[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
There are plenty of reasons why a woman might not have children. For many, it’s a choice to be childfree. Some are waiting for the right partner. Others might want to be mothers, but have had difficulties starting a family.

But the one thing many women without kids share is an awareness of constant judgment on their non-mom status. In an interview in January’s Allure, Jennifer Aniston addressed the issue head on: “I don’t like [the pressure] that people put on me, on women—that you’ve failed yourself as a female because you haven’t procreated. I don’t think it’s fair,” she said. “You may not have a child come out of your vagina, but that doesn’t mean you aren’t mothering—dogs, friends, friends’ children.”


Rest of the article )

This is the best statement in the article that articulate my personal feelings about this:
As for the “selfish” label, Notkin says it’s in the eye of the beholder. “One could be called selfish if they have more than four kids, too,” she says. “All decisions that we make about ourselves and our lives are selfish.”
She is absolutely correct on this. The sad reality is that regardless what kind of choice a woman makes, it's going to be seen as her being selfish by someone. If a woman choses to have a child, she's selfish. If she choses to have more than one or whatever magic number you want to use, she's selfish. If a woman aborts a pregnancy, she's selfish. If a woman choses not to have children ever, she's selfish. If a woman choses to give her kid up for adoption, she's selfish. If a woman choses to use contraception, she's selfish. If a woman choses to get sterilized, she's selfish. If a woman choses to have sex, she's selfish. If a woman choses to abstain, she's selfish (see where this is going).

This is a classic example of "You are damned if you do, and damned if you don't". This is why it's imperative that when women make decisions regarding their personal reproductive health that they decide what they want for themselves rather than basing it off of other people's opinions because she's not going to make anyone but herself happy (yes, and that's selfish in of itself which brings me to ask "When have humans ever been 100% not selfish)
[identity profile] lynn82md.livejournal.com
From Ultraviolet:

Richard Black, a candidate for Congress in Virginia, thinks that spousal rape should not be a crime.

Under cut for trigger warnings of victim blaming and rape )

To National Republican Campaign Committee:
It is dangerous to allow Congressional candidates to condone marital rape, which is a very serious instance of domestic violence. We are calling on you to denounce Richard Black's comments and demand that he apologize."


Things like this are a major reason why the Republican party is slowing digging themselves a grave. Get the fuck away from these douches! I would feel the same way towards any candidate, of any party and political persuasion that harbored this sick view.
[identity profile] lynn82md.livejournal.com
Sign the Bill of Reproductive Rights if:
-You want everyone to have the right to make their own decisions about their own reproductive health and future, free from intrusion or coercion by any goverment, group, or individual

-You want everyone to have the right to a full range of safe, affordable, and readily accessible reproductive healthcare. This includes pregnancy care, preventive services, contraception, abortion, fertility treatment, and accurate information about all of the above.

-You want everyone to have the right to be free from discrimination in access to reproductive healthcare or on the basis of our reproductive decisions.
[identity profile] lynn82md.livejournal.com
I got this snippet from the middle of the article. It's very long, but I think it's an interesting article even though some parts make me roll my eyes.

Last summer, the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals upheld this expanded interpretation of the chemical-endangerment law, ruling that the dictionary definition of “child” includes “unborn child,” an interpretation that will be challenged when the state’s Supreme Court considers Kimbrough’s case in the coming months. But the implications of that ruling go far beyond Alabama. Critics like Ketteringham argue that Alabama’s chemical-endangerment law offers a back door into what has become known as the “fetal personhood” argument.

Personhood USA, an organization based in Colorado, was founded in 2008 by Keith Mason after he became frustrated by the mainstream anti-abortion movement’s incremental approach of restricting the availability of legal abortion. “From my perspective, I saw a movement that was largely dying or dead and had a lack of enthusiasm from younger people and from people who had been in the fight for so many years,” he told me. “Something had to change. Personhood is that rallying point, because it’s the crux of the issue.” His movement seeks to establish the fetus’s right to live as equal to that of the mother’s.

Personhood advocates regard fetal rights as a civil rights issue, and they often compare themselves to abolitionists. “I think it would be unequal protection to give the woman a pass when anyone else who injects drugs into a child would be prosecuted,” Ben DuPré, director of Personhood Alabama, said. “What it boils down to is, aren’t these little children persons?”

The goal of Personhood USA is to establish that a fully rights-endowed person is created when sperm meets egg. To that end, it has introduced initiatives and measures in legislatures in 22 states. Though none of these measures have become law, some, like Proposition 26 in Mississippi, have made it to a ballot referendum, and other measures have passed legislative chambers in North Dakota, Montana and Oklahoma. The problem with those measures, from a legal perspective, says Lynn Paltrow, executive director of the National Advocates for Pregnant Women, is that “there is no way to treat fertilized eggs, embryos and fetuses as separate constitutional persons without subtracting pregnant women from the community of constitutional persons.”


What is everyone's thoughts on this?

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

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 26th, 2017 12:28 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios