Archive for pro forced birth

Dear pro-forced birthers: "What causes more abortions than not having contraception?"

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

abortion choice pro-forced birthers

Pro-forced birthers don't seem to have much depth, knowledge, or insight when it comes to how babies are made, how contraception works, or what women's health care agencies actually do.

Here's a tweet I just received, along with my reply:

Here is one of many excellent replies:

'Nuff said.

Sadly, "Franky's" tweet is typical of so many I receive from pro-forced birthers about women's reproductive rights, with one exception: He was civil.

With that, here are today's Los Angeles Times letters to the editor, because our voices matter:

Jonah Goldberg's column on the Hobby Lobby case takes as given the distortion of scientific facts at the core of the case. ("Alito agrees: Your birth control is not your boss' business," Op-Ed, June 30)

Overwhelming evidence has shown that emergency contraception does not prevent the implantation of a fertilized egg and does not cause the termination of an existing pregnancy. Therefore, emergency contraception it is not an abortifacient, contrary to what the Supreme Court justices and Goldberg contend.

Such uncritical endorsements of distorted science are the source of much misinformation, as I have discovered in my own research on barriers to access to emergency contraception. It is sad that the highest court in the nation has propagated this false belief and created another barrier for access to safe, effective and evidenced-based pregnancy prevention.

Tracey Wilkinson, MD, Los Angeles

..

Goldberg compares requiring employers to provide contraceptive health insurance to their employees to hypothetically requiring these companies to pay for their employees to attend a "Game of Thrones" convention.

Goldberg ignores the fact that every time a couple engages in unprotected intercourse, they are putting the woman's life at risk. According to a study published in the medical journal the Lancet, 18.5 women died in childbirth for every 100,000 live births in the U.S. in 2013.

The intimate relations between couples are no mere game. The ability to obtain and use contraceptives is a matter at the heart of family life.

Goldberg and the five men who make up the U.S. Supreme Court majority in the recent Hobby Lobby case have shown the world that they place little value on the lives of women.

Eleanor Egan, Costa Mesa

..

I suspect that because Hobby Lobby is so deeply religious, it would not support a woman's right to have an abortion. What causes more abortions than not having contraception?

Sarah Maze, Orange

Via .ecobumperstickers.com

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

SCOTUS rules for Freedom of Tyranny

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

women's rights vote 2014 scotus decision freedom of religion

Freedom, freedom, freedom schmeedom. The concept is losing its meaning, especially in light of the Supreme Court's warped perception of the word. My reaction to their ruling on contraception and "freedom" of religion is still hampered by my inability to respond with anything but sputtering noises and involuntary twitches, bursts of banging my head against the wall, and convulsing into tears of outrage. Freedom my ass. What about our freedom to not have your damned religion shoved up our atheist and/or non-Christian hineys?  Bam! And that was just a hiccup. I'm shutting up now.

By the way, conservatives, how's that outreach thing going for ya these days?

Anyway, instead of ranting, which would be nothing more than stream-of-consciousness outbursts at this point, I'll leave it to the Los Angeles Times letters to the editor, because, despite evidence to the contrary, our voices still matter. The Times headline for this batch of letters is, notably, "Don't want more Hobby Lobby decisions? Then don't elect conservative presidents":

The U.S. Supreme Court's distressingly improvident 5-4 decisions in this year's religious rights cases should surprise no one. They are the price we have paid for suffering disproportionate conservative appointments to the high court from 1980 to 2008, when Republicans occupied the White House for 20 of those 28 years. ("Supreme Court, citing religious liberty, limits contraceptive coverage in Obamacare," June 30)

All who despair over the Supreme Court's unseemly bowing to religious zealots — especially when certain faiths' tenets are allowed to trump enlightened medical care — should remember this in 2016: If a Republican is elected our next president, look for the court's conservative judicial activism to endure far beyond his or her term of office.

Robin Groves, Pacific Palisades

***

I am losing confidence in our system of three branches of government. Two of them seem no longer to be working for us.

The Supreme Court increasingly seems to be operating as a political body, rendering decisions that make questionable judicial sense unless one happens to be a corporation that has taken on "person" status or a religious group that wishes to impose its specific beliefs on its employees. These decisions are becoming more questionable as our do-nothing Congress functions less like an elected body responsible to the people and more like a robot body created and manipulated by wealthy donors.

As long as our lethargic electorate keeps reelecting these legislators, our president is left to act alone and the court decides in an increasingly predictable way, we will see the continued eroding of our beloved constitutional form of government.

Bette Mason, Corona del Mar

***

If there's a silver lining to the Supreme Court's Hobby Lobby ruling, it's that the decision will energize progressive voters to flood the polls for the foreseeable future as well as fuel boycotts against businesses that use religion as an excuse to discriminate.

Jerry Weil, Seal Beach

***

Will someone please explain to me how forcing your religious beliefs on others, who may or may not agree, is freedom of religion? Sounds more like tyranny to me.

Barbara Buckner, Laguna Niguel

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

Wisconsin state Dem senator expects "all out hell" on GOP abortion bills

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

rachel maddow gop big government

Anti-abortion, pro-forced birth bills are moving right along in Wisconsin's state Senate, and Democratic Sen. Jon Erpenbach will do everything he can to prevent them... loudly and clearly.

If his name sounds familiar, it's because he was also very vocal during the enormous protests against Gov. Scott Walker a couple of years back.

The typically anti-choice, invasive, War on Women bills in question would:

--Ban abortions "that are solely based on whether the fetus is male or female,"  (AKA sex selection) but Democrats don't think Wisconsin needs a bill like that at all since there are very few, if any, of those procedures that are even performed.

--Prevent public workers' health insurance plans from covering abortions and exempt religious organizations from providing insurance coverage for contraceptives. Contraceptives would be available if they're needed for something other than birth control. This bill is the biggie.

Via Madison.com:

"Their morals are fine for them but not for the rest of the state," Erpenbach said after the hearing. "Government intrusion like this is shocking."... When asked after the hearing how he expected Tuesday's debate to play out, Erpenbach said, "All out hell. Seriously."

Republicans control the Senate 18-15. Gov. Scott Walker has said he supports both bills and will sign them into law once they pass.

Notice the report doesn't say "if they pass."

The hypocrisy by Republicans is astounding. They scream "Small government!" but their version of "small government" becomes hugely intrusive when it suits them."Governor Ultrasound" ring a bell? Sure, government is just small enough to fit into our vaginas.

Memo to Republicans: My body, my choice. Stay the hell out of my uterus and my birth control methods, GOP. Clear?

uncle sam gynecologist abortion

small government my ass

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

VIDEO: This would "probably be the top politics story in the country if #GOPshutdown were not happening."

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare

abortion ban cartoon choice  nebraska

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

A Nebraska anti-choice bill states that anyone under 18 who wants to have an abortion needs written permission from a parent or guardian or she can't have it. She would be blocked from getting an abortion.

Written consent from a parent or guardian is required.

A 16-year-old foster child in Nebraska requested to get an abortion without consent, but she can't, because her parents no longer have the right to be considered her parents. They abused her, so their parental rights were stripped by the state.

The teen felt she couldn't support a child financially or "be the right mom that she would like to be" and felt she needed to end the pregnancy, but no parents were available to give written consent.

Watch the video for more details, but the upshot is this:

A male judge was the one to decide for this high school student whether or not she could have an abortion, because she wasn't "sufficiently mature and well informed enough" to decide on her own.  So, again, if you live in Nebraska and you're under 18 and pregnant, you are forced to give birth against your will.

If you're under 18 and pregnant, Nebraskan legislators think you're too immature to have an abortion, but apparently not too immature to be forced to become a mother.

Abortion in Nebraska is legal for adults, but not for this teenager, because see, she was beaten up and neglected by her family, so the state made the decision for her.

And now, in addition to coping with her violent past, she must carry her pregnancy to full term, go through the trauma of a delivery and any possible complications, put the baby up for adoption, because, see, she's mature enough to handle all that-- all while trying to keep up with school and life in general-- but not grown up enough to decide what to do with her own body.

FacebookTwitterRedditDiggStumbleUponTumblrLinkedInPinterestEmailShare