[identity profile] lynn82md.livejournal.com
Republican lawmakers are raising concerns that the party will alienate young voters and women by voting for an antiabortion bill coming to the House floor next week, on the 42nd anniversary of the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision.

In a closed-door open-mic session of House Republicans, Rep. Renee Ellmers spoke out against bringing up the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, which would ban abortion after 20 weeks, telling the conference that she believes the bill will cost the party support among millennials, according to several sources in the room.

"I have urged leadership to reconsider bringing it up next week.… We got into trouble last year, and I think we need to be careful again; we need to be smart about how we're moving forward," Ellmers said in an interview. "The first vote we take, or the second vote, or the fifth vote, shouldn't be on an issue where we know that millennials—social issues just aren't as important [to them]."

The frustration comes as the GOP retreat on Thursday night hosted demographer Neil Howe, the man credited with coining the term "millennial," and as the party has been discussing how to appeal to young voters.

Other members voiced concerns in the meeting that the bill, which passed the House last year, distracts from the GOP's stated message of creating jobs and spurring economic growth.

Dear GOP,
Please do two things. A-listen to Rep. Ellmers and B-See where it says that the GOP's state message of creating jobs and spurring economic growth? Yeah, what happened to that agenda? Going after healthcare a hundred billion times and reproductive rights wasn't part of the plan. If I had been a republican that voted for you economically, I would be miffed right now that you're doing something exactly the opposite of what you said you would do.


Cross posted to [livejournal.com profile] we_r_the_middle
[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.
[identity profile] lynn82md.livejournal.com
From NOW:
All women have the right to have the children they want, raise the children they have, and plan their families through safe, legal abortion, and access to contraception, and pre and post-natal care. For those rights to become a reality, women in all communities need to have the resources and the economic, social and political power to make health decisions about their bodies, their sexuality and their reproduction.

Sign the NOW Pledge to protect reproductive rights
[identity profile] lynn82md.livejournal.com
North Dakota didn't set out to become the abortion debate's new epicenter.

It happened by accident, after a legislative caucus that once vetted abortion bills languished, leaving lawmakers to propose a flurry of measures — some cribbed from Wikipedia — without roadblocks.

Long dismissed as cold and inconsequential, North Dakota is now trying to enact the toughest abortion restrictions in the nation. The newly oil-rich red state may soon find itself in a costly battle over legislation foes describe as blatantly unconstitutional.

More )

Lawmakers on Friday took a step toward outlawing abortion altogether in the state by passing a so-called personhood resolution that says a fertilized egg has the same right to life as a person. The House's approval sends the matter to voters, who will decide whether to add the wording to the state's constitution in November 2014.
Hopefully, history repeats itself again by voters overturning this like it did in Colorado and Mississippi.

Also, I'm happy to see that there are some republicans that aren't happy about this bill and think it goes too far. They realize that this wouldn't only hinder abortion, but it would hinder IVF and make miscarriage a crime...two things that also affect lifers as much as choicers.

With all of this said and done...it makes me happy I'm not from a state like ND. It also makes me happy that I live in Sweden because I wouldn't have to worry about this stupid shit. I was already lucky to be living here when I miscarried in 2010 because I bleed so much that a blood transfusion was required. If I had been refused a D&C, I probably would've bled to death regardless if I had the blood transfusion because I would've continued to bleed until the fetus (who was already dead) was removed (as I have O negative blood while the fetus had a positive blood type).
[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
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Republican vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan launched a broad assault on President Barack Obama in a speech to social conservatives on Friday, accusing him of pandering to extremists on abortion and emboldening U.S. enemies in the Middle East.

The Wisconsin congressman told the Values Voters Summit, an annual gathering of religious and conservative activists, that Obama had led a "reckless expansion of federal power" and waged economic class warfare.

Declaring himself "a values voter, too," Ryan mocked Democrats for their convention fight over the mention of God in the platform and questioned claims by Obama that "we're all in this together."

"How hollow it sounds coming from a politician who has never once lifted a hand to defend the most helpless and innocent of all human beings, the child waiting to be born," Ryan said.

"Giving up any further pretense of moderation on this issue, and in complete disregard of millions of pro-life Democrats, President Obama has chosen to pander to the most extreme elements of his party," he said.

Of course Obama would choose to support those who favor reproductive rights Mr. Ryan. Didn't you miss the memo that supporting abortion, contraception, and sex ed are part of the Democrat plat form? However, considering there's only two parties to choose from in the US (that count, unfortunately), the pro-life Democrats are shit out of luck like the republicans are in your party that are pro-choice and will be until the US drops the two partied system.

Also, I'm glad he supports "the extremists" of his party regarding abortion because at least I know Obama doesn't want a woman to die if she suffers a complication during pregnancy....unlike you, Mr. Ryan. And you say you want to protect those before they are born? Well, good luck if you support a bill that will allow a woman to die...taking the fetus along with it. Who's pro-life now? Certainly not you or any one that is against abortion to save a woman's life as well as contraception.
Cross posted to [livejournal.com profile] we_r_the_middle
[identity profile] lynn82md.livejournal.com
From PP:
After weeks of debate and an enormous outcry from Planned Parenthood supporters nationwide, the Senate rejected the Blunt Amendment, a measure that would have allowed any employer to deny women who work for them insurance coverage for birth control. The message is clear: birth control is basic health care, and your medical decisions should be between you and your doctor.

This is a huge victory for women's health, and your senators were an important part of that victory. Please, take a moment right now to thank your senators for voting to defend access to affordable birth control.

For people that live outside of Maryland, you can go here to see how your senators voted for and send them a message of thanks or outrage.
[identity profile] lynn82md.livejournal.com
I got this from NOW, but MoveOn.org is hosting this:

Trust Women Week is from Jan 20th to Jan 27.

People around the country are joining together to show our strength and advocate for women's health and reproductive justice. Join the march now and add your name to our message for Congress and other elected officials.

Many reproductive rights and women's rights organizations support this
[identity profile] lynn82md.livejournal.com
JACKSON, Miss. (AP) — Abortion opponents say they're still pursuing life-at-fertilization ballot initiatives in six other states after Bible Belt voters in Mississippi defeated one Tuesday.

The "personhood" proposal was intended to prompt a legal challenge aimed at overturning Roe v. Wade, the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision that established a legal right to abortion.

Keith Mason is co-founder of Personhood USA, which pushed the Mississippi measure. The Colorado-based group is trying to put initiatives on 2012 ballots in Florida, Montana, Ohio, Oregon, Nevada and California. Voters in Colorado rejected similar proposals in 2008 and 2010.

Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, said the initiatives represent an "extreme, dangerous and direct assault" on abortion rights.

Mason told The Associated Press that Personhood USA might revive efforts for another ballot initiative in Mississippi.

Speaking of the failure in Mississippi on Tuesday, Mason said, "it's not because the people are not pro-life. It's because Planned Parenthood put a lot of misconceptions and lies in front of folks and created a lot of confusion."

Planned Parenthood Federation of America said in a statement: "Mississippi voters rejected the so-called 'personhood' amendment because they understood it is government gone too far, and would have allowed government to have control over personal decisions that should be left up to a woman, her family, her doctor and her faith, including keeping a woman with a life-threatening pregnancy from getting the care she needs, and criminalizing everything from abortion to common forms of birth control such as the pill and the IUD."

The so-called "personhood" initiative was rejected by more than 55 percent of Mississippi voters, falling far short of the threshold needed for it to be enacted.

The measure divided the medical and religious communities and caused some of the most ardent abortion opponents, including Republican Gov. Haley Barbour, to waver with their support.

Opponents said the measure would have made birth control, such as the morning-after pill or the intrauterine device, illegal. More specifically, the ballot measure called for abortion to be prohibited "from the moment of fertilization" — wording that opponents suggested would have deterred physicians from performing in vitro fertilization because they would fear criminal charges if an embryo doesn't survive.

Opponents also said supporters were trying to impose their religious beliefs on others by forcing women to carry unwanted pregnancies, including those caused by rape or incest.

This is an awesome victory that this amendment was defeated, especially in a state that leans towards being pro-life :)

However, it sucks though that this organization won't stop trying to push this amendment on other states' ballots. It's like they can't take a hint that people on their own side don't like the amendment.


prochoice_maryland: (Default)
Pro-Choice Maryland

August 2017

6 789101112


RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Page Summary

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sep. 26th, 2017 06:00 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios