adding that "when women are in control of their sexuality, it threatens a core element underpinning right-wing ideology: patriarchy."
"It's a brutal form of oppression to seize control of the 1 essential thing a person should command: their own body," she added.
https://www.salon.com/2019/05/16/ab...mens-sexuality-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-says/
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Verified Account
@AOC
Abortion bans aren’t just about controlling women’s bodies. They’re about controlling women’s sexuality. Owning women. From limiting birth control to banning comprehensive sex ed, US religious fundamentalists are working hard to outlaw sex that falls outside their theology.
10:10 PM - 15 May 2019
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Verified Account
@AOC Replying to @AOC
Ultimately, this is about women’s power. When women are in control of their sexuality, it threatens a core element underpinning right-wing ideology: patriarchy. It’s a brutal form of oppression to seize control of the 1 essential thing a person should command: their own body.
10:27 PM - 15 May 2019
@NewYorker
“Laws like this have almost nothing to do with the fetus, or the embryo, or the fertilized egg, and everything to do with the role of women in society today,” the journalist Linda Greenhouse said.
7:02 PM - 15 May 2019
So you don’t interpret the aggressiveness of these laws as conservatives feeling emboldened and thinking they’re going to overturn Roe?
Linda Greenhouse:
Well, I think they’re doing a couple things with these laws. They’re appealing to a base. These are politicians who are passing these laws, and these are elected governors who are purporting to sign them. It’s a way of keeping issues hot and alive. It’s also a way of, as we’ve seen throughout this battle, carving abortion out of normal medical practice by turning doctors into criminals for providing a medical service that something like thirty per cent of all American women will avail themselves of during their reproductive lifetimes.
So, there’s something very strange going on here, and I’ll just say that I think laws like this have almost nothing to do with the fetus, or the embryo, or the fertilized egg, and everything to do with the role of women in society today. It’s all about the dignity and agency of the female half of the population. And that’s what’s at stake, frankly.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez:
"They're about controlling women's sexuality. Owning women," she continued. "From limiting birth control to banning comprehensive sex ed, US religious fundamentalists are working hard to outlaw sex that falls outside their theology."
"Ultimately, this is about women's power," Ocasio-Cortez wrote in a second tweet, adding that "when women are in control of their sexuality, it threatens a core element underpinning right-wing ideology: patriarchy."
"It's a brutal form of oppression to seize control of the 1 essential thing a person should command: their own body," she added.
https://www.salon.com/2019/05/16/ab...mens-sexuality-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-says/
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Verified Account
@AOC
Abortion bans aren’t just about controlling women’s bodies. They’re about controlling women’s sexuality. Owning women. From limiting birth control to banning comprehensive sex ed, US religious fundamentalists are working hard to outlaw sex that falls outside their theology.
10:10 PM - 15 May 2019
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Verified Account
@AOC Replying to @AOC
Ultimately, this is about women’s power. When women are in control of their sexuality, it threatens a core element underpinning right-wing ideology: patriarchy. It’s a brutal form of oppression to seize control of the 1 essential thing a person should command: their own body.
10:27 PM - 15 May 2019
Abortion
Voters have been largely sidelined on the question since 1973
The Supreme Court decided the issue, so there is little or no incentive for political players to hammer out any kind of compromise and every incentive to use the issue to rally the party bases, demonize ideological opponents, and enact extreme measures, knowing nothing will come of them, and no real accountability will follow.
That is the real reason we are now seeing a batch of truly extreme bills in red states outlawing it.
It’s all about ginning up a Supreme Court case now that pro-lifers may have a majority, with Brett Kavanaugh ensconced. The Alabama measure, signed by the governor this week, bars legal abortion even for rape and incest cases. It threatens doctors with up to 99 years in jail for performing one. It doesn’t target women for legal punishment, as some have falsely claimed, but it’s so draconian that even Pat Robertson has demurred and Kevin McCarthy has disavowed it. On the other side of the debate, in contrast, New York state’s legislature just passed a strikingly permissive abortion law, and any attempts by some to limit abortion in any way is regularly deemed part of a “war on women.” If it is, over a third of American women want to wage war against themselves. (Pew finds no gender gap on the subject and puts the percentage of women wanting abortion to be illegal in most/all circumstances at 36 percent and men at 37 percent. Gallup finds only a trivial gender gap as well.)
interesting times 12:59 P.M.
Elizabeth Warren Just Transformed the Abortion Debate
By Andrew Sullivan
New York magazine
Roe was decided in 1973.
Unlike many other progressive Court decisions, this one didn’t budge public opinion. In 1975, two years after Roe, some 22 percent favored a total ban on abortion in a Gallup poll; today that number is … 18 percent. Back then, 54 percent favored a middle ground: keeping the procedure legal under restricted circumstances. Now it’s 50 percent. Twenty-one percent believed in 1975 that abortion should be legal in every circumstance; today that number is 29 percent.
We all have a natural right to our own bodies — and if we do not, then we have no natural right to anything, and America’s promise is a lie.
The integrity of women’s bodies is therefore a core principle, inferentially buried in the Constitution. The right to life, in this case, is literally, physically, inside the bounds of liberty, i.e. within a woman’s body.
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019...ay-through-the-intractable-abortion-wars.html
Voters have been largely sidelined on the question since 1973
The Supreme Court decided the issue, so there is little or no incentive for political players to hammer out any kind of compromise and every incentive to use the issue to rally the party bases, demonize ideological opponents, and enact extreme measures, knowing nothing will come of them, and no real accountability will follow.
That is the real reason we are now seeing a batch of truly extreme bills in red states outlawing it.
It’s all about ginning up a Supreme Court case now that pro-lifers may have a majority, with Brett Kavanaugh ensconced. The Alabama measure, signed by the governor this week, bars legal abortion even for rape and incest cases. It threatens doctors with up to 99 years in jail for performing one. It doesn’t target women for legal punishment, as some have falsely claimed, but it’s so draconian that even Pat Robertson has demurred and Kevin McCarthy has disavowed it. On the other side of the debate, in contrast, New York state’s legislature just passed a strikingly permissive abortion law, and any attempts by some to limit abortion in any way is regularly deemed part of a “war on women.” If it is, over a third of American women want to wage war against themselves. (Pew finds no gender gap on the subject and puts the percentage of women wanting abortion to be illegal in most/all circumstances at 36 percent and men at 37 percent. Gallup finds only a trivial gender gap as well.)
interesting times 12:59 P.M.
Elizabeth Warren Just Transformed the Abortion Debate
By Andrew Sullivan
New York magazine
Roe was decided in 1973.
Unlike many other progressive Court decisions, this one didn’t budge public opinion. In 1975, two years after Roe, some 22 percent favored a total ban on abortion in a Gallup poll; today that number is … 18 percent. Back then, 54 percent favored a middle ground: keeping the procedure legal under restricted circumstances. Now it’s 50 percent. Twenty-one percent believed in 1975 that abortion should be legal in every circumstance; today that number is 29 percent.
We all have a natural right to our own bodies — and if we do not, then we have no natural right to anything, and America’s promise is a lie.
The integrity of women’s bodies is therefore a core principle, inferentially buried in the Constitution. The right to life, in this case, is literally, physically, inside the bounds of liberty, i.e. within a woman’s body.
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019...ay-through-the-intractable-abortion-wars.html
Michelle Goldberg has a must- read on why a post- Roe world would be even worse than the conditions that existed before Roe. Here are a few of her top line arguments (our emphasis):
While doctors were prosecuted for abortions before Roe, patients rarely were. Today, in states that have legislated fetal personhood, women are already arrested on suspicion of harming or endangering their fetuses, including by using drugs, attempting suicide or, in a case in Utah, delaying a cesarean section. There’s no reason to believe that, in states where abortion is considered homicide, prosecutors will be less punitive when investigating it.
Further, the abortion bans in the new wave are harsher than most of those that existed before Roe. At that time, most states prohibited abortion in most circumstances, but according to historian Leslie Reagan, the author of the book “When Abortion Was a Crime,” there was little legal conception of fetal personhood.
Overturning or weakening Roe also shifts the Overton window:
Republican politicians in other states are clearly interested in
locking women up; last month Texas legislators held a hearing
on a bill that would allow women who have abortions to be
charged with homicide and potentially subject to the death penalty.
In a post-Roe future, the political fight, at least in red states,
could shift from whether women can have abortions to
whether they can be imprisoned for them.
https://hackwhackers.********.com/
Opinion |
Post-Roe America Could Be Worse Than Anything That Came Before
By Michelle Goldberg
nytimes.com —
The new abortion bans are harsher than the old ones.
May 16, 2019
This week, Alabama’s governor signed legislation banning most abortions without
exceptions for rape or incest, with sentences of up to 99 years in prison for
abortion providers. It follows a measure that Georgia’s governor signed last week effectively
banning most abortions after six weeks of pregnancy and that is worded in a way that
could lead to prosecutions of women who terminate their pregnancies after that point.
While doctors were prosecuted for abortions before Roe, patients rarely were. Today, in states that have legislated fetal personhood, women are already arrested on suspicion of harming or endangering their fetuses, including by using drugs, attempting suicide or, in a case in Utah, delaying a cesarean section. There’s no reason to believe that, in states where abortion is considered homicide, prosecutors will be less punitive when investigating it.
Further, the abortion bans in the new wave are harsher than most of those that existed before Roe. At that time, most states prohibited abortion in most circumstances, but according to historian Leslie Reagan, the author of the book “When Abortion Was a Crime,” there was little legal conception of fetal personhood.
Overturning or weakening Roe also shifts the Overton window:
Republican politicians in other states are clearly interested in
locking women up; last month Texas legislators held a hearing
on a bill that would allow women who have abortions to be
charged with homicide and potentially subject to the death penalty.
In a post-Roe future, the political fight, at least in red states,
could shift from whether women can have abortions to
whether they can be imprisoned for them.
https://hackwhackers.********.com/
Opinion |
Post-Roe America Could Be Worse Than Anything That Came Before
By Michelle Goldberg
nytimes.com —
The new abortion bans are harsher than the old ones.
May 16, 2019
This week, Alabama’s governor signed legislation banning most abortions without
exceptions for rape or incest, with sentences of up to 99 years in prison for
abortion providers. It follows a measure that Georgia’s governor signed last week effectively
banning most abortions after six weeks of pregnancy and that is worded in a way that
could lead to prosecutions of women who terminate their pregnancies after that point.
YDB95
Hopeless Romantic!
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2011
- Posts
- 14,107
If Roe gets overturned, I'm betting you'll see a LOT of suburban Republican women crossing over to vote pro-choice - just for starters.
The Republicans don't really want Roe overturned - it would cost them their most effective rallying tool with the religious extremists. That's one reason why it's never quite happened in all these years. Looks like the monster is about to get loose, though.
The Republicans don't really want Roe overturned - it would cost them their most effective rallying tool with the religious extremists. That's one reason why it's never quite happened in all these years. Looks like the monster is about to get loose, though.
Friday May 17, 2019
Back in February, the Supreme Court received an emergency request from a women’s health care clinic, June Medical Services. The organization asked the justices to block the enforcement of a Louisiana law requiring physicians who perform abortion to have hospital admitting privileges. A federal appellate court had reversed a lower court’s order stopping the law.
The Louisiana law is nearly identical to the Texas law that a 5-3 Supreme Court had struck down in 2016.
The justices, in an unsigned order, granted the request of the Louisiana women’s center and temporarily blocked the state requirement, but four justices dissented: Samuel Alito Jr., Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh. Chief Justice Roberts sided with the court’s liberal wing.
Last month, June Medical Services filed its petition for review and now the justices must decide what to do with it.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politic...ode-roe-v-wade
Today, we asked the Supreme Court to step in to stop Louisiana from blatantly ignoring the Court’s most recent ruling on abortion rights. In 2016, the Court was crystal clear that states may not use medically unjustified restrictions to shut down abortion clinics,” said Nancy Northup, President and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights. “The stakes in this case couldn’t be higher for Louisiana women, where abortion access is hanging by a thread. If states are allowed to disregard Supreme Court decisions, the constitutional protections of Roe v. Wade are in peril.”
After the Fifth Circuit upheld the Louisiana law last year, the Center for Reproductive Rights submitted a petition urging the entire Fifth Circuit to rehear the case and correct the panel’s failure to follow Supreme Court precedent. The petition was denied in a split 9-6 decision. In his dissent, Judge Dennis wrote that if the law took effect, “70% of women seeking abortions in Louisiana would be unable to obtain one, clearly constituting an undue burden on a large fraction of women.” He also noted that the law would disproportionately harm “women in poverty who seek abortions in Louisiana… who are no less entitled than other women to this constitutionally protected healthcare right.”
The law at issue, Act 620, would require any physician providing abortion services in Louisiana to have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of the procedure. There is no medical justification for this requirement, as abortion is extremely safe. In fact, the rate of major complications in the first trimester requiring hospitalization is about 2 in 1,000 women. Hospitals frequently deny admitting privileges to doctors who provide abortions for reasons ranging from ideological opposition to the fact that too few of their patients will ever need hospital care.
https://www.reproductiverights.org/p...-supreme-court
Statement from Nancy Northup, President & CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, on HB 126 passed by the Missouri legislature today:
05.17.19 -
“Without shame and on the heels of Alabama’s new criminal abortion ban, the Missouri legislature has passed an unconstitutional, complete ban on abortion.
“This bill mocks reproductive health care by creating tax credits for donations to fake clinics and makes it a crime for doctors who provide abortion care. We are alarmed by callous and extreme politicians who seek to deny women the ability to make decisions about their reproductive health and lives.
“Almost 50 years of core protections for women’s reproductive decision-making have been upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court. Missouri and Alabama’s recent criminal abortion bans, and all other affronts to Roe v. Wade, will be challenged and blocked according to precedent and settled law.”
https://www.reproductiverights.org/press-room/statement-on-missouri-abortion-ban
Back in February, the Supreme Court received an emergency request from a women’s health care clinic, June Medical Services. The organization asked the justices to block the enforcement of a Louisiana law requiring physicians who perform abortion to have hospital admitting privileges. A federal appellate court had reversed a lower court’s order stopping the law.
The Louisiana law is nearly identical to the Texas law that a 5-3 Supreme Court had struck down in 2016.
The justices, in an unsigned order, granted the request of the Louisiana women’s center and temporarily blocked the state requirement, but four justices dissented: Samuel Alito Jr., Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh. Chief Justice Roberts sided with the court’s liberal wing.
Last month, June Medical Services filed its petition for review and now the justices must decide what to do with it.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politic...ode-roe-v-wade
Today, we asked the Supreme Court to step in to stop Louisiana from blatantly ignoring the Court’s most recent ruling on abortion rights. In 2016, the Court was crystal clear that states may not use medically unjustified restrictions to shut down abortion clinics,” said Nancy Northup, President and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights. “The stakes in this case couldn’t be higher for Louisiana women, where abortion access is hanging by a thread. If states are allowed to disregard Supreme Court decisions, the constitutional protections of Roe v. Wade are in peril.”
After the Fifth Circuit upheld the Louisiana law last year, the Center for Reproductive Rights submitted a petition urging the entire Fifth Circuit to rehear the case and correct the panel’s failure to follow Supreme Court precedent. The petition was denied in a split 9-6 decision. In his dissent, Judge Dennis wrote that if the law took effect, “70% of women seeking abortions in Louisiana would be unable to obtain one, clearly constituting an undue burden on a large fraction of women.” He also noted that the law would disproportionately harm “women in poverty who seek abortions in Louisiana… who are no less entitled than other women to this constitutionally protected healthcare right.”
The law at issue, Act 620, would require any physician providing abortion services in Louisiana to have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of the procedure. There is no medical justification for this requirement, as abortion is extremely safe. In fact, the rate of major complications in the first trimester requiring hospitalization is about 2 in 1,000 women. Hospitals frequently deny admitting privileges to doctors who provide abortions for reasons ranging from ideological opposition to the fact that too few of their patients will ever need hospital care.
https://www.reproductiverights.org/p...-supreme-court
Statement from Nancy Northup, President & CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, on HB 126 passed by the Missouri legislature today:
05.17.19 -
“Without shame and on the heels of Alabama’s new criminal abortion ban, the Missouri legislature has passed an unconstitutional, complete ban on abortion.
“This bill mocks reproductive health care by creating tax credits for donations to fake clinics and makes it a crime for doctors who provide abortion care. We are alarmed by callous and extreme politicians who seek to deny women the ability to make decisions about their reproductive health and lives.
“Almost 50 years of core protections for women’s reproductive decision-making have been upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court. Missouri and Alabama’s recent criminal abortion bans, and all other affronts to Roe v. Wade, will be challenged and blocked according to precedent and settled law.”
https://www.reproductiverights.org/press-room/statement-on-missouri-abortion-ban
May 8, 3019
https://wosu2.drupal.publicbroadcas...-private-insurance-coverage-abortion#stream/0
WOSU Radio
https://wosu.org/
publicbroadcasting.net
new-ohio-bill-would-ban-most-private-insurance-coverage-abortion
pic
The Handmaids were there to protest
New Ohio Bill Would Ban Most Private Insurance Coverage Of Abortion
"regulating biology, that they do not understand"
https://wosu2.drupal.publicbroadcas...-private-insurance-coverage-abortion#stream/0
WOSU Radio
https://wosu.org/
publicbroadcasting.net
new-ohio-bill-would-ban-most-private-insurance-coverage-abortion
pic
The Handmaids were there to protest
New Ohio Bill Would Ban Most Private Insurance Coverage Of Abortion
"regulating biology, that they do not understand"
Grotesque in Ohio, because of Gov. Mike DeWine's decision
ACLU Sues Over Ohio's "Heartbeat Bill" Six-Week Abortion Ban
By Jo Ingles
May 15, 2019
https://www.statenews.org/post/aclu-sues-over-ohios-heartbeat-bill-six-week-abortion-ban
Apr 11, 2019 ... COLUMBUS —
Gov. Mike DeWine on Thursday wasted little time signing what
would be one of the strictest anti-abortion laws in the nation.
NARAL Verified Account
@NARAL
BREAKING;
Ohio’s Republican governor has just signed a bill that effectively bans abortion outright—with ZERO exceptions for rape or incest. #StopTheBans
(link)
12:49 PM - 11 Apr 2019
https://www.toledoblade.com/local/p...at-bill-anti-abortion-law/stories/20190411136
Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine signs 'Heartbeat Bill'
COLUMBUS — Gov. Mike DeWine on Thursday wasted little time signing what would be one of the strictest anti-abortion laws in the nation.
The Blade The Blade @toledonews
ACLU Sues Over Ohio's "Heartbeat Bill" Six-Week Abortion Ban
By Jo Ingles
May 15, 2019
https://www.statenews.org/post/aclu-sues-over-ohios-heartbeat-bill-six-week-abortion-ban
pic
Gov. Mike DeWine signed the "Heartbeat Bill", joined by Lt. Gov. Jon Husted, Speaker Larry Householder and several anti-abortion advocates.
More than a month after Gov. Mike DeWine signed one of the most restrictive abortion bans in the country, a lawsuit has been filed in federal court to stop it from taking effect in July. It bans abortion as early as six weeks into a pregnancy.
The bill bans abortion after a fetal heartbeat can be detected, often before a woman would even know she was pregnant. Jessie Hill, an attorney working with the ACLU, says the so-called “heartbeat bill” is blatantly unconstitutional.
“The law is very clear and the science that fetuses are not viable at six weeks of pregnancy and states cannot ban abortions before viability.”
ACLU Sues Over Ohio's "Heartbeat Bill" Six-Week Abortion Ban
By Jo Ingles
May 15, 2019
https://www.statenews.org/post/aclu-sues-over-ohios-heartbeat-bill-six-week-abortion-ban
Apr 11, 2019 ... COLUMBUS —
Gov. Mike DeWine on Thursday wasted little time signing what
would be one of the strictest anti-abortion laws in the nation.
NARAL Verified Account
@NARAL
BREAKING;
Ohio’s Republican governor has just signed a bill that effectively bans abortion outright—with ZERO exceptions for rape or incest. #StopTheBans
(link)
12:49 PM - 11 Apr 2019
https://www.toledoblade.com/local/p...at-bill-anti-abortion-law/stories/20190411136
Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine signs 'Heartbeat Bill'
COLUMBUS — Gov. Mike DeWine on Thursday wasted little time signing what would be one of the strictest anti-abortion laws in the nation.
The Blade The Blade @toledonews
ACLU Sues Over Ohio's "Heartbeat Bill" Six-Week Abortion Ban
By Jo Ingles
May 15, 2019
https://www.statenews.org/post/aclu-sues-over-ohios-heartbeat-bill-six-week-abortion-ban
pic
Gov. Mike DeWine signed the "Heartbeat Bill", joined by Lt. Gov. Jon Husted, Speaker Larry Householder and several anti-abortion advocates.
More than a month after Gov. Mike DeWine signed one of the most restrictive abortion bans in the country, a lawsuit has been filed in federal court to stop it from taking effect in July. It bans abortion as early as six weeks into a pregnancy.
The bill bans abortion after a fetal heartbeat can be detected, often before a woman would even know she was pregnant. Jessie Hill, an attorney working with the ACLU, says the so-called “heartbeat bill” is blatantly unconstitutional.
“The law is very clear and the science that fetuses are not viable at six weeks of pregnancy and states cannot ban abortions before viability.”
2019/04/26
Kansas Supreme Court Rules State Constitution Protects Right To Abortion
(Kansas passed a ban on dilation and evacuation abortions in 2015. )
Amy Jeffries
@amyoverhere
This is what the @ksnewsservice and @kcur is covering today,
and it's riveting, even for this editor
(link)
@Celia_LJ @DanMargolies
8:30 AM - 26 Apr 2019
Kansas Supreme Court: The State Constitution Protects Abortion Rights
(This story was updated at 4:45 p.m.)
Kansas women have a fundamental right to abortion,
the state’s Supreme Court ruled Friday
KCUR KCUR @kcur
Kansas News Service
@ksnewsservice Replying to
@ksnewsservice
The landmark ruling now stands as the law of the land
in Kansas with no path for an appeal —
even if Roe vs. Wade is reversed by the U.S. Supreme Court.
#ksleg
7:59 AM - 26 Apr 2019
https://www.npr.org/2019/04/26/7174...state-constitution-protects-right-to-abortion
The decision, in which one of the seven justices dissented, cites in its first sentence the first section of the Kansas Constitution's Bill of Rights: "All men are possessed of equal and inalienable natural rights, among which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."
The decision continues: "We are now asked: 'Is this declaration of rights more than an idealized aspiration? And, if so, do the substantive rights include a woman's right to make decisions about her body, including the decision whether to continue her pregnancy? We answer these questions, 'Yes.' "
The court continued that "this right allows a woman to make her own decisions regarding her body, health, family formation, and family life — decisions that can include whether to continue a pregnancy."
Kansas Supreme Court Rules State Constitution Protects Right To Abortion
(Kansas passed a ban on dilation and evacuation abortions in 2015. )
Amy Jeffries
@amyoverhere
This is what the @ksnewsservice and @kcur is covering today,
and it's riveting, even for this editor
(link)
@Celia_LJ @DanMargolies
8:30 AM - 26 Apr 2019
Kansas Supreme Court: The State Constitution Protects Abortion Rights
(This story was updated at 4:45 p.m.)
Kansas women have a fundamental right to abortion,
the state’s Supreme Court ruled Friday
KCUR KCUR @kcur
Kansas News Service
@ksnewsservice Replying to
@ksnewsservice
The landmark ruling now stands as the law of the land
in Kansas with no path for an appeal —
even if Roe vs. Wade is reversed by the U.S. Supreme Court.
#ksleg
7:59 AM - 26 Apr 2019
https://www.npr.org/2019/04/26/7174...state-constitution-protects-right-to-abortion
The decision, in which one of the seven justices dissented, cites in its first sentence the first section of the Kansas Constitution's Bill of Rights: "All men are possessed of equal and inalienable natural rights, among which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."
The decision continues: "We are now asked: 'Is this declaration of rights more than an idealized aspiration? And, if so, do the substantive rights include a woman's right to make decisions about her body, including the decision whether to continue her pregnancy? We answer these questions, 'Yes.' "
The court continued that "this right allows a woman to make her own decisions regarding her body, health, family formation, and family life — decisions that can include whether to continue a pregnancy."
New York Times opened a big can of worms, yesterday!
White Supremacists have been infiltrating universities for years.
Guess what happened...
racism, sexism, bigotry, trolling of academics, and much whining about free speech for White Supremacists
April 15, 2019
Medieval Scholars Joust With White Nationalists.
www.nytimes.com/2019/05/05/arts/the-battle-for...
“Medieval Studies always wants to be relevant,” said Ruth Mazo Karras, a historian at Trinity College, Dublin, and president of the Medieval Academy of America.
The shootings followed the release of materials some have called a manifesto but that has more accurately been called a “media plan.” In it are multiple medieval references, several involving medieval Vikings, which these days function as a signal to white supremacists. Along with much else from the European medieval world, the Viking past is part of the far right’s standard visual and textual imaginary. That vision of a Viking world depends on contemporary digital and filmic popular culture — such as the TV show Vikings and Viking-adjacent video games — as well as on academic and historical sources.
So where does the white supremacist vision of Viking genealogy come from?
Despite the fact that real Viking history was multicultural, academic medieval studies have historically been to blame for the upholding of that imaginary past.
http://time.com/5569399/viking-history-white-nationalists/
White Supremacists have been infiltrating universities for years.
Guess what happened...
racism, sexism, bigotry, trolling of academics, and much whining about free speech for White Supremacists
April 15, 2019
Medieval Scholars Joust With White Nationalists.
www.nytimes.com/2019/05/05/arts/the-battle-for...
“Medieval Studies always wants to be relevant,” said Ruth Mazo Karras, a historian at Trinity College, Dublin, and president of the Medieval Academy of America.
The shootings followed the release of materials some have called a manifesto but that has more accurately been called a “media plan.” In it are multiple medieval references, several involving medieval Vikings, which these days function as a signal to white supremacists. Along with much else from the European medieval world, the Viking past is part of the far right’s standard visual and textual imaginary. That vision of a Viking world depends on contemporary digital and filmic popular culture — such as the TV show Vikings and Viking-adjacent video games — as well as on academic and historical sources.
So where does the white supremacist vision of Viking genealogy come from?
Despite the fact that real Viking history was multicultural, academic medieval studies have historically been to blame for the upholding of that imaginary past.
http://time.com/5569399/viking-history-white-nationalists/
Similar threads
