lynn82md: (pro-choice)
[personal profile] lynn82md
Abortion rates are higher in countries where the procedure is illegal and nearly half of all abortions worldwide are unsafe, with the vast majority in developing countries, a new study concludes.

Experts could not say whether more liberal laws led to fewer procedures, but said good access to birth control in those countries resulted in fewer unwanted pregnancies.


This is a highly important snippet from the article to point out:
Dr Sedgh said there was a link between higher abortion rates and regions with more restrictive legislation, such as in Latin America and Africa. They also found that 95 to 97 per cent of abortions in those regions were unsafe.

The authors defined unsafe abortion as any procedure done by people lacking necessary skills or in places that did not meet minimal medical standards.
lynn82md: (pro-choice)
[personal profile] lynn82md
Welcome to the community, [community profile] prochoice_maryland. This is a safe community to discuss reproductive rights primarily in the state of Maryland.

Please read the rules on the community's profile. They should be very simple to follow. Failure to abide by them could lead to anything from being banned without warning to having your post deleted.

Feel free to talk about any issue involving abortion, contraception, sterilization, adoption, parenthood, sex ed, and activism that's happening in Maryland. Feel free to extend it outside of Maryland like in another state or country.
[identity profile] lynn82md.livejournal.com
From NARAL:
Late last week, as most Americans were preparing to enjoy a long weekend, two House Republicans introduced a bill that would ban abortion after 6 weeks of pregnancy.

Because that is before many women even know they're pregnant, this would amount to a COMPLETE, FEDERAL BAN on abortion.

It is crucial that we lay down a firm marker in opposition to this piece of legislation right now, before it moves any further.

Sign the petition to Congress saying you oppose this dangerous, unconstitutional, extreme ban on abortion.
[identity profile] lynn82md.livejournal.com
As you all know, there will be a Women's March on Washington on the day after Donald Trump's inaugeration...which is January 21st. The march starts at ten a.m. If you can't attend the big march in Washington D.C, there are having them in other states as well as all over the world. For more information, go here

Vision and Mission of the March )
[identity profile] lynn82md.livejournal.com
n Nov. 27 last year, a vicious gunman opened fire on health care providers at a Planned Parenthood community clinic in Colorado Springs, Colo., killing three people, including a local law enforcement officer. It was later learned that the assailant had been motivated in part by extreme anti-abortion rhetoric related to the false allegations that Planned Parenthood has been profiting from the sale of fetal tissue. In 2009, respected physician Dr. George Tiller was gunned down during a worship service at his church in Wichita, Kan., after he was publicly cited in the media and even on the Floor of the House of Representatives as a practitioner of late-term abortions. Since 1993, there have been 11 murders and 26 attempted murders resulting from extreme anti-abortion violence, not to mention more than 200 arson attacks since the Roe v. Wade ruling in 1973.

Perhaps just as tragic as these crimes is the reality that they might have been prevented had politicians and commentators refrained from crossing a very dangerous line. By combining a relentless barrage of accusatory and dehumanizing rhetoric with the release of specific identification of individuals and organizations, they bear some culpability for creating the conditions that led to these crimes.

Yet, having failed to learn from the very real and very dangerous consequences of extreme rhetoric and the publication of names and personal information of those who provide reproductive care services, House Republicans are now placing other health care practitioners, researchers, patients and first responders in danger — this time in our home state of Maryland.


More )
[identity profile] lynn82md.livejournal.com
From MoveOn.org
Planned Parenthood supporters all across the country will stand together on September 29 for the first-ever National Pink Out Day. We’re going to demonstrate just how many people across the country are willing to stand up and fight for women’s health and rights—and we’re counting on you to help.

Host your own Pink Out Day Event or sign up for an event near you.
[identity profile] lynn82md.livejournal.com
The campaign, masterminded by 26-year-old anti-abortion crusader and “proud millennial” David Daleiden, is meant to let us in on the fact that abortion is disgusting.

When asked, in an interview with the National Review, what one question he would ask Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards, Daleiden replied, “I would ask her if she knows abortion the way Planned Parenthood providers know abortion.” Proud millennial David Daleiden wants to make sure that 57-year-old Cecile Richards, who has given birth to three children and publicly discussed her own abortion, really understands what abortion is.

Daleiden is enacting a very old strategy, akin to standing outside a clinic with a sign informing women that their unborn babies have fingerprints at nine weeks’ gestation. This approach has taken on new life in recent years, as improving ultrasound technology has offered an ever-sharper view of fetal development, leading those in both the anti-abortion and the reproductive-rights movements to argue that a public, moral, and rhetorical reckoning with the carnal implications of abortion is necessary.

The videos are likely to have an impact: not on public opinion about abortion, which rarely changes meaningfully, but perhaps on Planned Parenthood’s funding, and almost certainly on laws made by state legislatures in the parts of America where abortion has already become so inaccessible — thanks to elaborate facility requirements, waiting periods, parental-consent-and-notification laws, earlier gestational cutoffs, and a dwindling number of providers — that it might as well be illegal.

But as a broader strategy, the notion that educating women in the grotesqueries of termination will be a game-changer is absurd. As Richards could tell Daleiden if he asked her his question, women already know what abortion is. We know more about blood, innards, fetuses, and the babies they may become — in short, about life in reproductive bodies — than anti-abortion activists seem to understand.


Disclaimer: This is a snippet from the article. It's not the beginning of the article.
[identity profile] lynn82md.livejournal.com
For fuck sakes....

From the petition by the Center for Reproductive Rights (CRR):
A 10-year-old girl in Paraguay is pregnant—the result of rape by her stepfather. As doctors weigh the best options for her health, we ask that Paraguay’s Health Minister keep the full range of reproductive health care available to her—including safe, legal abortion. Sign the petition today.

I got this petition from CRR from this article
[identity profile] lynn82md.livejournal.com
From NARAL:
The new Congress is about to vote on an extreme abortion ban in the House. This could be the biggest congressional fight about an abortion ban in over a decade.

Abortion is a personal decision that should be left up to women and their families – not politicians.

We have to show the new Congress that the majority of Americans want them to focus on the economy and jobs, not taking away abortion access.

Make sure your member of Congress hears from you. Tell your representative to stop this attack on abortion.
[identity profile] lynn82md.livejournal.com
Catholics should not feel they have to breed "like rabbits" because of the Church's ban on contraception, Pope Francis said on Monday, suggesting approved natural family planning methods.

I had fun with this part:
He mentioned a woman he recently met who already had seven children by caesarean sections and put her life at risk by becoming pregnant again. He said he chided her for "tempting God" and added: "That was an irresponsibility."
Ooh, where do I start? I love how women are always being blamed for getting pregnant like we can magically make ourselves pregnant. Seriously, if that was the case, we wouldn't need men and sex (well, if you're having sex for procreation reasons that is). We could just say "I would like to be pregnant now" and boom-badda-bing! There's a bun in the oven. That's not the case in reality. So, where the fuck is the blame on the husband who got her pregnant? I mean...maybe it was his idea for her to get pregnant, whether she wanted to or not.

More )
[identity profile] lynn82md.livejournal.com
In large parts of the country, women’s access to safe and legal abortion care is increasingly coming to depend on the willingness of judges to rigorously examine and reject new (and medically unnecessary) restrictions imposed by Republican legislatures.

In just that sort of searching review, a federal judge last week struck down as unconstitutional an Alabama law requiring doctors at abortion clinics to have admitting privileges at a local hospital. The requirement — advertised, falsely, as necessary to protect women’s health — is one of the main strategies being deployed nationally by opponents of abortion rights to shrink the already inadequate number of abortion providers.

The decision, by Judge Myron Thompson of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama, followed a 10-day hearing. The ruling is a big victory for Alabama women and should be an instructive model for other courts.

The starting point for Judge Thompson’s analysis was the Supreme Court’s 1992 Casey decision, which said a state abortion regulation goes too far when it imposes an “undue burden” on a woman’s ability to choose to have an abortion before a fetus is viable. The judge said that despite the state’s effort to minimize the rule’s impact, it would shut down three of Alabama’s five abortion clinics. All five provide only early abortions, well before viability. He noted that the rule would actually harm women, especially poor women, by forcing them to wait longer and travel longer distances for the procedure.


more )
[identity profile] lynn82md.livejournal.com
This is similar to the last post with supporting legislation that would fix the Hobby Lobby ruling. However, this action comes from the RCRC (Reproductive Coaliation for Reproductive Choice).

From RCRC:
The Supreme Court's ruling in Hobby Lobby v. Burwell wrongly opened the door for business owners to impose their religious beliefs on their employees, thereby restricting access to contraceptive coverage. This ruling undid our nation’s rich history of protecting individual religious liberty, twisting it from a shield that should protect everyone into a sword that gives more rights to a powerful few. That’s the bad news.

The good news is that RCRC and our allies are already fighting back. The Protect Women's Health from Corporate Interference Act, introduced by Senators Patty Murray and Mark Udall, and Representatives Louise Slaughter, Diana DeGette, and Jerrold Nadler, would fix the Hobby Lobby decision by enacting language that would prevent for-profit corporations from using to religion to selectively comply with the Affordable Care Act. The Senate could vote on this bill as early as Wednesday!

While these bills unfortunately maintain the language that allows some non-profit organizations to deny their employees access to no-cost contraception, they are still critically needed to counter the horrible Supreme Court ruling that allows bosses to impose their religion on their employees.

It is critical that we flood Capitol Hill offices with messages from people of faith that support this legislation, so Congress knows that the proponents of discrimination don’t represent the entire religious community.


Please Take Action Now!
[identity profile] lynn82md.livejournal.com
From Ultraviolent:


Last week's Supreme Court decision gutting access to birth control was devastating -- but the good news is that something can be done.

The Not My Bosses' Business Bill was just introduced in Congress to reverse the Supreme Court's decision gutting women's right to birth control coverage -- and it has HUGE momentum. The bill states that federal laws, including the Religious Freedom Restoration Act cited by the Supreme Court, do not allow employers to refuse to cover health care -- including birth control -- guaranteed by the Affordable Care Act. It would ensure women at corporations like Hobby Lobby continue to have critical access to affordable birth control.

If we shine a spotlight on this bill and bring it to a vote, we'll know which members of Congress support affordable access to birth control -- and which side with 5 men on the Supreme Court.

Tell the Senate:
"Pass the bill to reverse the Supreme Court's birth control decision."
[identity profile] lynn82md.livejournal.com
The Supreme Court has been making horrible decisions lately. Frankly, I hope these decisions bite them and the supporters in the ass.

First one: WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Thursday unanimously struck down a Massachusetts law that barred protests, counseling and other speech near abortion clinics.

“A painted line on the sidewalk is easy to enforce, but the prime objective of the First Amendment is not efficiency,” Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote in a majority opinion that was joined by the court’s four-member liberal wing.

The law, enacted in 2007, created 35-foot buffer zones around entrances to abortion clinics. State officials said the law was a response to a history of harassment and violence at abortion clinics in Massachusetts, including a shooting rampage at two facilities in 1994.

What is so hillarious is that the Supreme Court has a huge buffer zone itself. If you ever protested in front of the Supreme Court before, you aren't allowed to be on the steps. You have to be off the steps when you protest. I mean...it has a 35 foot buffer zone that this clinic was trying to get. Yet, I haven't heard any one tried to get this buffer zone in front of the Supreme Court taken down because it violated their freedom of speech.

More personal thought )

Then the second, more fucked up one (imo): WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that requiring family-owned corporations to pay for insurance coverage for contraception under the Affordable Care Act violated a federal law protecting religious freedom. It was, a dissent said, “a decision of startling breadth.”

The 5-to-4 ruling, which applied to two companies owned by Christian families, opened the door to many challenges from corporations over laws that they claim violate their religious liberty.

I really hope this ruling comes back and bites supporters in the ass. It would suck for these people if they had relatives denied certain medical services like blood transfusions and meds for mental illness because it went against their relatives' employer's beliefs. Worst, if their relative or friend's employer was against any medical intervention. An employer has no place in their employee's health, whether if it's reproductive or general. However, I hope this costs the republicans their power in the House between this election and the one in 2016.

Profile

prochoice_maryland: (Default)
Pro-Choice Maryland

April 2017

S M T W T F S
      1
2345678
9 101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
30      

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Page Summary

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 22nd, 2017 12:48 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios