Remember when Nebraska passed the first ever federal abortion ban and the US Supreme Court upheld it? It became a nightmare for doctors trying to help women in tragic circumstances and provide the safest care.

Nebraska is at it again.

From RHRealityCheck.org:

Last week, Nebraska’s Republican governor Dave Heineman signed a sweeping new law that criminalizes almost all abortions after 20 weeks’ gestation and another bill that forces women to undergo extensive mental health assessment prior to obtaining an abortion before 20 weeks.

Intimidating providers

Monica Potts of TAPPED explains that the laws are meant to have a chilling effect on all abortion providers in Nebraska. In the wake of last year’s assassination of Kansas abortion provider Dr. George Tiller, Dr. LeRoy Carhart of Nebraska began providing late-term abortions. According to Potts, the new abortion legislation is probably designed to run Dr. Carhart out of town.

An anti-choice Catch-22

Robin Marty of RH Reality Check notes the glaring contradictions between the two Nebraska abortion laws: Before 20 weeks of gestation, the state is so concerned about a woman’s health that they will force her to seek a mental health assessment to spare her the trauma of an ill-advised abortion. It seems that Nebraska legislators think women are so fragile that they can’t decide on their own whether an abortion will be unduly upsetting. Yet, after 20 weeks, a woman is not entitled to a “life of the woman” exemption even if a doctor determines that she is likely to commit suicide if she is forced to continue her pregnancy.

The second round of debate was held [Monday] on the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, a bill created almost entirely as a vehicle for getting anti-choice legislation challenged and potentially reviewed by the Supreme Court. Unlike every other anti-choice law that has so far passed in this country, LB 1103 refuses to provide an exemption for a mother’s mental health, regardless of the fact that prior to 20 weeks a pregnant woman’s mental health was so valuable that the state wants to advocate mandatory screenings to protect it.

Vanessa Valenti of Feministing writes of the Nebraska law:

The blatant anti-choice and ableist implications in these bills are just atrocious. Not only will some women be forced to carry their pregnancies to term with no mental health exception, but doctors will be terrified to perform abortions in fear of not correctly adhering to obscure these screening rules.

A collision course with Roe?

Gov. Heineman vowed to defend the new laws against any legal challenges. The Nebraska law bans abortion based on the purported ability of fetuses to feel pain, not their ability to survive outside the womb. The Supreme Court has ruled that states cannot ban abortion of pre-viable fetuses. According to the accepted legal reasoning, if a fetus is too immature to survive outside the woman’s body, the woman has the right to withdraw the support of her body by terminating the pregnancy.

Conveniently, anti-choicers say that they have scientific evidence that pre-viable fetuses can feel pain. This dubious evidence isn’t just a pretext for banning abortion earlier, it puts the bill on a crash course with Roe. If the abortion issue is really about a woman’s right to control her body, then the fetal pain issue is a red herring. A woman can legally inflict pain on a full-grown person if she strikes in self-defense to protect her bodily autonomy. Nebraska is launching a full frontal assault on women’s rights. In Nebraska the pain of a non-viable fetus allegedly matters more than a woman’s freedom. We’ll see what the Supreme Court says about that. 3 years ago

Palin: ‘I Don’t Know’ If Abortion Clinic Bombers Are Terrorists4 years ago

From today’s post secret. 4 years ago

The Supreme Court’s onetime wide majority in favor of abortion rights has shrunk to one: Justice John Paul Stevens, who is 88. Now the decision’s fate may depend on who becomes the next president.

WASHINGTON—Every four years, defenders of abortion rights proclaim that the fate of Roe vs. Wade hangs on the outcome of the presidential election.

This year, they may be right.

Through most of the 1990s and until recently, the Supreme Court had a solid 6-3 majority in favor of upholding the right of a woman to choose abortion. But the margin has shrunk to one, now that Justice Sandra Day O’Connor is retired and has been replaced by Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr.

And Justice John Paul Stevens, a leader of the narrow majority for abortion rights, is 88.

“Clearly, Roe is on the line this time,” said Indiana University law professor Dawn Johnsen, a former lawyer for NARAL Pro-Choice America. “It is quite clear they have four votes against it. If the next president appoints one more, the odds are it will be overruled.”

Some advocates worry that the perennial cries of “Roe is falling” has had the effect of muting such claims.

“What we find scary is that people don’t understand what’s at stake,” said Kathryn Kolbert, president of People for the American Way. “In the next four years, one to as many as three Supreme Court justices may step down, and they all will come from the liberal end of the court.”

But that doesn’t mean abortion or the fate of the Roe decision is a rallying cry on the campaign trail for either Democrats or Republicans. The two parties have staked out opposite positions, but their candidates rarely mention them when campaigning.

The abortion issue is enormously important to the base of both parties, political strategists say, but it is a touchy and difficult matter to raise with an audience of swing voters and those who are undecided.

“People are conflicted about it,” said Peter Fenn, a veteran Democratic strategist. “If you are campaigning in Scranton, you want to make the lunch-bucket argument. When the economy is driving the race, you don’t want to ignite the culture wars.”

On the Republican side, Kenneth L. Khachigian, a California attorney and a campaign advisor to President Reagan, said abortion had become a key issue in the primary races but not in the general election.

“It is a motivating factor at the grass-roots level,” he said.

When Republican John McCain was considering his choices for a running mate, conservative activists threatened a rebellion at the GOP convention in St. Paul, Minn., if he were to choose a supporter of abortion rights.

Instead, McCain galvanized his support with conservative activists when he chose Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, who opposes abortion even in cases of rape and incest.

McCain’s website says he “believes Roe v. Wade is a flawed decision that must be overturned.”

But having established his opposition to abortion, McCain has no reason to campaign on the issue, Khachigian said. “At this stage, when you focus on the 10% who are out there and have not decided, you can figure they are not going to decide based on your view of abortion or Roe vs. Wade,” he said.

Democrat Barack Obama has called himself a strong supporter of abortion rights.

“A woman’s ability to decide how many children to have and when, without interference from the government, is one of the most fundamental rights we possess,” he told NARAL Pro-Choice America. “I believe we must work together to reduce the number of unintended pregnancies,” he said.

But Obama, like McCain, does not talk up the issue on the campaign trail.

Polls show the American public remains closely split on abortion. Most say they favor legal abortion, with some restrictions. In August, a poll for the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press found that 54% said abortion should be generally legal, and 41% said it should be mostly illegal.

Read more…4 years ago

Palin/McCain take over the white house in 09. 4 years ago

TAKE ACTION

I have just learned that the Bush administration is about to
release a rule that will make it possible for federal funding
that is specifically designed to prevent unintended pregnancy
and promote reproductive health to now be used for anything but
that.

If it happens, this will be a massive betrayal of women and
families, and we must stop it. For example, this is what one
result of Bush’s rule change could be:

Right now, anti-choice groups run so-called “crisis pregnancy
centers” in communities all around the country—often a block
or two away from Planned Parenthood affiliate health centers.
These facilities look like health centers, but in reality are
run by anti-choice zealots who deliver only the reproductive
health care options that fit their agenda. No birth control, no
abortion—and no choice for women and families who need it.

If this rule takes effect, they’re likely to receive a massive
influx of our tax dollars to expand their deceptive operations
and to attract hundreds of thousands of women who think they’ll
be getting medical care but instead will receive a large dose of
anti-choice ideology.

I believe that tricking women when they are most vulnerable is
wrong—and the federal government shouldn’t pay people to do
it.

Please join me in telling President Bush “no.” Here’s the link
with all the info you need.4 years ago

I have the Blondie song, One Way or Another, running through my head thanks to “this story”http://www.feministing.com/archives/009733.html from feministing.com.

If you want to get real sick, read the entire New York Times story (free subscription required).

But if you are a policy junky or a lawyer, this might make sense to you: The proposal defines abortion as follows: “any of the various procedures — including the prescription, dispensing and administration of any drug or the performance of any procedure or any other action — that results in the termination of the life of a human being in utero between conception and natural birth, whether before or after implantation.”

Blah, blah blah. It basically opens up federal family planning dollars to non-family planning organizations. It is gross. And so damn clever on their part. And with just 3 and a half month until the election, it’s the perfect think to throw Planned Parenthood and NARAL into a tizzy. 1/20/09 can’t come fast enough. 4 years ago

Just in case you missed it: On Friday, the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals issued a ruling in PPMNS v. Rounds, Planned Parenthood’s challenge to a South Dakota law requiring doctors to recite state-mandated ideology to women seeking abortion care. This law, passed by the South Dakota legislature in 2005, was pushed through by the same politicians who tried to ban all abortions in South Dakota last year. It violates doctors and patients constitutional rights by forcing doctors to give ideologically charged, non-scientific and inaccurate messages to patients.

In a 7-4 vote, the court, sitting en banc, vacated a lower court preliminary injunction, and allowed the South Dakota law to take effect.

“This case is about whether women in South Dakota should be able to make private health care decisions with their doctors – free from political interference,” said Mimi Liu, PPFA staff attorney.

This law is the only one of it’s kind in the country. Now nowhere is it more difficult for a woman to access abortion than in the state of South Dakota. It’s very disturbing on so many levels.

What are we, China? 4 years ago

Hi everyone! I’m hosting a virtual house party for Planned Parenthood. It’s called Let’s Do It In the Voting Booth!”

I’m volunteering for Planned Parenthood to help bring 1 million pro-choice voters to the polls in November and I’d love for you to join me. Because YOU ARE one in a million!

Visit my Virtual Party Web Site to RSVP and join the Planned Parenthood Action Fund.

The person with the most house party attenders gets to have dinner with Cecile Richards, President of PP. Woot! Help me get there!

Once you’ve rsvp’d, check out this youtube

I hope you’ll join me! 4 years ago

this great piece by Vanessa Valenti on the war on contraception.

It might just blow your mind a bit. But it is excellent. Here’s an excerpt.

For the last three and a half decades, the big battle in women’s health has been abortion. Anti-choice activists attack Roe v. Wade at every turn and purposefully chip away at abortion rights. But as anti-choice groups expand their net to oppose basic birth control, they have a helping hand in the myriad political, financial and practical access issues that American women face in trying to prevent unwanted pregnancy.

The average American woman spends about three decades of her life trying to avoid pregnancy, and only a few years trying to become or being pregnant. And while the general belief is that contraception is only a pharmacy away, the United States still has one of the highest unintended pregnancy rates in the developed world. Why is it that in a country where 98 percent of sexually active women have used a form of contraception, nearly half will have an unintended pregnancy? According to the Guttmacher Institute, a research organization for sexual and reproductive health, one of the major contributing factors is simply a lack of access—economic gaps, racial disparities and insurance status all play a role in determining women’s access to birth control. And they all seem to have slipped under the public radar. 4 years ago

I am not sure who’s kid this is but the t-shirt says it all! 4 years ago

ELECTION 2008 | Colo. Group Submits Signatures To Put Proposal That Would Define Fertilized Embryo as Person on State Ballot
[May 15, 2008]

The group Colorado for Equal Rights submitted 131,245 signatures to place an initiative on the November statewide ballot that would define a fertilized embryo as a person and extend to it rights and protections under the Colorado Constitution, the Denver Post reports. According to the Post, 76,000 valid signatures are required. Signatures submitted by the Tuesday deadline will need to be validated by the Colorado Secretary of State’s office (Draper, Denver Post, 5/13). The initiative is seeking to amend the state constitution to define “any human being from the moment of fertilization” as a “person” for purposes of the state’s constitutional provisions “relating to inalienable rights, equality of justice and due process of law” (Daily Women’s Health Policy Report, 5/8).

You can read more here.

Is anyone in Colorado? Can you tell me how you think this will go? 5 years ago

I’m a lot smarter than I look. And I have never believed that the movement against abortion would ever stop there. You’d think that anti-choicers would be much more vocal about supporting sex education and better access to contraception (I know there are some of you who are rational, but not these folks. However, they can’t hide it any longer.

The Pill Kills? Seriously? This is the most ridiculous campaign I have ever seen and it outs those lunatics for what they really are, anti-woman and anti-sex.

Check out American Life League’s new campaign The Pill Kills.

Anyone who got a D in high school biology can see right through this load of bull. Take a deep breath, run to your pharmacy and buy some Plan B before it’s too late!

_{I’m so glad I spend my days fighting these freaks. It’s total job security.}5 years ago

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia had a wide-ranging interview on 60 Minutes last night. Among highlights: “Back at the Oxford Union, Scalia told the students, ‘You think there ought to be a right to abortion? No problem. The Constitution says nothing about it. Create it the way most rights are created in a democratic society. Pass a law. And that law, unlike a Constitutional right to abortion created by a court can compromise. It can…I was going to say it can split the baby! I should not use… A Constitution is not meant to facilitate change. It is meant to impede change, to make it difficult to change.’” AND ” ‘They say that the Equal Protection Clause requires that you treat a helpless human being that’s still in the womb the way you treat other human beings. I think that’s wrong. I think when the Constitution says that persons are entitled to equal protection of the laws, I think it clearly means walking-around persons. You don’t count pregnant women twice.’”
Read and watch his interview here.

Hmmm. Sounds almost sane. But the thought of passing a federal law, or GASP, a Constitutional Amendment (like the antis are trying to do) is just so overwhelming considering how strong the opposition is. 5 years ago

A recent editorialist in my local paper claimed, “No pharmacist would refuse … a contraceptive [prescription].” I have personally fought with pharmacists to obtain contraceptives. I use contraceptives because I suffer from severe menstrual disorders. My doctor prescribed the medication to diminish the effects, but insurance wouldn’t cover it. Some pharmacists won’t fill birth control orders at all; they aren’t required to.

It is important to consider that the right thing for one woman may not be for another. The pro-choice position defends women who experience a pregnancy under any circumstances, who have the right to choose based on accurate medical information. Until a fetus reaches viability (the ability to survive outside the uterus), it is a part of the woman’s body and she may do as she chooses. If she decides that she cannot carry the pregnancy to term, she has the choice to terminate it. All options should be weighed by the woman and her doctor. At no point should a woman be judged.

Anti-choice individuals state that women who carry a pregnancy to term under horrific circumstances are brave. Those women made that choice. Their courage doesn’t negate the bravery of rape and incest survivors who have terminated resulting pregnancies. A survivor, regardless of whether she endured a rape kit, should be encouraged to make her own decisions. If she chooses to terminate a resulting pregnancy, then that should be done safely.

Some say, “It’s not the fetus’s fault.” It’s also not a woman’s fault that she suffered assault, and her needs take priority over something relying on her to exist.

This is a slippery slope on which women are losing their inherent rights. The snowball effect recalls a recent past when women were expected to smile silently through life with few career opportunities and little familial support. Women are not fetus-growing pods; they are competent humans with the right to choose. 5 years ago

How wonderful all of us are able to write our opinions about if abortion is right or wrong blah blah the fact of the matter is we should all be grateful OUR mothers were PROLIFE!! And we should thank the Lord for all the days he gives us free will to make these choices.

I too was a teen parent and you know what? it’s not the end of the world. I know everyone’s life experiences are different but when it comes down to it people raise unwanted babies everyday (bio-parents or adopted parents). But give the child a chance of life people, because EACH one of you reading this has been given a chance at life so why should an unborn child not have that same opportunity?

Seems like in an effort to protect women’s rights we have failed to protect the rights of God’s will and the rights of an unborn child. If there is a heartbeat there is life, it’s not rocket science. With that said I will pray for all of us, fore we should always be there for each other so we don’t have to make mistakes like this. I am sorry if you have had to make this choice and you didn’t have a support system in place to help you raise a child. All of you are in my prayers. 5 years ago

Today, I celebrate 35 years of freedom. 35 years ago, on January 22, 1973, the US Supreme Court made its landmark decision in Roe v. Wade making abortion legal in all 50 states. That decision saved my life and made me who I am today.

I made that difficult decision to have an abortion in 1993. It was a decision I wish I never had to make. Whether or not to have a child at the age of 19. But there I was. And thanks to Roe, I was able to have a safe and legal abortion. I made that decision with my doctor and my family. I was not alone. The crazy number is something like 1 in 3 women in the US will have an abortion in their lifetime.

I’ve received all the emails from the big national organizations today. They celebrate this landmark with vigilance. Even now, forces are amassing to take this right away from me. They want to control my private life. They want to force me to have a baby as punishment for having sex. They do not want me to have access to contraception. They don’t want me to know about contraception. They don’t want me to have sex. Instead of protecting women’s health, ant-choice forces wish to leave no exception for women’s health in their laws banning abortion.

So no one needs to tell me how important this right is. I lived that right. And I will do everything in my power to protect that right. Because my life depends on it. 5 years ago

http://www.ppaction.org/campaign/Enoughpetition 5 years ago

I’m going to the 3rd Annual Women 4 Women Day in South Dakota’s capital with a good friend of mine and her mother. There’ll be a luncheon, campaign training, and all kinds of action on behalf of women’s rights in SD. I’m so excited!

http://standupsd.blogspot.com/
“We beat the ban but we still have a lot of work to do. If you are still concerned about the rights and status of Women in South Dakota, then you should participate in Women 4 Women Day! Women 4 Women Day is a great day of advocacy and action on behalf of the women in our state.Please come to Pierre on Thursday, January 31st, 2008 and make your voice heard!” 5 years ago

On January 22, the 35th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, we are asking pro-choice bloggers to join us for Blog for Choice Day!

Blog for Choice Day provides us with an opportunity to raise the profile of reproductive rights in the blogosphere and the media, while celebrating Roe’s 35th anniversary. Plus, it’s a great way to let your readers and the mainstream media know that a woman’s right to choose is a core progressive value that must be protected.

This year’s topic: tell us, and your readers, why it’s important to vote pro-choice.5 years ago

The best way to save Roe v. Wade is to vote for candidates who will protect it. There is nothing wrong with contacting a candidate on where she or he stands on the issue, no matter what level of government they are running for.

One year, I contacted the two County Legislator candidates by looking their home phone numbers in the phone book. I asked them several questions, including whether they support abortion rights and privacy. I got my answers and voted appropriately.

Do not assume. Find out or ask. 5 years ago

Texas Court Rules Law That Gives Fetuses Some Legal Protections Does Not Conflict With Roe
[Nov. 27, 2007]

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals on Wednesday unanimously ruled that a 2003 state law declaring a fetus at any gestational age as an individual with legal protections does not conflict with Roe v. Wade, the AP/Google.com reports (AP/Google.com, 11/22). The ruling affirmed a previous ruling by the 5th District Court of Appeals in Dallas (Houston Chronicle, 11/22).

The Court of Criminal Appeals rejected an appeal by Terence Lawrence, who was convicted of killing a woman and her four- to six-week old fetus. Lawrence in an appeal argued that he should not have been prosecuted for the death of the fetus because it was not viable. According to the Texas ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court has established that states do not have a compelling interest to interfere before a fetus is viable. The Supreme Court also has “emphasized that states may protect human life not only once the fetus has reached viability but ‘from the outset of the pregnancy.’”

As a result, the Texas Legislature is “free to protect the lives of those whom it considers to be human beings,” the Texas court said. Presiding Judge Sharon Keller added that the “compelling state interest” test, along with the “accompanying ‘viability’ threshold, has no application to a statute that prohibits a third party from causing the death” of a fetus against the will of the pregnant woman (AP/Google.com, 11/22).

Now, I understand that this is a touchy subject. I’m sure I will get some negative feedback. But I disagree with the court’s ruling. Not because I think the guy should get off. The lecherous murderer should be locked up for life. I disagree because the court treads dangerously here. The intent of the law is clearly to undermine Roe. If a law upholds that a fertilized egg deserves protection, how on earth can abortion be legal?

Okay, let’s not take it to the extreme. If a woman is 10 weeks pregnant (which makes it officially a fetus) it is roughly 1.2 inches long and .14 ounces. Are you kidding me? Granted, to a woman who wants that baby, it is incredible. But we’re talking outside the context of murder and about an unplanned pregnancy when the woman wants to terminate. of course it conflicts with Roe.

I’m baffled. If this goes to the Supreme court, we are screwed. 5 years ago

Fascinating article on the construct of marriage on the NYT today, taking marriage private. Reading it made me wonder about the time and context shaping the experience of motherhood prior to the public sanctioning of the union known today as marriage.

I’ll come back to this topic later when I’m not so sleepy. For now I keep thinking about the idiotic reason used by a man I dated to justify and pressure the decision not to have the child we “accidentally” procreated. Complex sure, but I dare to say that our ability to exercise our right ends with our ability to exercise our most powerful muscle, our brain. 5 years ago

I was thinking about why I have not added an entry about this goal in a while.

It’s not that Abortion rights are safer today than they used to be. In fact, they are more at risk than ever before in the US.

It’s not that I’ve found other priorities and this has moved down my list. I work everyday toward this goal.

It’s not even that there isn’t much going on in the realm of reproductive rights these days. There’s something to report every day.

I think it’s just that nothing surprises me anymore. Like the fact that President Bush, the number one enemy of abortion rights in America, just vetoed funding for the US Family Planning program (Title X). Way to go in helping to increase abortions Mr. President. I’ve just gotten so used to it that I don’t get mad anymore.

How can you be mad every day of your life? I can’t. I don’t have the energy for it. It could be the protesters I see outside Planned Parenthood. It could be those idiotic letters to the editor I see printed all the time telling women to just “keep their legs closed.” Or, it could be the latest attempt by anti-choice factions to limit people’s ability to prevent pregnancy.

Like Mike Pence, Congressman from Indiana (yes, I wrote about him before). Well, he introduced a bill that would prohibit any organization that performs, advocates for ar refers women to abortions from receiving federal family planning dollars. So let me get the straight. The organizations that do the most to prevent unintended pregnancy will be cut from federal funding? Seriously? What color is the sky in his world? I’d really like to know because we are not living on the same planet.

Seriously.

So how do I stop my anger?

I stop writing. Probably not a good thing either. 5 years ago

Watching Love in the Time Cholera, which disappointed almost every expectation hiding lazily in some corner, Red and I stopped by Clair de Lune for a lot of girl talk. Reg comes from the majestically beautiful Panama and has the most beautiful forest green eyes I’ve ever seen. Despite our friendship spanning only for a few months, if not weeks, we meet like old friends do, with a deep sense of warmth and gratitude for who we each are and share. In the spirit of this sense of sisterhood we each shared glimmers of our paths, talked about politics, love and all that rises and falls in between.

Reg talks about the big and small things shifting around in her heart and mind. And so do I. The story of my abortion comes back to my mind like a good reliable friend. With the attentive and caring listening of Reg and of course the nurturing I provide I realize soon that not only am I talking about it more openly, but in so doing I also visit specifics of the abortion that had up until now remained hidden from my awareness. Coming to mind are the faces of the women in the reception room upon arriving. I think I also remember what my companion was wearing, a red t-shirt displaying the British flag and opaque corduroy jacket. I however don’t remember what I was wearing. Forgotten are also the faces of the other male companions, some holding their partner’s hand, some looking more like shadows of bodies they had left somewhere else.

I think too I was a shadow of the woman I had given up somewhere between the first date and the first &*^{%$$ Both happened in the same 42 hour period.}

The next memory has me on the cold table, legs wide open and my head feeling so so large I feel I’m floating like a big yellow balloon. Before my consciousness goes with the balloon, I glimpse over the monitor, which the nurse quickly turns away from me. I don’t know how many hours after; I again step into the reception area, which moves under my feet like a big puddle of sticky stuff. From there the companion and I drive to the cheap hotel where we had stayed.

And from the next image is that of the two of us *&&^% yet again, just 12 hours after the surgery that removed the embryo I had carried for no more than 4 weeks. As I sit there with Reg the insides of my lower abdomen shake. It is then I realize this memory summons as much rage and pain as the actual abortion itself. If there was ever a doubt in my mind of what I represented for the man beside, or on top of me that evening, this memory and the raw emotions it awakens serve as loud reminders. I was a premium pussy. And yet I know I served myself, the self I was back then on a silver platter, pussy and all. I gave my body over the pain, over a weak plea for rest. And there last night I realize the hurt, the violation and the perpetrator sit inside finally coming together. Like Reg and I came together as old friends, the pieces of the story in me also gathered for once. 5 years ago

I really can’t begin to explain how important this is. Women’s rights are not worth sacrificing, and I will be lifelong fighter in this battle. Sex education is key, and no one is pro-abortion, so we all need to work together to make sure that Roe is saved! 5 years ago

Noam Chomsky appears in the film, Lake of Fire. Yet, the NYT articles points out, aside from the voice of one or two females the film mostly “has a lot of men about what women should do and not do with their bodies”. I’m interested not so much in what the other men’s stand on the topic, much as I’m intrigued by listening to Mr. Chomsky’s take. The other men’s argument looks like old dust.

The fact that even this documentary, made by a man, primarily I’d say for a male audience, does not include women does not surprise me the least bit. As a matter of fact since following this issue I’ve only come across one book, peace after abortion, that renders the stories of women, some poignantly painful, pivotal. In the very own words of the author of this small, yet uniquely and refreshingly important book, believing ardently in the right of women to make choices about pregnancy does not exclude that at the end of it all, choices imply consequences, including the tremendous suffering associated with abortion.

Like the author of the book I too strongly and passionately support our right to make our very own decisions regarding pregnancy. Yet I also know personally that the decision I made came with life changing suffering. Two years into the abortion I wonder for instance if the decision against my pregnancy would hurt less, had the man in my life at that moment being more of a man to let me decide. But then again, as this man said, it was his sperm that got me pregnant. And if I believe in my right to make my own choice, should I then believe in his right to half of the product of the pregnancy? What happens when each of us claims right to the product of conception from very different perspective? These are the questions, things, the many feelings, and issues that abortion unearths in the lives of the women that have them. Yet these too are the questions that we don’t explore because we get too caught up in the current debate.

More later of course… 5 years ago

Abortion as a Frontline in the Culture Wars. Perhaps too painful to see, judging by the graphic depiction in the article. 5 years ago

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/27/us/27verizon.html?hp 5 years ago

Dear Friend,

I just participated in a campaign to support Planned Parenthood and the women it serves.

Here’s the background:

The fight for women’s access to reproductive health care has landed in Aurora, Illinois, a fast-growing city outside Chicago, where Planned Parenthood just built a large health center.

The usual suspects in the anti-choice fringe have showed up in droves – more people are protesting this clinic than Planned Parenthood has seen in a very long time. And they are doing everything in their power to try to keep our clinic doors shut. Planned Parenthood needs our help!

People like you and me are tying ribbons at the new clinic – a ribbon for every supporter. If we get massive amounts of ribbons tied, we’ll send a powerful message to the protesters that Planned Parenthood has support from across the country. And, we’ll also let the women seeking care there know that they are welcome and supported, too.

You see, what’s happening in Aurora isn’t just some isolated incident. What’s happening in Aurora today is what’s happening in America. It’s not a war on a clinic – it’s a war on women’s access to needed health care – in Aurora, and across our country.

Join me! Tie a ribbon to show your support. Click here5 years ago