Anti-choicers get a lot of attention and often credit for being strong mobilizers for their agenda. They are able to get effectively get their fellow antis to spread the word about a campaign, a candidate, a protest etc. I always find it frustrating, annoying, you name it. Now the pro-choicers have shown that we are just as, if not more effective.
Recently, two high profile issues have come about and forced response and change from major corporations/organizations. First we had the issue with Siri, which was brought to light on this blog by Abortioneer Mr. Banana Grabber. Through social media, the pro-choice movement was able to get out the word, mobilize big-name organizations, and get the attention of national media. We didn't give up and were able to get a response from the CEO of Apple (and hopefully a solution).
Now, we have just had the Susan G. Komen/Planned Parenthood debacle. Thanks to PP for outing the problem, pro-choicers again took to social media, got national media to write news articles and opinion pieces, and even got the attention of 26 US Senators who agreed that a "women's health organization" should care about women's health over politics. Very quickly Komen realized what a grave mistake they made and reversed their decision.
I am proud of my fellow pro-choicers for being strong, vocal, and persistent. Watch out antis. A new generation of pro-choicers are active, and we will fight every day, every campaign for the rights of women to choose for themselves what type of contraception is right for them, and whether abortion is right for them. The anti-choice lobby may have always been a strong one, but the pro-choicers are showing just how powerful we can be.
Showing posts with label revolutionary vagina. Show all posts
Showing posts with label revolutionary vagina. Show all posts
Monday, February 6, 2012
Monday, January 23, 2012
Beware of the Superbowl Commercials
How does one ruin the Superbowl for everyone? Run anti-abortion commercials!
Randall Terry, everyone's favorite anti to hate, is running for President. He has no chance and knows that. So why would he run you ask? Part of the FCC Telecommunications Act says that candidates' ads must be run and can't be altered if aired within 45 days of a Presidential primary. As long as Terry can get the money together (and apparently has in 13 television markets), he can run whatever he wants. If you live in these areas, you can prepare to see some graphic fetus porn. Because I refuse to link directly to Randall Terry's website, I will link to a CNN article. While these ads could be worse, I still don't know too many people who want to see this while they have family and friends gathered for food and football (pro- or anti-choice).
I did go to his website to view the ads, and I saw that he's raising money to air the ads. Undoubtedly there are many misguided people out there who are ok with this crap airing on TV. I wish I could do something to prevent people from donating to this nut job. While I may not be able to do that, I can try to do something to encourage people to donate to his opposition. Below I've listed some fabulous pro-choice options for donations.
EMILY's List
NARAL Pro-Choice America
Planned Parenthood
National Abortion Federation
National Network of Abortion Funds
Let's offset Randall Terry and show him that we will not be silenced or deterred.
Randall Terry, everyone's favorite anti to hate, is running for President. He has no chance and knows that. So why would he run you ask? Part of the FCC Telecommunications Act says that candidates' ads must be run and can't be altered if aired within 45 days of a Presidential primary. As long as Terry can get the money together (and apparently has in 13 television markets), he can run whatever he wants. If you live in these areas, you can prepare to see some graphic fetus porn. Because I refuse to link directly to Randall Terry's website, I will link to a CNN article. While these ads could be worse, I still don't know too many people who want to see this while they have family and friends gathered for food and football (pro- or anti-choice).
I did go to his website to view the ads, and I saw that he's raising money to air the ads. Undoubtedly there are many misguided people out there who are ok with this crap airing on TV. I wish I could do something to prevent people from donating to this nut job. While I may not be able to do that, I can try to do something to encourage people to donate to his opposition. Below I've listed some fabulous pro-choice options for donations.
EMILY's List
NARAL Pro-Choice America
Planned Parenthood
National Abortion Federation
National Network of Abortion Funds
Let's offset Randall Terry and show him that we will not be silenced or deterred.
Sunday, January 22, 2012
Happy Roe Day!
Roe Day is a celebration of a woman's right to choose. It's a day when we should reflect on the sacrifices made by those who came before us. Remember those who died or risked their lives to have control over their bodies and to ensure that the generations that came after would have the same right.
For 39 years we have had the right to choose. Many of us have grown up only ever knowing what this is like. It's pretty amazing to have grown up with this right, but let's not be complacent. All across the country, state legislatures are slowly chipping away at this right. The Republican contenders for President salivate at the opportunity to get rid of Roe.
We can't allow that to happen. We can't allow the sacrifices made by our predecessors to be in vain. Celebrate Roe today and continue the fight for future generations.
For 39 years we have had the right to choose. Many of us have grown up only ever knowing what this is like. It's pretty amazing to have grown up with this right, but let's not be complacent. All across the country, state legislatures are slowly chipping away at this right. The Republican contenders for President salivate at the opportunity to get rid of Roe.
We can't allow that to happen. We can't allow the sacrifices made by our predecessors to be in vain. Celebrate Roe today and continue the fight for future generations.
Monday, November 28, 2011
Reproductive Health As a Human Right
Access to safe reproductive healthcare is a right of everyone - men, women, adolescents. But most importantly, and something those of us in our "first world" bubble sometimes forget, it's a right regardless of what country/part of the world you live in. It's also something that governments around the world forget as you can see by this map of worldwide abortion laws created by the Center for Reproductive Rights. The disparity is easily apparent. It doesn't just fall along the lines of conservative/liberal or religious/secular; instead it's rich/poor, developed/developing.
In 2000 the United Nations created the Millennium Development Goals. These are 8 quantifiable, measurable goals that the nations around the world felt would greatly improve human rights of the most poor and vulnerable around the world. And they would, if they were actually met. The 2015 deadline for the MDGs are not to far off. We are working our way toward achieving some, but are falling far short of others. In particular, we are far from the goals related to maternal and child health: Goal 3 to promote gender equality and empower women, Goal 4 to reduce child mortality, and Goal 5 to improve maternal health. Despite this, improving women's health doesn't seem like a priority to many, especially if it enables women to take control of their own lives and bodies.
Not only would improving access to reproductive health improve the MCH related MDGs, but it would also improve others like Goal 1 to eradicate extreme poverty and hunger and Goal 6 to combat HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other diseases. Improving reproductive health enables men and women to create sustainable families and focus on jobs and education. Not to mention that allowing women to have control over their reproductive health treats them like autonomous humans and not just baby making machines.
Reproductive health is a human right, a right everyone should have. Until the governments of the world understand that, we will always have a huge human rights disparity.
In 2000 the United Nations created the Millennium Development Goals. These are 8 quantifiable, measurable goals that the nations around the world felt would greatly improve human rights of the most poor and vulnerable around the world. And they would, if they were actually met. The 2015 deadline for the MDGs are not to far off. We are working our way toward achieving some, but are falling far short of others. In particular, we are far from the goals related to maternal and child health: Goal 3 to promote gender equality and empower women, Goal 4 to reduce child mortality, and Goal 5 to improve maternal health. Despite this, improving women's health doesn't seem like a priority to many, especially if it enables women to take control of their own lives and bodies.
Not only would improving access to reproductive health improve the MCH related MDGs, but it would also improve others like Goal 1 to eradicate extreme poverty and hunger and Goal 6 to combat HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other diseases. Improving reproductive health enables men and women to create sustainable families and focus on jobs and education. Not to mention that allowing women to have control over their reproductive health treats them like autonomous humans and not just baby making machines.
Reproductive health is a human right, a right everyone should have. Until the governments of the world understand that, we will always have a huge human rights disparity.
Tuesday, November 22, 2011
It's the Most Wonderful Time of the Year?
Thanksgiving is this Thursday. You know what that means - turkey, mashed potatoes, family, friends, giving thanks...oh and mass hysteria evoked by the $50 dvd player that you must have. Watching tv this past week, I can't escape the increasing Black Friday commercials. Apparently it wasn't enough to make retail workers deal with stampeding shoppers at 5:00 am. Now they need to open on Thanksgiving. I've never been a fan of the intense commercialization of holidays, but I think this year it has gotten worse. Is this what the holidays are about?
For me, the holidays aren't about how much I can buy and how many gifts are under the tree. It's about family and friends. Despite the pressure this time of year to spend money on crap we don't need, there are ways to turn the commercialization around and do something good. Rather than going to the crazy stressball that is any store on Black Friday, make a donation to your favorite charity - donate to an abortion fund, Planned Parenthood, or NARAL! It's easy, and it doesn't take much to make a difference. With the year those of us working for abortion rights have had (and the tough year I foresee ahead), it would be a great way to show your support.
Monday, November 14, 2011
When Ads Get a Little Too Personal
All of us internet users are well aware of the amount ads we get as well as the personalization of them. When you make an any kind of account - through gmail, facebook, myspace (does anyone still use myspace?) - you're tracked through what you write, what you post, and what websites you visit. You then get ads that are designed to fit you. Sometimes these ads are perfect, sometimes they're totally off, and sometimes they're downright creepy.
I get a lot of these ads on facebook, and I tend to just ignore them because they're so prevalent. They're usually for becoming an ultrasound tech, which based on my abortiony nature isn't all that surprising. They all have pictures, usually an ultrasound photo. Makes sense for an ultrasound tech ad, right? The other day I noticed an ad to become a social worker. The picture seemed a little weird to me though.
What does a giant baby have to do with becoming a social worker? I mean, babies and social workers make sense, I suppose. It's a little weird. And I'm sorry, but the giant baby kinds of weirds me out.
Then today I noticed another ad for becoming a social worker except the ad was a little less relevant and a little more...well....creepy.
Not only is this irrelevant to becoming a social worker, it would also turn me off if I was considering becoming a social worker. Why would you use this picture? I know many people pro- and anti-choice alike who are turned off by plastic fetuses. This just seems like bad marketing to me. I also am noticing an alarming trend. These pictures are getting more creepy and anti-like. Is there an anti-choice group or marketing agency following me around on the internet?
Have you all noticed your facebook, gmail, etc ads? If so - start if you haven't - what kind of strange/creepy ads do you get?
I get a lot of these ads on facebook, and I tend to just ignore them because they're so prevalent. They're usually for becoming an ultrasound tech, which based on my abortiony nature isn't all that surprising. They all have pictures, usually an ultrasound photo. Makes sense for an ultrasound tech ad, right? The other day I noticed an ad to become a social worker. The picture seemed a little weird to me though.
What does a giant baby have to do with becoming a social worker? I mean, babies and social workers make sense, I suppose. It's a little weird. And I'm sorry, but the giant baby kinds of weirds me out.
Then today I noticed another ad for becoming a social worker except the ad was a little less relevant and a little more...well....creepy.
Not only is this irrelevant to becoming a social worker, it would also turn me off if I was considering becoming a social worker. Why would you use this picture? I know many people pro- and anti-choice alike who are turned off by plastic fetuses. This just seems like bad marketing to me. I also am noticing an alarming trend. These pictures are getting more creepy and anti-like. Is there an anti-choice group or marketing agency following me around on the internet?
Have you all noticed your facebook, gmail, etc ads? If so - start if you haven't - what kind of strange/creepy ads do you get?
Monday, October 17, 2011
The Newest Anti Craze: Fetal Heartbeat Laws
We all know the antis are constantly trying to push through new laws to restrict abortion, from parental involvement to laws regarding the size and space in and outside clinics. The newest area the antis have set their eyes on is fetal heartbeat. Fetal heartbeat bills, if passed, would actually make it mandatory for women to listen to the heartbeat (if detectable) before getting an abortion. Some of them even go further than that. In Ohio an anti group is trying to propose a law that would make abortion illegal once the heartbeat is detectable.
Can someone explain to me exactly what this would do, other than be terribly upsetting to many women? Do they think women are stupid? Do they think we don't know the fetus has a heartbeat, so we need to sit there and see it and listen to it? Do they think a woman going to have an abortion hasn't already put a lot of thought into what she's doing?
I swear these proposals treat women like ignorant children who need to be protected from themselves. These ultrasound and now fetal heartbeat proposals really irritate me. They aren't about counseling or informing women. They have no medical benefit to them at all. The point of them is to put up barriers and prevent women from seeking LEGAL health care.
These types of proposals really scare me and so do the people proposing them. It really worries me how antis are chipping away at our rights, our right to have control over our own bodies. This election season scares the crap out of me, and it should scare the crap out of you all too.
Can someone explain to me exactly what this would do, other than be terribly upsetting to many women? Do they think women are stupid? Do they think we don't know the fetus has a heartbeat, so we need to sit there and see it and listen to it? Do they think a woman going to have an abortion hasn't already put a lot of thought into what she's doing?
I swear these proposals treat women like ignorant children who need to be protected from themselves. These ultrasound and now fetal heartbeat proposals really irritate me. They aren't about counseling or informing women. They have no medical benefit to them at all. The point of them is to put up barriers and prevent women from seeking LEGAL health care.
These types of proposals really scare me and so do the people proposing them. It really worries me how antis are chipping away at our rights, our right to have control over our own bodies. This election season scares the crap out of me, and it should scare the crap out of you all too.
Monday, October 3, 2011
35 Years of Suppression Should Not Go Unnoticed
Last Friday marked the 35th anniversary of the Hyde Amendment. You all probably know what it is, but for any that do not, the Hyde Amendment is a provision started by Former Congressman Henry Hyde that is added as an attachment to appropriations bills. This provision prohibits any federal funds from funding abortion services with exceptions for rape, incest, or danger to the life of the mother/pregnant person. In 1976 Henry Hyde proposed this amendment and Congress approved it in response to Roe v. Wade, and it has been reauthorized every year since.
There are many people that believe there is a war on the poor, and they are doing something about it. And you know what, I'm starting to think they might be on to something.
There is a problem with how how our political system treats the poor, uninsured, disenfranchised people in this country. We need to start a revolution. We need to make a plan to not let crotchety, conservative, windbags (and I'm looking at you Michele Bachmann and Sarah Palin) rule our lives and the lives of all women. Let's show them that 35 years of the Hyde Amendment hasn't defeated us or weakened our resolve. Let's keep fighting until every woman has the option of exercising her freedom of choice.
Monday, September 19, 2011
'Tis the Season for Misinformation
How exactly can people with no true knowledge on a subject get away with telling the public lies about it? This happens all the times with antis and abortion. They just love to say things that aren't true to scare people. But that's not what I'm talking about in this case.
I'm talking about Michele Bachmann's claim that she spoke to a woman who said the HPV vaccine gave her daughter mental retardation. What?! First of all, the claim that vaccines cause horrendous side effects like autism was found to be fraudulent. Second, I've seen no legitimate source show proof that the vaccine could cause mental retardation. In fact, the CDC has information on vaccine safety on their website and lists info on the HPV vaccine.
Luckily Bachmann's claim has been ridiculed by pretty much everyone, including conservatives like Rush Limbaugh! Her claims are ridiculous and clearly not founded in scientific fact, but most importantly they are dangerous. The HPV vaccine helps prevent cervical cancer. To suggest to someone they shouldn't get a vaccine because they could have a serious side effect (that you have no proof of) is criminal. Vaccines are one of the most important advances we've made in public health. They don't cause mental retardation, they don't cause autism, they save lives.
I'm talking about Michele Bachmann's claim that she spoke to a woman who said the HPV vaccine gave her daughter mental retardation. What?! First of all, the claim that vaccines cause horrendous side effects like autism was found to be fraudulent. Second, I've seen no legitimate source show proof that the vaccine could cause mental retardation. In fact, the CDC has information on vaccine safety on their website and lists info on the HPV vaccine.
Luckily Bachmann's claim has been ridiculed by pretty much everyone, including conservatives like Rush Limbaugh! Her claims are ridiculous and clearly not founded in scientific fact, but most importantly they are dangerous. The HPV vaccine helps prevent cervical cancer. To suggest to someone they shouldn't get a vaccine because they could have a serious side effect (that you have no proof of) is criminal. Vaccines are one of the most important advances we've made in public health. They don't cause mental retardation, they don't cause autism, they save lives.
Monday, September 5, 2011
Defining Choice
I came across an editorial published online for the Chicago Sun Times about being pro-choice and whether that means defending one's right to have an abortion or to carry to term. I won't recount their editorial, but I think it's a pretty interesting read and recommend you check it out. It made me think about choice and what it means to be pro-choice.
For me personally, pro-choice isn't pro-abortion. I am pro-choice because I think that people have the right to make decisions about their life and their body. If your choice is lawful, why should it be any of my business? For me this means people should be able to choose abortion, choose to carry to term, choose to use their preferred method of contraception, or choose not to use contraception - all without stigma.
It frustrates me to no end when someone refers to me as pro-abortion, which is something anti-choice folks say all the time. First of all, abortion is only one part of what choice means to me. Also, and this may surprise or bother some of my pro-choice brethren, but I'm not pro-abortion. I don't necessarily think that someone should have an abortion. I think they should have the CHOICE. That's what it's about - the ability to choose what is best for you. This blog is the Abortioneers and a lot of what we do and talk about obviously revolves around abortion, but choice, for me, includes many different aspects of reproductive health. And I am happy to live in a country where people have the right to decide which choice is right for them and their families.
For me personally, pro-choice isn't pro-abortion. I am pro-choice because I think that people have the right to make decisions about their life and their body. If your choice is lawful, why should it be any of my business? For me this means people should be able to choose abortion, choose to carry to term, choose to use their preferred method of contraception, or choose not to use contraception - all without stigma.
It frustrates me to no end when someone refers to me as pro-abortion, which is something anti-choice folks say all the time. First of all, abortion is only one part of what choice means to me. Also, and this may surprise or bother some of my pro-choice brethren, but I'm not pro-abortion. I don't necessarily think that someone should have an abortion. I think they should have the CHOICE. That's what it's about - the ability to choose what is best for you. This blog is the Abortioneers and a lot of what we do and talk about obviously revolves around abortion, but choice, for me, includes many different aspects of reproductive health. And I am happy to live in a country where people have the right to decide which choice is right for them and their families.
Monday, August 22, 2011
Pro-Choice Hypocrisy
I was doing some internet reading when I stumbled on this Slate article that asks the question of why some pro-choicers are bothered by selective abortion. One thing that really bothers me about the mainstream pro-choice movement is hypocrisy. I am tired of hearing that people have the right to safe, legal abortion until....until it makes me feel uncomfortable or it conflicts with what I would do personally. Isn't that what drives us all crazy about antis, that they try to make people fit into their own moral constraints?
The New York Times has recently published articles on abortion including one in which a woman decides to reduce a twin pregnancy and another about sex-selective abortion. These articles have sparked various blog posts regarding selective abortion, including this one. Now, I understand that even pro-choicers have limitations on how far they personally would go. But what I do have a problem with is casting your morality on someone else and saying their decision to have an abortion is wrong because you don't like their reasoning.
I won't go on a spree of linking to and commenting on the many blog posts the articles have spawned, as the Slate article does a pretty good job of that. I do want to mention one in particular that really bothered me, this short post on RH Reality Check. The author of this post says that she wasn't bothered by the idea of selective abortion...until she read the reasoning given by the patient in the Times article for reducing her twin pregnancy. This woman said that if her pregnancy had come about naturally, she wouldn't have aborted one of the fetuses, but because it was created artificially, she felt it was just one of the decisions she could make about the pregnancy. I don't know exactly what makes the author of the RH Reality Check post so uncomfortable. If you have no problem with selective abortion, then why do you have a problem with this woman's? But I really don't think it's the author's place to judge this woman. She clearly had to make a very difficult decision; one that was ultimately best for her. And isn't that what we want? Don't we want women to be able to make these decisions for themselves? Don't we, pro-choicers, want people to make decisions about their reproductive health free of scrutiny?
Personally I have no problem with anyone's decision to have an abortion - whether it's because she can't afford it, doesn't want multiple births, doesn't want a boy/girl, etc. If you call yourself pro-choice, how about you be just that. Celebrate choice and let the person who has the pregnancy decide what she's going to do and why she's going to do it, and keep your opinions about it to yourself.
The New York Times has recently published articles on abortion including one in which a woman decides to reduce a twin pregnancy and another about sex-selective abortion. These articles have sparked various blog posts regarding selective abortion, including this one. Now, I understand that even pro-choicers have limitations on how far they personally would go. But what I do have a problem with is casting your morality on someone else and saying their decision to have an abortion is wrong because you don't like their reasoning.
I won't go on a spree of linking to and commenting on the many blog posts the articles have spawned, as the Slate article does a pretty good job of that. I do want to mention one in particular that really bothered me, this short post on RH Reality Check. The author of this post says that she wasn't bothered by the idea of selective abortion...until she read the reasoning given by the patient in the Times article for reducing her twin pregnancy. This woman said that if her pregnancy had come about naturally, she wouldn't have aborted one of the fetuses, but because it was created artificially, she felt it was just one of the decisions she could make about the pregnancy. I don't know exactly what makes the author of the RH Reality Check post so uncomfortable. If you have no problem with selective abortion, then why do you have a problem with this woman's? But I really don't think it's the author's place to judge this woman. She clearly had to make a very difficult decision; one that was ultimately best for her. And isn't that what we want? Don't we want women to be able to make these decisions for themselves? Don't we, pro-choicers, want people to make decisions about their reproductive health free of scrutiny?
Personally I have no problem with anyone's decision to have an abortion - whether it's because she can't afford it, doesn't want multiple births, doesn't want a boy/girl, etc. If you call yourself pro-choice, how about you be just that. Celebrate choice and let the person who has the pregnancy decide what she's going to do and why she's going to do it, and keep your opinions about it to yourself.
Monday, August 8, 2011
Economic Woes
With the doom and gloom of the economy, we all naturally take a step back to think about our own personal finances and what we really need to spend money on. Do I really need that morning coffee from the coffee shop on the way to work, when I can brew one to go at home? Maybe not. Do I really need to eat out as much when I can cook at home more often? Maybe not. Do I really need to buy that shirt/sweater/dress even if it's on sale? Maybe not. Do I really need to continue making donations to my favorite charities? Absolutely!
Even faced with my own upcoming financial insecurity, I am determined to continue making regular contributions to my local abortion fund. I know it's difficult to decide what to cut out, but if you're a contributor to abortion funds, I implore you to think twice before giving up that donation. With the economy still tanking and the budget cut process sure to bring cuts to social welfare programs like public funding for abortion (where they still do that), help is needed more than ever. I talk to more and more people who are out of work, off unemployment (or never received it in the first place), and who feel helpless about their situation.
Please think about continuing (or starting) to donate to a local or national fund. They are really hurting right now, and could really use the support. I know those of us that work in direct abortion service, can tell you how much the people who do receive help truly appreciate it and feel as though they've been given their life back.
Even faced with my own upcoming financial insecurity, I am determined to continue making regular contributions to my local abortion fund. I know it's difficult to decide what to cut out, but if you're a contributor to abortion funds, I implore you to think twice before giving up that donation. With the economy still tanking and the budget cut process sure to bring cuts to social welfare programs like public funding for abortion (where they still do that), help is needed more than ever. I talk to more and more people who are out of work, off unemployment (or never received it in the first place), and who feel helpless about their situation.
Please think about continuing (or starting) to donate to a local or national fund. They are really hurting right now, and could really use the support. I know those of us that work in direct abortion service, can tell you how much the people who do receive help truly appreciate it and feel as though they've been given their life back.
Monday, June 13, 2011
Limiting Abortion Care One Uninformed Law at a Time
I was looking through the news today for inspiration on my post, and I saw articles about states that are currently passing new limits on abortion. Iowa could approve the tightest restrictions in the country at 18 weeks. Alabama just passed a fetal pain bill that puts a limit at 20 weeks.
I'm amazed by those who make medical claims to gain support for these bills, as if they had actual medical training. They irresponsibly pass their opinions off as fact.
In the article I linked to by the Iowa Independent, they quoted the Executive Director of the Iowa Right to Life Committee as saying, "We’re not talking about abortion, we’re talking about infanticide. We’re talking about viable children who can live outside the womb." At 18 weeks?! There's a lot of debate over viability, but the likelihood of viability at 18 weeks (like of it even being biologically possible) isn't high. I am honestly surprised someone will go on record claiming that it is.
Then there's this gem from an Alabama state senator, Scott Beason: "It's clear that a baby at 20 weeks experiences pain. There's no doubt about that." It's clear, is it? Where is your data to back up the claim that a fetus experiences pain at 20 weeks? How is this man even qualified to make such a statement? Oh right, he isn't; he has a degree in Geology.
I'm tired of having to hear antis make these claims. They offer no proof to back any of it up. They don't have medical training, yet they get away with it because the uninformed will go along with it. When will our laws start being passed with facts to back them up?
I'm amazed by those who make medical claims to gain support for these bills, as if they had actual medical training. They irresponsibly pass their opinions off as fact.
In the article I linked to by the Iowa Independent, they quoted the Executive Director of the Iowa Right to Life Committee as saying, "We’re not talking about abortion, we’re talking about infanticide. We’re talking about viable children who can live outside the womb." At 18 weeks?! There's a lot of debate over viability, but the likelihood of viability at 18 weeks (like of it even being biologically possible) isn't high. I am honestly surprised someone will go on record claiming that it is.
Then there's this gem from an Alabama state senator, Scott Beason: "It's clear that a baby at 20 weeks experiences pain. There's no doubt about that." It's clear, is it? Where is your data to back up the claim that a fetus experiences pain at 20 weeks? How is this man even qualified to make such a statement? Oh right, he isn't; he has a degree in Geology.
I'm tired of having to hear antis make these claims. They offer no proof to back any of it up. They don't have medical training, yet they get away with it because the uninformed will go along with it. When will our laws start being passed with facts to back them up?
Monday, May 30, 2011
A Day of Remembrance
Beginning as a day to pay tribute to deceased military service men and women, Memorial Day has transitioned to a more general day of remembrance. I remember many in my life I have lost and since becoming an abortioneer, I also remember those in our field we have lost, the heroes.
Dr. Tiller carried on his father's practice in Wichita, KS and was a beacon of hope to women desperately seeking an abortion. I never had the opportunity to meet him, but I know from others that he was a lovely person who cared deeply for everyone who walked through the doors of his clinic - patients, their loved ones, and his staff. He had been harassed for years, shot, threatened, yet he continued to go to his clinic.
Dr. Barnett Slepian who was killed in his home. Soon after the shooting, antis held protests in the Buffalo and Rochester, NY area where Dr. Slepian lived and practiced. They used his murder to try to incite more violence against providers.
A clinic in Birmingham, AL was bombed killing an off duty police officer, Robert Sanderson, who worked as a security guard and severely injured and maimed a nurse, Emily Lyons. The bomb was detonated by remote control - a truly cowardly act.
Two clinic receptionists were shot and killed at two different clinics in Brookline, MA - Shannon Lowney and Leanne Nichols; many others were wounded. The perpetrator later committed suicide in prison and amazingly, had his convictions overturned because he died before his appeals could be heard.
Dr. John Britton, and clinic escort, James Barrett, were killed outside a clinic in Pensacola, FL. They were just arriving to the clinic, James Barrett and his wife had picked the doctor up from the airport. Dr. Britton's wife was also injured. The man who killed them was convicted and sentenced to death.
Dr. David Gunn was also killed outside a Pensacola clinic and like Dr. Tiller, he had been harassed and lambasted by Operation Rescue - an anti-abortion group that regularly incites violence against abortion providers.
Many others have been harassed, threatened, followed home from work, their clinics bombed. They prevail. Anti abortion zealots won't defeat them, they won't defeat us. This Memorial Day let us all honor the people who gave their lives, so that women can continue to access safe abortion as well as those that continue to go to the clinic everyday knowing they are putting their lives in danger. They are all heroes.
Dr. Tiller carried on his father's practice in Wichita, KS and was a beacon of hope to women desperately seeking an abortion. I never had the opportunity to meet him, but I know from others that he was a lovely person who cared deeply for everyone who walked through the doors of his clinic - patients, their loved ones, and his staff. He had been harassed for years, shot, threatened, yet he continued to go to his clinic.
Dr. Barnett Slepian who was killed in his home. Soon after the shooting, antis held protests in the Buffalo and Rochester, NY area where Dr. Slepian lived and practiced. They used his murder to try to incite more violence against providers.
A clinic in Birmingham, AL was bombed killing an off duty police officer, Robert Sanderson, who worked as a security guard and severely injured and maimed a nurse, Emily Lyons. The bomb was detonated by remote control - a truly cowardly act.
Two clinic receptionists were shot and killed at two different clinics in Brookline, MA - Shannon Lowney and Leanne Nichols; many others were wounded. The perpetrator later committed suicide in prison and amazingly, had his convictions overturned because he died before his appeals could be heard.
Dr. John Britton, and clinic escort, James Barrett, were killed outside a clinic in Pensacola, FL. They were just arriving to the clinic, James Barrett and his wife had picked the doctor up from the airport. Dr. Britton's wife was also injured. The man who killed them was convicted and sentenced to death.
Dr. David Gunn was also killed outside a Pensacola clinic and like Dr. Tiller, he had been harassed and lambasted by Operation Rescue - an anti-abortion group that regularly incites violence against abortion providers.
Many others have been harassed, threatened, followed home from work, their clinics bombed. They prevail. Anti abortion zealots won't defeat them, they won't defeat us. This Memorial Day let us all honor the people who gave their lives, so that women can continue to access safe abortion as well as those that continue to go to the clinic everyday knowing they are putting their lives in danger. They are all heroes.
Sunday, May 8, 2011
Happy Mother's Day.
Mother's Day is the day we celebrate women who brought us into their families, cared for us, and have supported us through our ups and downs.
This is also a great day to celebrate choice. I celebrate the people who chose to be moms, but I also celebrate the people who didn't choose to be moms or become a mom again. I celebrate the women who took on the challenge and those that knew they could not. As About A Girl has said, parenthood is hard work even when it was deeply desired -- imagine how much harder when it wasn't -- and deserves to happen with all the readiness and support it can. Motherhood should be voluntary, freely and happily chosen, not forced.
At the time of their appointment, 61% of abortion patients have one or more children; so the majority are mothers, and the vast majority of the others will also become mothers at some later time in their lives. And many of the people who care for them or advocate for them (at clinics and local funds, and at policy organizations) are also moms. When you know this, it's hard to think that abortion is about "hating children," either for patients or for abortioneers; abortion is just one possible part of making a responsible choice about being a mom.
Being a mom is one of the most amazing, and I think sacred, things a woman can do, and she shouldn't take it lightly or be forced to do it. Society, too, shouldn't take motherhood lightly by implying that it is the obvious choice for all women who find themselves pregnant. I celebrate all of the moms out there and their ability to CHOOSE to be moms -- may you be celebrated all year 'round -- and may we work to make it a truly free choice for all.
This is also a great day to celebrate choice. I celebrate the people who chose to be moms, but I also celebrate the people who didn't choose to be moms or become a mom again. I celebrate the women who took on the challenge and those that knew they could not. As About A Girl has said, parenthood is hard work even when it was deeply desired -- imagine how much harder when it wasn't -- and deserves to happen with all the readiness and support it can. Motherhood should be voluntary, freely and happily chosen, not forced.
At the time of their appointment, 61% of abortion patients have one or more children; so the majority are mothers, and the vast majority of the others will also become mothers at some later time in their lives. And many of the people who care for them or advocate for them (at clinics and local funds, and at policy organizations) are also moms. When you know this, it's hard to think that abortion is about "hating children," either for patients or for abortioneers; abortion is just one possible part of making a responsible choice about being a mom.
Being a mom is one of the most amazing, and I think sacred, things a woman can do, and she shouldn't take it lightly or be forced to do it. Society, too, shouldn't take motherhood lightly by implying that it is the obvious choice for all women who find themselves pregnant. I celebrate all of the moms out there and their ability to CHOOSE to be moms -- may you be celebrated all year 'round -- and may we work to make it a truly free choice for all.
Monday, May 2, 2011
Election Season is Nigh
We're entering the start of the presidential election season. With that comes talk of a whole host of issues, including everyone's favorite political topic - abortion! It's always interesting to read the opinions of candidates. They are trying to be conservative but not too conservative or progressive but not too progressive. This has to make you have to wonder how these candidates really feel about the issues they are taking a stand on.
Let's take abortion as an example. It's unusual for a Democrat to be anti-abortion, but I think it's even more unusual for a Republican to be pro-choice. Generally for a Republican or Democrat to even win their primaries, they need to have their respective anti-choice, pro-choice views. There are of course some exceptions, but the norm is the norm for a reason. These candidates need to reflect the views of their constituents, so it makes me wonder how many of them actually have these views or are just saying this to gain support.
As I was doing some googling tonight, trying to figure out what I wanted to write about, I kept finding articles about Donald Trump's views on abortion. If you weren't aware, Donald Trump is in fact an unofficial candidate for the Republican presidential nomination. I found an article on Life Site News (no I won't link to it) that stated Donald Trump had written a book in 2000 proclaiming he was pro-choice, although he was still uncomfortable with the procedure. Now he's coming out as anti-choice saying that he changed his views a few years ago. He cites a story about a friend's wife who was contemplating an abortion, ultimately kept the pregnancy, and now this child fills this man with unrelenting joy (he fails to note if the woman in this scenario is equally happy). In another interview he was asked about whether we have a right to privacy under the Constitution - he said yes. But then had no idea how that connected to his views on abortion (right to privacy was the basis for the Roe v. Wade decision) - maybe he hasn't thought this one through very well. I wonder if Trump believes what he saying now, if he believed what he said back then, or will just say anything to get people to like him and give him attention.
Not sure how I got on a Donald Trump tangent, but my point is that candidates will say anything to get us to vote for them. We have to think critically and try to figure out if they are saying what they believe or just what we want to hear. We have to make sure they are challenged and asked difficult questions that cause them to really think about what they are saying. Don't allow them to speak in sound bites but make sure they have thought through what they are saying, otherwise how do you know they are telling you the truth?
Let's take abortion as an example. It's unusual for a Democrat to be anti-abortion, but I think it's even more unusual for a Republican to be pro-choice. Generally for a Republican or Democrat to even win their primaries, they need to have their respective anti-choice, pro-choice views. There are of course some exceptions, but the norm is the norm for a reason. These candidates need to reflect the views of their constituents, so it makes me wonder how many of them actually have these views or are just saying this to gain support.
As I was doing some googling tonight, trying to figure out what I wanted to write about, I kept finding articles about Donald Trump's views on abortion. If you weren't aware, Donald Trump is in fact an unofficial candidate for the Republican presidential nomination. I found an article on Life Site News (no I won't link to it) that stated Donald Trump had written a book in 2000 proclaiming he was pro-choice, although he was still uncomfortable with the procedure. Now he's coming out as anti-choice saying that he changed his views a few years ago. He cites a story about a friend's wife who was contemplating an abortion, ultimately kept the pregnancy, and now this child fills this man with unrelenting joy (he fails to note if the woman in this scenario is equally happy). In another interview he was asked about whether we have a right to privacy under the Constitution - he said yes. But then had no idea how that connected to his views on abortion (right to privacy was the basis for the Roe v. Wade decision) - maybe he hasn't thought this one through very well. I wonder if Trump believes what he saying now, if he believed what he said back then, or will just say anything to get people to like him and give him attention.
Not sure how I got on a Donald Trump tangent, but my point is that candidates will say anything to get us to vote for them. We have to think critically and try to figure out if they are saying what they believe or just what we want to hear. We have to make sure they are challenged and asked difficult questions that cause them to really think about what they are saying. Don't allow them to speak in sound bites but make sure they have thought through what they are saying, otherwise how do you know they are telling you the truth?
Monday, April 18, 2011
How Do You Pass a Budget? Strike Down Abortion Funding.
As I'm sure you all know, Congress has been having some troubles passing a 2011 budget, going through many stop-gap measures to prevent a shutdown. The last of these was on April 8, and it went to just about the very last minute. What you all may not know is that last year DC enacted Medicaid funding for elective abortion (yay!). In its infinite wisdom, Congress decided it was within its purview and necessary to stop that Medicaid funding with the passage of the last stop gap measure to prevent the government shut down as well as making it permanent in the 2011 budget this past week.
A few questions come to mind. Why do you need to play with the budget like that, tacking on extra measures? Why do you need to play with women's lives like that? Low income women deserve to exercise their right to safe, legal, abortion like rich, middle class, and women with insurance coverage do? And exactly how is it in your purview to change DC law - passed by officials ELECTED BY THE PEOPLE OF DC?
It's an abomination that Congress thinks it's ok to rip away funding people rely on. I understand that we have a deficit, and that the debt ceiling continues to rise. What I don't understand is why taking programs to help the most disenfranchised, vulnerable citizens of this country is a good way to reduce the deficit. Perhaps we should take away tax loopholes that enable giant companies to avoid paying as much in taxes as possible. Punishing poor people is not the answer.
As someone with friends in DC and has lived in DC, it pisses me off that Congress gets to yay/nay decisions made by the DC city council and mayor. DC residents have no voting member in Congress or the Senate, yet Congress and the Senate get to make decisions on how DC's local tax dollars are spent. How ridiculous is that? DC residents need to get angry, get active, and get involved in the campaign to gain DC voting rights. It also wouldn't hurt for all of us with voting members of Congress and the Senate to write a letter/make a phone call/send an e-mail and tell our representatives how taxation without representation goes against what we claim to be about in this country.
I guess this means that helping low income women access reproductive health care falls back to the hands of volunteers. As we've mentioned before, the National Network of Abortion Funds is having a kick ass bowl-a-thon as a great way to energize the masses to donate to their favorite local abortion fund. I implore you, dear readers, to donate. Please help do the work that Congress is unwilling to do. Tell John Boehner that you won't let his uncaring, narrow minded views affect women having access to safe, legal abortion care.
A few questions come to mind. Why do you need to play with the budget like that, tacking on extra measures? Why do you need to play with women's lives like that? Low income women deserve to exercise their right to safe, legal, abortion like rich, middle class, and women with insurance coverage do? And exactly how is it in your purview to change DC law - passed by officials ELECTED BY THE PEOPLE OF DC?
It's an abomination that Congress thinks it's ok to rip away funding people rely on. I understand that we have a deficit, and that the debt ceiling continues to rise. What I don't understand is why taking programs to help the most disenfranchised, vulnerable citizens of this country is a good way to reduce the deficit. Perhaps we should take away tax loopholes that enable giant companies to avoid paying as much in taxes as possible. Punishing poor people is not the answer.
As someone with friends in DC and has lived in DC, it pisses me off that Congress gets to yay/nay decisions made by the DC city council and mayor. DC residents have no voting member in Congress or the Senate, yet Congress and the Senate get to make decisions on how DC's local tax dollars are spent. How ridiculous is that? DC residents need to get angry, get active, and get involved in the campaign to gain DC voting rights. It also wouldn't hurt for all of us with voting members of Congress and the Senate to write a letter/make a phone call/send an e-mail and tell our representatives how taxation without representation goes against what we claim to be about in this country.
I guess this means that helping low income women access reproductive health care falls back to the hands of volunteers. As we've mentioned before, the National Network of Abortion Funds is having a kick ass bowl-a-thon as a great way to energize the masses to donate to their favorite local abortion fund. I implore you, dear readers, to donate. Please help do the work that Congress is unwilling to do. Tell John Boehner that you won't let his uncaring, narrow minded views affect women having access to safe, legal abortion care.
Thursday, March 10, 2011
Who Has Appreciation? We do!
From the bottom of my heart I thank all abortion providers for all that they do. You endure harassment, even death threats, new laws restricting your job, news articles denouncing you and what you do, and even more. Through all of this you continue to go to the clinic, day after day, to help women access choice.
You spend hours calling funds, discussing her finances, and looking for ways where you can discount the cost. You do all of this to help low income women access choice.
You volunteer your time to answer phone calls, before, work, after work, on your lunch break, on the weekends. You listen to her story and try to give her as much money as you can to help her. You participate in activities to fund raise more money. You do this to help women piece together they money they need, so they can access choice.
You get up early to wait outside the clinic and are yelled at by protesters, pushed around, harassed. You do this to help women get into the clinic.
All of those that work in abortion care - doctors, nurses, counselors, receptionists, clinic escorts, local funds, and all of those that I missed. You are amazing. You are the reason women have access to safe, legal abortion care. From the bottom of my heart, I thank you.
Sunday, March 6, 2011
Bowling for 'Bortion
Sorry about the late post today. This abortioneer has had a long couple of weeks.
While looking around on facebook the other day, I saw that NNAF is launching its annual bowl-a-thon. If you haven't heard of this, in the next month or so funds across the country will be "bowling for abortion access." If you go to the bowl-a-thon website, you can see more details including which funds have signed up so far. You can start a team, register with the site, and start raising money. Then you get to go bowling with lots of other fun pro-choicers. I don't know about you, but this abortioneer cannot wait to strap on a pair of awesome rental shoes and throw some balls (hopefully strikes) to raise money for my local abortion fund.
Events like this are so important for small abortion funds. These funds do their best to help the poorest women have the same access to reproductive health care that many of us do. With the economy still struggling, and many women pinching pennies just to put food on the table and pay their bills, it's nice to be able to help.
Monday, February 7, 2011
Abortion Clinic "Investigations"
I am so tired of the "investigations" that anti-abortion activists do to make clinics look bad. They set up a crazy situation to try to trap people. Let's take the most recent stunt at a Planned Parenthood in New Jersey. If you were the clinic worker, and a man came into the clinic and was asking questions about how to help minor prostitutes get abortions, what would you do? What would you say? The particular worker in this situation was fired. Maybe she shouldn't have advised this man how to avoid having reports made with CPS because of legal issues. Ultimately her job is to help these girls, right? Help them get abortions. Is it wrong that she was trying to do that? I don't think so.
These anti-abortion activists aren't doing anything for the women and girls they purport to be helping. If they truly cared, they would help women who want to keep their pregnancies. They would help those women get prenatal care and get diapers, clothes, and formula once they're born. Are you doing that Lila Rose? How about you Jill Stanek? If you care, channel your efforts into helping those that are already here and are struggling.
It's like a friend of mine once said, "If you're pre-born, they want to "help" you. If you're post-born, you're screwed."
These anti-abortion activists aren't doing anything for the women and girls they purport to be helping. If they truly cared, they would help women who want to keep their pregnancies. They would help those women get prenatal care and get diapers, clothes, and formula once they're born. Are you doing that Lila Rose? How about you Jill Stanek? If you care, channel your efforts into helping those that are already here and are struggling.
It's like a friend of mine once said, "If you're pre-born, they want to "help" you. If you're post-born, you're screwed."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)