You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Abortion’ category.
Today’s post is by guest blogger Torie.
“No woman wants an abortion as she wants an ice cream cone or a Porsche. She wants an abortion as an animal caught in a trap wants to gnaw off its own leg” – Frederica Mathewes-Green
Having been born well after Griswold v. Connecticut, Eisenstadt v. Baird and Roe v. Wade, Supreme Court decisions which affirmed a Constitutional right to privacy, permitted unmarried women to obtain contraceptives and legalized abortion, I have no first hand knowledge of what life was like for women before these rulings. Sure, I knew that women once used Lysol as birth control and knitting needles for self-induced abortions, but I somehow viewed these as aberrations. I had no appreciation for the immense suffering and desperation women and their families faced during that time, until Rick Santorum’s rise in the Republican primaries and his increasing misogyny.
I had always dismissed Santorum as a serious candidate. I thought given his extreme views on science, homosexuality and women that his campaign would have crashed and burned months ago. I never thought the rights women literally died for would ever truly be taken away. Yes, anti-choice candidates and politicians might propose legislation that would infringe upon those rights, but I could not imagine those rights ceasing to exist. I had to learn about life for women before Griswold and Roe. I needed to understand what life could become for me and the millions of other women should Santorum ever make to the Oval Office.
Below is an excerpt from the book “The Worst of Times” and a graphic description of life before Roe.
I graduated from medical school in 1954. During my medical training, I saw women being treated for septic abortion, and as a resident I took care of lots of them. I have no idea what the real abortion numbers were in those days, but I’m pretty sure we just saw and identified as “abortion patients” the tip of the iceberg–women where something went wrong and they had no private doctor. I suspect that no more than one in five abortions was actually listed as an abortion, maybe even less.
The women on the wards were generally more seriously ill than the private patients. Now, that may be due to their generally inferior health status. They didn’t have the advantages of good nutrition and hygiene. They didn’t get regular health care or any kind of maintenance care. They also tended to be black, and the private patients tended to be white, but this was probably typical of the times. However, it didn’t mean that white women got better abortions. They all got lousy abortions.
The technique of the criminal abortionist wasn’t limited to a catheter or coat hanger. Many of them injected some kind of caustic substance–bleach or something like that–into the uterus. The uterus would contract to get rid of the irritant, but there was a high risk of complications.
Potassium permanganate [a dark purple salt] was another common choice. The abortionist dissolved some of the crystals in water and inserted the solution into the uterus through a syringe or catheter. On the street, women heard that potassium permanganate would work, but they didn’t get all the details of how to use it, and we would see women who would just insert the crystals into the vagina.
By the time these women got to the hospital, they would have terrible burns or even actual holes in the vaginal lining, because the crystals had simply eaten away the tissue. The irony is that placed in the vagina, potassium permanganate didn’t abort the pregnancy, but it sure did a lot of damage to the vagina.
The complications we typically saw on the ward were severe pelvic inflammation and infection, with pelvic abscesses which had to be drained. Many women got an ilius, or shutdown of their intestines. They had to have a nasal-gastic tube so we could just keep their intestines quiet until they started to function again.
They would also get a generalized peritonitis. Some patients died of “uremia”–at least that’s what would be written on the death certificate again leading statisticians to miss the abortion connection. Uremia is an extremely severe infection with septic shock and kidney shutdown.
Hemorrhage was sometimes a complication, although often these women died at the time of the abortion, before they ever got to a hospital. With a perforation in certain parts of the uterus, where the blood supply is concentrated, it would take only a few hours–a day at most–for the woman to bleed to death. If it isn’t that part of the uterus, perforation could take several days to cause death.
With illegal abortion, there were lots of ways to die. The lucky ones made it through. The not-so-lucky ones died fairly horrible deaths.
In the 1950s and early ’60s, in spite of that always-full hospital ward, no one talked about abortion as a public health problem. It was just a fact of life, and you dealt with it the best way you could–taking care of the complications. It was the women’s rights movement and not public health concerns that made abortion legal.
I remember that when I first went into private practice in 1961, if a woman wanted her tubes tied, she had to get her husband’s written permission. I thought that was way out of line. Her body didn’t belong to her husband! Besides, she didn’t have to sign for his vasectomy. But that’s how it was.
For as long as I can remember, I have been in favor of making abortion legal, because I always thought that a woman ought to have the right to control her body.
Overturning Roe, banning contraception will not stop women from seeking abortions and birth control. A woman will do whatever she feels she has to do to exercise control over her body, no matter the consequences. Reversing Roe is in no way pro-life. It will not save women and babies. It certainly will not change our country for the better. In fact, without access to safe and legal abortions, more women will die. Their spouses will be left alone. Their children will be left motherless. Their parents will be left without their daughters. This circle of tragedy will continue to expand as our society loses parts of itself.
The Irony of discussing the issue of abortion in a Sports Bar is obvious. The change in Rick Perry’s stance on abortion is documented. He admits he has had a “transformation.” He watched a DVD and said:”I really started giving some thought to the issue of rape and incest. (There are) some powerful stories in that DVD.” Based on watching this DVD Perry says he “STARTED” giving thought to this issue. Does that mean he hadn’t thought much about it when his web site was put together summarizing his stance on social issues? Does that mean that he hadn’t really thought about it when he previously took the stance on abortion that it was OK in cases of rape and incest. How about when the mother is going to die when she carries the baby to term? Perry has signed a pledge saying that abortion should be banned in all cases. That means that he doesn’t value the life of the mother above the life of a fetus that will inevitably die when the mother dies.
The issue of abortion is not the critical issue in the 2012 presidential election. The economy is the critical issue facing America. If there is no health care for indigent women, it doesn’t matter what the Supreme Court has decided regarding abortion, she may not be able to afford the cost of the abortion. If a nuclear holocaust occurs the pregnant women will likely give birth to babies exposed to radiation and they won’t survive anyway. For Rick Perry to discuss abortion in a discussion over drinks at a Sports Bar is a clear indication of his attitude toward women and their reproductive rights, or lack thereof. To indicate that he “started” giving thought to the issue after watching a DVD, is an indication of the depth of this candidates consideration of all issues.
Guess what House Republicans are focused on.
Are they pushing through legislation to get Americans back to work? No. Are they fighting to improve our education system? Nope. Perhaps they’re too busy repairing America’s roads and bridges, making vital investments in infrastructure? Wrong again.
They’re using their majority in Congress to wage a war on women’s health and freedom.
Last week, they passed the Protect Life Act, which is curiously named since it does precisely the opposite. This bill would override core patient protections and allow hospitals to legally deny life-saving treatment to women.
You read that right: It would actually allow hospitals to let women die without treatment.
I spoke out against this bill last week in Congress, and I recorded a message for you, too.
Check out my message — then join me in fighting back by donating $40 or more today.
If this bill were to become law, it could mean the difference between life and death. Just ask my colleague, Congresswoman Jackie Speier, who testified earlier this year about needing an emergency late-term abortion.
She told us, “I was pregnant, I was miscarrying, and I was bleeding. If I had to go from one emergency room to the next, who knows if I would be here today.”
This is a bill that would deny women in Jackie’s position critical care and put their lives in danger.
Democrats will be on the front line — fighting back and holding Republicans accountable — from now until next November. The Women’s Leadership Forum will support that work at every step, and we need you to join the fight.
This latest bill is just one more example of why we Democrats do what we do. We work to protect the rights of women, children, and families when others won’t. And we focus on the issues that middle-class families are concerned about.
If Republicans truly care about protecting life, they can work with the Democrats to rebuild our nation’s economy, put Americans back to work, and improve everyone’s lives.
But instead, we get this — a bill that does nothing to address the financial crisis or create jobs, but only serves to rile up their base and chip away at women’s rights. And they think they’ll get away with it.
Make a donation of $40 or more today to support the Women’s Leadership Forum and help fight back:
Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz
Chair Democratic National Committee
Just this weekend I posted an article describing Sarah Palin as paranoid. As part of the description of a paranoid personality, the literature cited describes such a person as having “ unrealistic grandiose fantasies,” which are “often attuned to issues of power and rank…”
The headline news this morning is that Sarah Palin has declared that she can win the presidential race. In spite of multiple polls showing her popularity is in free fall, she announces she can win. In the “all of them” that she reads, she must have missed the article that identified the specific reasons she could NOT win:
1. Republicans don’t want her to run.
2. She’s too polarizing
3. She has issues with Republican powerbrokers.
4. Republican actually never liked her much.
Thus Palin proves that she has delusions of grandeur to think she could win. However for her to declare that “I can win” is arrogant and proves that she is out of touch with reality. Most candidates who thought they could win would never declare that I Can Win. She must have watched the Undefeated too many times, and is beginning to believe her own propaganda. Her declaration that she can win the Presidency of the United States is the definition of “unrealistic grandiose fantasies.” There is no position of power or rank greater than the Presidency of the United States. Palin’s paranoia has reached epic proportions.
Palin has spent the last three years criticizing President Obama. Now not only does she believe she knows better than the President, but she believes that if she should grace us with agreeing to serve as our President, that she would get elected. Any other candidate would be smart enough to wait and see if they could win. Not Sarah Palin. She is Undefeated, so she can do whatever she wants. Now we can add “arrogant” to the list of adjectives that describe her. While mocking the President for having a Harvard Law Degree, Sarah Palin puts herself in the category of the elites by declaring that she could win the Presidency if she chooses to run.
Bristol says the decision has been made. Sarah Palin has declared that she has the “fire in her belly”. Now she says she could win if she runs . So why isn’t she announcing her candidacy? She has all the pertinent qualifications, including some education (degree in broadcast journalism), she has some experience (half herm as Governor of one of the least populated states in the United States), a special needs child (regardless of whether she gave birth to him or not), she has a lot of friends in North Korea , two books, a reality television show, a movie, and a daughter who dances with the stars. She has been compared to George Washington and Winston Churchill.. The only similarity I can find between Churchill and Palin is that they each claimed to be parents of five children.
The comparison to George Washington is harder to understand. She is not President or the Commander of an Army. Perhaps Palin has false teeth or syphillus, and we just don’t know that yet.?
In either event this comparison is yet another example of the grandiose fantasies of Sarah Palin.
For years we have been told the Republican Party is the political party who promotes “family values”. Sarah Palin has given lip service to that position through her TLC show where she proclaims that she loves Alaska like she loves her family. The title of her latest book, America by Heart: Reflections on Family, Faith and Flag, Palin attempts to reinforce the value of “family”. However the truth is that traditional “family values” is the antonym for Palin family values.
Both Todd and Sarah have been reported as having extra-marital affairs. Sarah was pregnant out-of-wedlock, and there is a real possibility that her first child is actually the child of another man. Todd and Sarah live in separate structures on the property in Wasilla, they don’t sleep together, and evidently throw cans at each other when tempers flare. Her fifth child may be someone else’s first child. Bristol not only is an unwed mother, but was a 17-year-old pregnant teen at the time her mother was running with John McCain. If McCain and Palin had been elected, it would have been the first time the Vice President’s illegitimate grandchild would be living in the white house with her. Now with the announcement of Track’s spontaneous wedding with only parents in the “picture” and a party to be held later, there is great suspicion as to why the rush?
When Sarah Palin announced that Bristol was pregnant she was quick to say that Bristol was keeping the child, and that she would marry Levi. The amazing thing about the announcement was that Palin thought that plans to marry would make the pregnancy acceptable. Like her marriage to Todd, she suggested that marriage to Todd would make her out-of-wedlock pregnancy acceptable. Sarah Palin misses the point. If a woman is too young when having a child she risks her health and that of the baby. If the mother is too young she may not be mature enough to be the best mother she can be. As we have seen with Bristol, completing an education is difficult or impossible if a baby is in the picture. If a man and woman marry too young their chances of having a happy and healthy marriage decline. It can happen; it’s just not as likely. Sarah Palin and the Republican Party miss the point to suggest that marriage alone is a sign of traditional family values.
With the recent focus on Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican, and his “love child,” it is important to pause and consider the number of Republicans who have established their true attitude about traditional family values. There was Dick Cheney’s daughter who is lesbian and she and her partner became parents. Thomas Jefferson had 7 children out-of-wedlock.
Ted Nugent, the promoter of Palin through the Time Magazine article, had two wives and eight children, including three children out-of-wedlock.
In February of this year Congressional Republicans were involved in running a prostitution ring.
The list of Republicans who deviated from the GOP’s traditional party platform regarding family values could provide material for an entire year of SNL episodes.
Here are just a few worthy of note:
(September 28, 2006)
The Crime: Sending sexually laced, grammatically challenged instant messages and e-mails to teenaged boys in the Congressional page program for more than 10 years.
The Hypocrisy: Chairman of the House Caucus on Missing and Exploited Children and one of the foremost opponents of child pornography in the Senate.
The Quote: “get a ruler and measure it for me”
Leader of the National Association of Evangelicals
The Crime: Paying male prostitutes for sex and snorting crystal meth.
The Hypocrisy: A powerful force in the evangelical movement, Haggard participated in weekly meetings with President George Bush and top advisors where he gave spiritual advice. He taught that homosexuality was an abomination and actively lobbied against gay rights.
The Quote: “I did not have a homosexual relationship with a man in Denver.”
Senate Liaison for Mitt Romney’s Presidential Campaign
(June 11, 2007)
The Crime: Soliciting sex from an undercover cop in an airport bathroom
The Hypocrisy: Craig twice voted against adding the words “sexual orientation” to the federal hate crimes law. Craig also voted to give states the right to refuse to recognize gay marriage–a right they already had, but the Senator wanted to really, really prove he didn’t like gay people.
The Quote: “I am not gay; I don’t do these kinds of things.”
Member of the Florida House of Representatives
Florida Chairman of John McCain’s Presidential Campaign
(July 11, 2007)
The Crime: Offering an undercover cop $20 to allow Allen to blow him in a men’s room in a public park. After being arrested, Allen tried to explain that he only offered to blow the cop because the cop was a “burly black man” and he “didn’t want to become a statistic.”
The Hypocrisy: Allen was one of 21 Florida legislators to sign Gov. Jeb Bush’s friend-of-the-court brief supporting the state’s ban on gays adopting children, and he co-sponsored an unsuccessful bill that would have enhanced penalties for “offenses involving unnatural and lascivious acts” such as indecent exposure.
The Quote: “I certainly wasn’t there to have sex with anybody and certainly wasn’t there to exchange money for it.”
Glenn Murphy Jr.
National Chairman of the Young Republicans
Chairman of the Clark County Republican Party
(July 28, 2007)
The Crime: Murphy got a fellow Young Republican drunk and then spent the night at his house. The other young man woke up in the middle of the night to find Murphy giving him mouth-to-penis resuscitation. After this incident, a 1998 sexual battery report came to light in which Murphy was alleged to have done the exact same thing.
The Hypocrisy: Murphy was a well-paid political consultant for Republican candidates and often advised them to use gay marriage as a wedge issue to paint their opponents as out of touch with traditional values.
The Quote: “I was in the Sound of Music in High School…don’t ask” (from his now-defunct Myspace page.)
The Video: Unfortunately, the Young Republicans took down all of their videos of Mr. Murphy. So instead, I give you: http://www.badmouth.net/top-five-republican-gay-sex-scandals/
Here is a more complete list:
In considering the current we site of the Republican Party, under the “issues” section there is no reference to family values or abortion or homosexuality. Maybe they will add these in a few more weeks after the focus on Arnold, Track Palin, and Republican Rep. Paul Scott has died down. Maybe the Republican Party and Sarah Palin should stick to politics and just consider family matters off-limits?
Section 501 (c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code allows certain types of organizations to enjoy tax-free status. The specific provisions explain that the organization:
“…must be organized and operated exclusively for exempt purposes…and none of its earnings may inure to any private shareholder or individual. In addition, it may not be an action organization, i.e. it may not attempt to influence legislation as a substantial part of its activities and it may not participate in any campaign activity for or against political candidates.”
In 2008 the IRS created a Political Activities Compliance Initiative (PACI) which sought to remind 501(c) (3) organizations about the federal ban on political activity.
Sarah Palin has appeared across the country giving speeches and charging “charitable organizations” $100,000 per speech. While those charitable organizations probably felt her fees were excessive, the total cost will likely be far in excess of the speaking fees. Because Palin interjected politics into her speeches, her speech alone should result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status.
The IRS explains it this way:
“Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501 (c) (3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office…Violating this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status…”
Palin has established herself as a speaker for pro-life organizations and those geared toward providing assistance for special needs kids. Palin usually insists that the speeches not be recorded. However there has been recordation and reporting of many of her comments. The following two examples are subject to easy documentation.
- Speech in Waco at the Care Net Event
Sarah Palin appeared in Waco Texas at a meeting of Care Net on September 14, 2010, before the 2010 elections. Care Net’s mission is to:
“… (help women with) accurate information, compassionate care and practical support. Accurate information begins with Care Net’s medical director, who discusses options regarding the pregnancy and the risks and procedures of each option”
Money raised from the event was dedicated to the building of a facility to be located in Waco to provide support for women who are pregnant and considering abortion.
Palin speech from that event is posted on YouTube. Palin’s own words justify the revocation of the 501 (c) (3) status of Care Net because of the politically charged nature of many of her comments. Here are specifics:
From the first third of the speech:
Palin specifically made reference to:
- Glenn Beck and the Restoring Honor Rally
- Ronald Reagan
- Shooting caribou
- We eat so we hunt
From the second third of the speech:
Palin specifically made reference to:
- Pro-women groups
- Politicians would erode a culture of life
- It is essential to elect a Congress in 2010 to undo the damage of Obamacare
- Corrupt deals and a trail of broken promises and unfunded “band-aid of Obamacare”
From the third part of the speech:
Palin specifically made reference to:
- We will remember politicians that promised to hold firm against federal funding of abortion and caved at the last minute in exchange for a non-binding Presidential order.
- President Obama is the most “pro-abortion President to occupy the White House.” We have to change it.
- The government should work for us…we don’t retreat, we reload.
- Casting votes is how we can reload.
- Republicans passed a law in the House to ensure that there will be no taxpayer funded abortions.
2. Speech at the Exceptional Foundation in Alabama
Recently Palin gave a speech to the Exceptional Foundation in Alabama, a new “charitable” organization. The Exceptional Foundation is an organization whose stated purpose is to provide support for special needs children and adults. In a previous post I have explained the many problems with the Exceptional Foundation and its failure to obtain 501 (c) (3) status before the Palin speech.
However given the political nature of the Palin speech, the Exceptional Foundation should never be approved for charitable status. The local newspaper reported that the following things were included in her speech:
“Palin on Politics
Much of Palin’s remarks veered into politics, particularly during a question-and-answer session following her keynote address. She responded to the foundation’s prepared questions on various issues, most of which dealt with her views on federal government and current affairs. No media outlets were allowed to speak to Palin, and these were the only questions anyone could ask her.
Some of her comments, as expressed directly from the newspaper were as follows:
- She commended President Barack Obama’s order and the Navy Seals’ actions for bringing Osama bin Laden to justice, and credited “the groundwork laid by (former President George W.) Bush.” However, she supported the idea of proving the al-Qaida founder and 9/11 mastermind is truly dead, if only to quell the naysayers, “conspiracy theorists — especially Arab nations — who don’t believe that we won,” she said. “Showing the photos, to me, allows us to say, ‘You mess with the United States military — we gotcha.”
- On foreign relations when it comes to terrorism, Palin said, “We win; you lose, in the words of Ronald Reagan all those years ago.”
- In fact, one of the threads throughout Tuesday’s dinner were quotations from the 40th U.S. president, namely several references to his “Shining City on a Hill” speech that stressed American exceptionalism.
- The Tea Party movement — which she described as “not obsessively partisan; full of common sense” — inspires her, as does Abraham Lincoln.
- She picks her battles when the media attack her. Though erroneous media reports irk her and require her rebuttal, tabloid “potshots” — such as rumors of infidelity in her marriage — don’t faze her. Tending to Trig’s needs “taught us that that nonsense … may seem important to other people but at the end of the day, none of that stuff amounts to a hill of beans in our world,” she said.
Palin also echoed recurring themes in her other public appearances across the country including:
- The negative effect she believes the federal government’s “uncontrollable” $14 trillion debt will have on future generations.
- That she believes the U.S. needs to “drill baby, drill” domestically for oil production.
- That she still believes the Obama administration’s 2010 health-care reform — which she termed “Obamacare” — was “rammed down our throats” and will result in health rationing “death panels” — two words that drew heavy criticism when she mentioned them on her Facebook page in 2009.”
As of this morning the Exceptional Foundation is still not listed as being a 501 (c) (3) organization.
Sarah Palin, through her political rhetoric, rather than her charitable spirit, has compromised the tax-exempt status of these two organizations. Perhaps these organizations should ask for a refund for their $100,000 fees paid to Palin, if they explained to her that the speech should not be political in nature.
Bob Callahan Sr. is listed as “Chairman of the Board” for the Exceptional Foundation. His number is listed as 251-928-1559. I called this number this morning, and the woman who answered the phone answered by saying “Callahan and Associates.” I explained that I was trying to determine if tax exempt status had been granted for the Exceptional Foundation, and was told that only Melanie could answer that question, and she was out of the office today. In going to the Exceptional Foundation web site, under the tab entitled “contact us” you are referred to a screen that references Bob Callahan Sr. and the only web site mentioned is that of Callahan and Associates at http://callhanandassociates.com. When you click on that web site you see a lot of information about Callahan and Associates, but noting about the Exceptional Foundation. I wonder if this is what the IRS meant when they referred to an individual who benefits financially from the organization? If so that would be an additional reason that the “Exceptional Foundation” would not qualify for tax-exempt status.
Nothing is more vile than a traitor. Sarah Palin, the proud “Rogue,” has gone rogue on women. During an interview on Fox, in her zeal to condemn Obama, she joined the war on women. Suggesting that the debate this weekend over the budget was all about funding the troops, she suggested that Obama’s veto of the House Bill was “atrocious” and “appalling”. She declared that Obama was “using our troops as leverage” and that Obama would “not go to bat” for our troops to ensure that they were paid. Palin said that by his veto he had used the troops as “pons.”
Even though the commentator for Fox said that “nobody wants” to see the troops lose their funding, Palin still insisted that Obama was evil and used the troops as leverage. The commentator from Fox pointed out that Palin previously said that “if the troops didn’t get paid we should blame Obama.” However in light of the fact that there was a resolution reached that would ensure the payment, the commentator suggested that we should give credit to Obama? Palin’s answer was a defiant “NO.”
Here are the facts.
If a government shutdown had occurred here is how the military would have been affected:
“Although military personnel will still be required to report for duty, a government shutdown would, at least temporarily, halt or stagger scheduled payments, according to the DFAS. Once …an agreement is reached, active military members will be compensated for duty performed during the shutdown.
Thus there was never a danger that the troops would not be compensated for their service.
The essential functions of government,including national security, the military, air traffic control, border security, Social Security payments, etc., would continue to function.
Yet, as the deadline to avoid a government shutdown approached Friday night, Sarah Palin pushed Republican Congressional leaders one more time to hold their ground.
“GOP: don’t retreat! The country is going broke. We can’t AFFORD cowboy poetry & subsidizing abortion,” Palin tweeted. “If we can’t fight to defund this nonsense now when we have the chance, do you think we’ll win the big fight on entitlement reform later on?”
Palin referred to an issue that both sides involved in the ongoing negotiations on Capitol Hill agree has been a major sticking point — the debate over providing federal funding to the family planning group, Planned Parenthood.
Even Michele Bachmann disagreed with Palin and voted against the original bill which was later vetoed by Obama. Bachmann said: “The current fight in Washington is not that fight.”
Palin’s attack on the budget was based upon a lie. Her statement that the government is currently “subsidizing abortion” is an outright lie! The GOP has lodged an attack on Planned Parenthood by suggesting that “federal money should not be used to pay for abortions.” The reality is that since the passage of the Hyde Amendment, no federal funds are allowed to subsidize abortions.
The bill passed by the House, and vetoed by Obama, was a measure that would eliminate about $330, million through the end of September for funding of Planned Parenthood for services such as contraception, cancer screening, anemia testing, cholesterol screening, diabetes screening, physical exams, flu vaccines, high blood pressure screening, tetanus vaccines, and thyroid screening.
This bill represented a “vendetta against Planned Parenthood,” Planned Parenthood has a right to operate. Planned Parenthood has a right to provide services for family planning.
“It’s the Republicans’ war on women. The GOP’s position makes absolutely no sense. For decades, conservatives have decried abortion, yet remain vehemently against sex education and family planning. They’re steeped in religious ideology and insist on playing morality cop, sanctimoniously telling the rest of us what we should do with our bodies and in our bedrooms.”
Sarah Palin has joined that war on women. It is especially insidious because she is viewed by some as a “representative” of women. She is a traitor. Her attack on Obama comes at the expense of women, and it is an attack we can’t afford.
Conjoined Twins in Illinois are celebrating their first birthday.
The babies share one malformed heart and one liver. Because the heart is malformed, survival is dependent upon a ventilator. The mother is 21 years old and unmarried. The cost of sustaining these conjoined twins through their first year of life has exceeded $ 4 million dollars. The bill has been paid, not by Obamacare, and not by the GOP, but by Medicaid, and thus by U.S. taxpayers. The mother was offered the option of an abortion as the doctors advised her that it was unlikely that the twins could even survive. In order to survive to their first birthday they have had to be resuscitated more than once. A heart transplant is not an option due to malformed blood vessels. The doctors have advised the mother that death is inevitable for the twins because as they grow larger their single, malformed heart, will not be able to sustain them.
For Sarah Palin abortion would never be an option. Even if this mother had wanted an abortion, and even if this mother had wanted to save tax payers millions of dollars, Palin would have said “NO” …you don’t have a choice. Palin considers abortion an “essential” issue. At the same time Palin attacks President Obama and Democrats for the outrageous debt facing the country. The national debt currently exceeds 14 Trillion dollars. The National Debt has continued to increase an average of $4.11 billion per day since September 28, 2007!
The four million dollars devoted to sustaining the life of these conjoined twins would scarcely make a dent in the national debt. Only a heartless bastard would advocate letting these babies die. Devoting resources to sustaining of life for these twins is just one example of the hard choices we have NOT made as a country if we are committed to lowering the debt. If the national debt is the greatest threat to our future, and if we want to be able to provide assistance to people who could survive with proper medical care, then its time to make some hard choices. Fortunately for Sarah Palin she doesn’t have to wrestle with these gut wrenching decisions because she quit her job as Governor. She is free to advocate both anti-abortion stances and lowering the debt without offering any solutions with a method for doing that. She is free to Tweet about the evil of abortion one minute, and Tweet about the outrageous national debt in the next minute, and she doesn’t have to offer any realistic solutions to this hypocrisy.
Legislators in Ohio are being asked to consider a piece of legislation that would forbid abortions in the case of any fetus with a detectable heart beat. Because a heart beat can be detected as early as the 18th day of development, the bill would in essence eliminate the right to an abortion for anyone, and for any reason.
To emphasize the significance of a heart beat the Ohio Legislature gave permission for two women to appear and have sonograms performed on them before the state legislature.
I guess the argument was that the legislators could not appreciate the significance of hearing the heart beat of a fetus, without an actual demonstration on the floor of the Ohio legislature.
Following this line of logic, next week perhaps the Ohio Legislature should give equal time to pro-choice groups. Perhaps they might demonstrate the horror experienced by a woman being raped by her father. Perhaps they could bring the 13 year old child who just this week, was so desperate to terminate a pregnancy, that she undertook to perform the abortion on herself, with a pencil. She could talk about the 30 year old father of the fetus, who committed statutory rape to create this fetus with a beating heart. Perhaps this young girl could explain how she was willing to jeopardize her own LIFE to end this pregnancy.
Consider the impact of this bill if it should pass. In all cases of abortion, including rape and incest, abortion would no longer be an option for the victims. The reality is that rape and incest are a much larger problem in the United States than we would like to admit. It is estimated that only 16% of rapes and sexual assaults are reported to the police. In 2005, the 16% that were reported accounted for 191,670 rape or sexual assault cases. These statistics would indicate that over a million cases of rape occur every year in the United States. It is estimated that 1 in 6 women has experienced an attempted, or completed rape.
Consider the horror of the woman in Ohio who was raped in a movie theatre by a man who then returned to watch the end of the show with his wife and kids. Consider the tragedy of a woman in Ohio in January of this year who was raped in broad day light on a street, and no one came to her aid. Consider the 65 girls who were pregnant, out of a a total class of 490 high school students (boys and girls), in a Cleveland Ohio high school. Consider the cost to the United States of reversing Roe v. Wade.
Consider that sometimes choosing life, means choosing abortion.
Roe v. Wade has recognized the Constitutional right of a woman to choose abortion since 1973. Thirty seven years later we are still spending tax payer dollars debating the issue of abortion. Unwed teen pregnancy is a greater problem today than in past decades. Over a million women are raped every year in the United States. In the United States it is estimated that we have 2.8 million orphans. The real tragedy is that instead of focusing on the needs of victims of rape, or the plight of millions of orphaned children in the country, we are spending our legislature’s time watching the heart beat of an 18 day-old fetus.
Dear MoveOn member,
It might seem hyperbolic to say that Republicans have declared a war on women.
Sadly, it’s not.
Just take a look at the top 10 shocking, crazy things Republicans have proposed in recent weeks. If you think this constitutes a war on women, please share this email far and wide—forward it, and post it on Facebook and Twitter.
I wish I could say these were the only examples of the Republican war on women. But it’s just a sampling, and more is sure to come—unless we raise a ruckus and call them out. So please, share this email today.
1) Republicans not only want to reduce women’s access to abortion care, they’re actually trying to redefine rape. After a major backlash, they promised to stop. But they haven’t.
2) A state legislator in Georgia wants to change the legal term for victims of rape, stalking, and domestic violence to “accuser.” But victims of other less gendered crimes, like burglary, would remain “victims.”
3) In South Dakota, Republicans proposed a bill that could make it legal to murder a doctor who provides abortion care. (Yep, for real.)
4) Republicans want to cut nearly a billion dollars of food and other aid to low-income pregnant women, mothers, babies, and kids.
5) In Congress, Republicans have proposed a bill that would let hospitals allow a woman to die rather than perform an abortion necessary to save her life.
6) Maryland Republicans ended all county money for a low-income kids’ preschool program. Why? No need, they said. Women should really be home with the kids, not out working.
7) And at the federal level, Republicans want to cut that same program, Head Start, by $1 billion. That means over 200,000 kids could lose their spots in preschool.
8) Two-thirds of the elderly poor are women, and Republicans are taking aim at them too. A spending bill would cut funding for employment services, meals, and housing for senior citizens.
9) Congress voted yesterday on a Republican amendment to cut all federal funding from Planned Parenthood health centers, one of the most trusted providers of basic health care and family planning in our country.
10) And if that wasn’t enough, Republicans are pushing to eliminate all funds for the only federal family planning program. (For humans. But Republican Dan Burton has a bill to provide contraception for wild horses. You can’t make this stuff up).
1. “‘Forcible Rape’ Language Remains In Bill To Restrict Abortion Funding,” The Huffington Post, February 9, 2011
“Extreme Abortion Coverage Ban Introduced,” Center for American Progress, January 20, 2011
2. “Georgia State Lawmaker Seeks To Redefine Rape Victims As ‘Accusers,’” The Huffington Post, February 4, 2011
3. “South Dakota bill would legalize killing abortion doctors,” Salon, February 15, 2011
4. “House GOP Proposes Cuts to Scores of Sacred Cows,” National Journal, February 9, 2011
5. “New GOP Bill Would Allow Hospitals To Let Women Die Instead Of Having An Abortion,” Talking Points Memo, February 4, 2011
6. “Republican Officials Cut Head Start Funding, Saying Women Should be Married and Home with Kids,” Think Progress, February 16, 2011
7. “Bye Bye, Big Bird. Hello, E. Coli,” The New Republic, Feburary 12, 2011
8. “House GOP spending cuts will devastate women, families and economy,” The Hill, February 16, 2011
9. “House passes measure stripping Planned Parenthood funding,” MSNBC, February 18,2011
“GOP Spending Plan: X-ing Out Title X Family Planning Funds,” Wall Street Journal, February 9, 2011
Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women,” Blog for Choice, February 17, 2011
Want to support our work? We’re entirely funded by our 5 million members—no corporate contributions, no big checks from CEOs. And our tiny staff ensures that small contributions go a long way. Chip in here.
PAID FOR BY MOVEON.ORG POLITICAL ACTION, http://pol.moveon.org/. Not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee. This email was sent to malia litman on February 19, 2011. To change your email address or update your contact info, click here. To remove yourself from this list, click here.