The Assault on Womens Sexual and Reproductive Rights

[Martina]

Loved it. Thanks for posting the link. OMG I didn't know he was on the House Committee on Science and stuff. Lord. *chuckling*

My favorite quote from the article:

Paul Ryan, who teamed up with Akin in the House to sponsor harsh anti-abortion bills, may look young and hip and new generation, with his iPod full of heavy metal jams and his cute kids. But he’s just a fresh face on a Taliban creed — the evermore antediluvian, anti-women, anti-immigrant, anti-gay conservative core. Amiable in khakis and polo shirts, Ryan is the perfect modern leader to rally medieval Republicans who believe that Adam and Eve cavorted with dinosaurs.

[Martina]

[*Anya*]

Originally Posted by Martina

I'll go a step further. You have a vagina? No?

Shut the Fuck Up.

[Toughy]

don't have the link...........heard it on some femi-nazi liberal radio talk show

Apparently Aiken said on some Fox show during his various explanations and so-called apology that sometimes women lie and say they were raped when they were not....that's what he meant by 'forcible' and also 'legitimate'....

[Corkey]

Originally Posted by Toughy

don't have the link...........heard it on some femi-nazi liberal radio talk show

Apparently Aiken said on some Fox show during his various explanations and so-called apology that sometimes women lie and say they were raped when they were not....that's what he meant by 'forcible' and also 'legitimate'....

You're quite correct, it was on Hannity, saw it at the gym today.

[Licious]

Really good to see this thread posted. Assault on women and their rights, in any form, going back to the dark ages in any sense, is not acceptable, and is a sign of a greater problem. Glad everyone is discussing this.

[AtLast]

Feels like the Phyllis Shaffley days are on us again.

[Kobi]

Massachusetts’ leading pro-life group says it is supporting Republican U.S. Sen. Scott Brown, while Brown is trying to distance himself from the anti-abortion wing of his party.

Since the firestorm around Missouri Rep. Todd Akin's comments about rape and abortion, Brown has been emphasizing his pro-choice credentials. Here’s his wife, Gail Huff, at a recent campaign stop:

Scott is pro-choice. Has been forever. He’s always been very, very clear about his pro-choice view. Like he said, he has two young daughters, 24 and 21 years old. He understands more than anyone that women have a right to make their own decisions,” she said.

So it must have been awkward when Massachusetts Citizens for Life decided to throw its support behind Brown.

Anne Fox, the group's president, said Brown's voting record was more in line with her organization's views. “What he has voted on so far, yes, it’s been pro-life. So we would prefer to see our people vote with Scott Brown,” she said.

Megan Amundson of NARAL Pro-Choice, on the other side of the issue, saw some irony in the situation: “This is the one thing that Massachusetts Citizens for Life and NARAL Pro Choice of Massachusetts do agree on — is that Scott Brown may call himself pro-choice, but in reality he voted pro-choice only 1 in 5 times.”

In the past, Brown’s votes have angered both sides of the abortion debate. In 2007, he voted to create a 35-foot buffer zone to keep protesters away from abortion clinics. But he also co-sponsored a bill that would require women to wait 24 hours before getting an abortion and be provided with pictures and information on the development of their fetus.

Brown isn’t rejecting Massachusetts Citizens for Life's support. But on the campaign trail, he maintains he’s a moderate pro-choice Republican.

http://www.wgbhnews.org/post/pro-lif...hes-pro-choice

---------------------------------

Missouri Rep. Todd Akin is still campaigning — and his controversial comments about rape are continuing to impact the high-profile U.S. Senate race in Massachusetts.

On Aug. 21, Sen. Scott Brown sent a letter to the chairman of the Republican National Committee, asking him to drop the anti-abortion plank in the party platform.

Peter Blute, the deputy chairman of the Massachusetts Republican Party, said sending the letter was a brave move. "I think it’s very rare that a senator stands up and speaks against a plank in his own party’s platform."

But Megan Amundson, the executive vice president of NARAL Pro Choice, said the letter didn't go far enough.

“The letter doesn’t do anything. He’s been very clear the letter is all he’s willing to do. That’s he’s not willing to go to the convention to speak about for this or fight for this, that’s he’s not willingly to actively stand up for women’s rights,” she said.

Brown said on Aug. 22 that he wouldn’t be taking the abortion fight to the GOP convention in Tampa this weekend.

“I’m going down Thursday as I’ve always planned before this came up," he said. "They know my position. It’s up to others to join forces. The Olympia Snowes and Collinses need to join forces.”

In the past, other big-name Massachusetts Republicans did more than write letters about abortion. In 1992, then-Gov. Bill Weld delivered a strong pro-choice speech at the Republican Convention in Houston. He tried to launch a floor fight but didn’t have enough votes.

Brown’s challenger Elizabeth Warren has capitalized on this issue. All this week she’s been hammering Brown on abortion, contraception and equal pay.

http://www.wgbhnews.org/post/scott-b...not-far-enough

[Kobi]

Romney on Meet The Press today:

On the divisive social issue of abortion, Romney said it "would be my preference" that the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling legalizing it be overturned by any justices who he would appoint to the U.S. Supreme Court if vacancies come up.

"Well, there are a number of things I think that need to be said about preserving and protecting the life of the unborn child. And I recognize there are two lives involved: the mom and the unborn child," Romney said.

"And I believe that people of good conscience have chosen different paths in this regard. But I am pro-life and will intend, if I'm president of the United States, to encourage pro-life policies," he added.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/romney-says...155146420.html

[Kobi]

from NARAL:

Remember the demeaning “transvaginal probe law?”

Well, now Virginia’s Governor Bob McDonnell is backing outrageous new regulations for abortion providers that are impractical, serve absolutely NO medical purpose—and ultimately threaten to close clinics down or force them to rebuild from the ground up.

This Friday, the Virginia Board of Health is being asked to vote on the regulations for a second time—even though the panel already rejected these rules because they were unrealistic and medically unnecessary. The Governor and the rest of the executive branch are acting like the past never happened though, and continue to try to strong-arm the board into advancing these regulations.

Among other things, the regulations would force existing reproductive health care facilities to meet architectural standards designed for new hospitals. This makes no medical or logical sense at all, and it would require providers in the state to undergo massive construction or renovations. Hospitals aren’t even required to meet standards this tough.

Virginia abortion providers have been safely caring for women for decades. But it’s clear that Gov. McDonnell and others are less concerned with women’s health than with imposing harsh rules aimed at shutting clinics down.

[Kobi]

RICHMOND, Virginia (Reuters) - The Virginia state health board voted on Friday to require existing abortion clinics to meet stricter hospital building codes, a move clinic supporters say could force facilities to make expensive changes or close.

The board in June had exempted existing abortion clinics from meeting the building code rules for new hospitals that can require modifications such as wider hallways and additional parking. It voted 13 to 2 on Friday to reverse that decision.

Virginia Attorney General Kenneth Cuccinelli, a Republican known for his conservative social views, had argued against that earlier decision, saying the health board did not have the authority to challenge the intent of a 2011 law that treats abortion clinics as hospitals.

Abortion-rights supporters, who had packed the hearing room, stood and chanted "shame, shame, shame" as the vote was read and security officers escorted them from the room.

"I'm exhausted because I've been going to these meetings for over a year," said Shelley Abrams, director of A Capital Women's Health, a Richmond abortion clinic. "We've complied with every rule except these architectural requirements."

Anti-abortion activists said the board's decision would protect women who choose to get an abortion.

"I'm against it, but if you're going to do it, it should be safe," Williamsburg resident Jerry Moran said. "Safety of women should be the primary objective."

The board typically has exempted existing medical facilities from new construction codes approved by state lawmakers, limiting them to additions, renovations and new building.

More than half of the clinics have submitted plans to comply with the state codes.

"It is unprecedented to force existing health centers to comply with building regulations intended for new construction, and the board acted well within its authority in voting to amend these regulations in June," said Tarina Keene, executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice Virginia.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/virginia-ti...025257592.html

[Kobi]

(Reuters) - A U.S. appeals court on Tuesday blocked the prosecution of an Idaho woman who aborted her pregnancy by taking pills instead of traveling to a clinic or hospital as required by state law.

Jennie Linn McCormack, an unmarried mother of three, was charged by Bannock County prosecutors last year after she ingested medication to induce an abortion. The drugs were approved for use by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and prescribed over the Internet, according to the opinion from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Idaho requires that abortions be performed during the first trimester in a hospital, doctor's office or clinic. No licensed healthcare providers offered the procedure near where McCormack lived in southeastern Idaho, the opinion said.

The criminal case against McCormack was dismissed, and she filed a lawsuit claiming Idaho's abortion law is unconstitutional. An Idaho federal judge issued an injunction saying the law can't be enforced.

In its ruling on Tuesday, the 9th Circuit largely agreed. Criminal abortion statutes traditionally apply to individuals such as doctors, who perform unhealthy abortions that threaten women's safety, the unanimous three-judge panel said.

Those laws shouldn't apply to pregnant women themselves, according to the opinion.

"There can be no doubt," the court said, "that requiring women to explore the intricacies of state abortion statutes to ensure that they and their provider act within the Idaho abortion statute framework, results in an 'undue burden' on a woman seeking an abortion of a nonviable fetus."

At this point in the litigation, however, the injunction should only apply to McCormack, and not women generally, the court said. McCormack may ultimately get a judgment that strikes down the law entirely, the 9th Circuit said.

Bannock County prosecutors and McCormack's attorney could not immediately be reached for comment.

The case in the 9th Circuit is Jennie Linn McCormack vs. Mark Hiedeman, 11-36010.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/u-court-say...75.html?_esi=1

[Martina]

[Kobi]

The states are not free, under the guise of protecting maternal health or potential life, to intimidate women into continuing pregnancies. ~Justice Harry A. Blackmun, Roe v. Wade, 22 January 1973





And yet, this is exactly what the GOP has been doing.

[always2late]

ENOUGH!! I have HAD it with these fucking assholes and their "definitions" of rape! Rape is "another method of conception"??? Fuck you and the horse you rode in on you lying, backward, teabilly, douchebag!! ANY woman who votes for these fucking idiots is a self-loathing moron!! (excuse my language..I am furious and have lost ALL my filters when it comes to these pathetic excuses for human beings!)

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/08/2...of-conception/

[*Anya*]

I feel like I have fallen down a rabbit hole and the clock has been turned back to the 1950's.

I just can't believe my eyes and ears anymore. It is like insanity overload and I just want to turn it off.

Where is the outrage of the women that would have to deal with an unplanned pregnancy or a pregnancy as a result of rape? Are they truly that apathetic?

Oh god for the marches and political activism today, of the 60's and 70's! I just do not get all of this.

Do I still live in America?

Maybe I am dreaming.

Can someone wake me up please, because it is actually a nightmare.

[always2late]

Originally Posted by *Anya*

I feel like I have fallen down a rabbit hole and the clock has been turned back to the 1950's.

I just can't believe my eyes and ears anymore. It is like insanity overload and I just want to turn it off.

Where is the outrage of the women that would have to deal with an unplanned pregnancy or a pregnancy as a result of rape? Are they truly that apathetic?

Oh god for the marches and political activism today, of the 60's and 70's! I just do not get all of this.

Do I still live in America?

Maybe I am dreaming.

Can someone wake me up please, because it is actually a nightmare.

There is outrage. There are protests, and marches, and grassroots activism...all of which is being virtually IGNORED by the media outlets! That is the part of all this that I don't understand, that is the part that perplexes and confuses me probably about as much as it does you. I can understand Fox "News" ignoring the efforts of women to counteract this insanity...but every other major network?? There was a march in Washington, DC on August 18. Did you hear about it? I'm guessing that you probably didn't...and I'm not saying that to sound snarky. I'm just amazed that there is basically a media blackout regarding the women protesting against this insanity.

[Kobi]

Rep. Steve King, one of the most staunchly conservative members of the House, was one of the few Republicans who did not strongly condemn Rep. Todd Akin Monday for his remarks regarding pregnancy and rape. King also signaled why — he might agree with parts of Akin’s assertion.

Transcript:

REPORTER: You support the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act that would provide federal funding for abortions to a person that has been forcefully raped. But what if someone isn’t forcibly raped and for example, a 12-year-old who gets pregnant? Should she have to bring this baby to term?

KING: Well I just haven’t heard of that being a circumstance that’s been brought to me in any personal way and I’d be open to hearing discussion about that subject matter. Generally speaking it’s this: that there millions of abortions in this country every year. Millions of them are paid for at least in part by taxpayers. I think it’s immoral for us to compel conscientious objecting taxpayers to fund abortion through the federal government, or any other government for that matter. So that’s my stand. And if there are exceptions there, then bring me those exceptions let’s talk about it. In the meantime it’s wrong for us to compel pro-life people to pay taxes to fund abortion.

King’s office said he had been taken out of context.

“What he was saying was, he personally does not know a girl who was raped,” Brittany Lesser, a spokesperson for King said. “He never says, ‘I’ve never heard of that.’ There’s a fine line between ‘I’ve never heard of that’ and ‘I don’t know personally anybody who’s been raped. There’s a difference. There is a difference.”

Lesser said “of course” King is aware that girls have been impregnated by statutory rape or incest, and said King supports people who have not been forcibly raped receiving federal abortion coverage under a rape exemption. “That’s a given for anybody who understands pro-life legislation,” Lesser said.


Check out the raw as well as the broadcast version.


http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/20...utory-rape.php

------------------


So, if you were "raped forcibly", he doesnt want you to have access to federal funds to pay for an abortion.

Yet, he is ok with abortion funds for statutory rape and incest.

So, he is pro-life except when it involves pedophilia.

[Kobi]

Abolition of a woman's right to abortion, when and if she wants it, amounts to compulsory maternity: a form of rape by the State. ~Edward Abbey

[Corkey]

Originally Posted by Kobi

Rep. Steve King, one of the most staunchly conservative members of the House, was one of the few Republicans who did not strongly condemn Rep. Todd Akin Monday for his remarks regarding pregnancy and rape. King also signaled why — he might agree with parts of Akin’s assertion.

Transcript:

REPORTER: You support the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act that would provide federal funding for abortions to a person that has been forcefully raped. But what if someone isn’t forcibly raped and for example, a 12-year-old who gets pregnant? Should she have to bring this baby to term?

KING: Well I just haven’t heard of that being a circumstance that’s been brought to me in any personal way and I’d be open to hearing discussion about that subject matter. Generally speaking it’s this: that there millions of abortions in this country every year. Millions of them are paid for at least in part by taxpayers. I think it’s immoral for us to compel conscientious objecting taxpayers to fund abortion through the federal government, or any other government for that matter. So that’s my stand. And if there are exceptions there, then bring me those exceptions let’s talk about it. In the meantime it’s wrong for us to compel pro-life people to pay taxes to fund abortion.

King’s office said he had been taken out of context.

“What he was saying was, he personally does not know a girl who was raped,” Brittany Lesser, a spokesperson for King said. “He never says, ‘I’ve never heard of that.’ There’s a fine line between ‘I’ve never heard of that’ and ‘I don’t know personally anybody who’s been raped. There’s a difference. There is a difference.”

Lesser said “of course” King is aware that girls have been impregnated by statutory rape or incest, and said King supports people who have not been forcibly raped receiving federal abortion coverage under a rape exemption. “That’s a given for anybody who understands pro-life legislation,” Lesser said.


Check out the raw as well as the broadcast version.


http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/20...utory-rape.php

------------------


So, if you were "raped forcibly", he doesnt want you to have access to federal funds to pay for an abortion.

Yet, he is ok with abortion funds for statutory rape and incest.

So, he is pro-life except when it involves pedophilia.

Sometimes I just want to slap the stupid out them