Posts Tagged ‘ abortion ’

WWND?

April 8, 2010
By

Ladies, I need advice. Here’s the dilemma. What would you do if you wanted to affect positive change but you knew the change would not be well received if it was presented by a woman to an entrenched ole’ boys network? My head is telling me to get a man to make my case publicly and to stay behind the scenes for the sake of my cause.  After all, isn’t the cause more important than being right?

But I don’t think it’s that simple. By remaining behind the scenes, do I risk winning the battle and losing the war? My heart is telling me to own the process and the “boys” will have to just deal with it. If I take this course of action, my proposal might fail, but at least a woman will have stepped forward and spoken up for what she believes. And frankly, I think we need to see a lot more of that going on. But then again, if I do speak out and lose the battle, does the establishment get to use me as yet another proof point for why women don’t belong in the game?

When Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi was strategizing to move the health care bill through the House of Representatives last fall, she negotiated with Rep. Bart Stupak and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and struck a deal. Stupak would add an amendment to the bill severely restricting a woman’s access to reproductive services and in return his cronies would pass the bill. Following the passage of the amendment, women had to choose between accepting a bill that sacrificed their rights and supporting reform that would help so many Americans.  

Obviously, my own dilemma is much smaller than healthcare reform and reproductive rights. But still it’s a compromise and the personal is political. What should I choose: stand up and fight or shut up and win?

WWND? What would YOU do?

Another Wild Weekend

March 22, 2010
By

We spent all day yesterday glued to our Blackberry and to C-SPAN. The House finally voted in favor of healthcare reform sometime around 11 p.m. Sunday – but not before some very ugly moments elapsed and some serious negotiation –using women’s health as the bargaining chip – took place.

On Saturday, protestors in Washington yelled hateful racial and homophobic slurs at several Congressmen, and in cyberspace plenty of hateful posts could be viewed in Twitter streams. Then late Sunday night, someone on the House floor yelled “baby killer” at Rep. Bart Stupak.

Stupak had been threatening to derail healthcare reform unless the final bill included his amendment containing some very restrictive abortion language. But the bill before the House contained the Nelson amendment, which also restricted access to abortion coverage. Even though pro-choice advocates said the Nelson amendment was a major blow to women’s reproductive rights, Stupak wouldn’t yield. After whisperings about closed door negotiations between Stupak and Pelosi, and Pelosi and pro-choice Democrats, a deal was struck. President Obama agreed to sign an Executive Order effectively supporting the Hyde amendment, which is already in place and prohibits the use of federal funds for abortions, and Stupak agreed to support the bill.

Meanwhile, closer to home, it looked as if we might be getting our first application for the job we just posted. Late Friday a group of supporters posted on Blue Mass Group and Facebook that Harmony Wu, a Needham, Mass. resident and Democratic activist, was considering a run for the 9th Congressional District if Rep. Steven Lynch voted against the healthcare bill. He was indeed a “no” vote.

Here is a statement from Ms. Wu issued this morning. “Late last night, members of Congress cast an historic vote to pass comprehensive health care reform. I know I share my excitement of its passage with millions of Americans across the country. My gratitude goes to all who worked tirelessly to earn this important victory; when we work together, and each do our part, we can make great things happen. As excited as I am about this historic step toward health care for all, I am extremely disappointed that my Congressperson voted against the health care reform bill, demonstrating that he is out of touch with our families’ most important concerns. With this betrayal of key Democratic principles and priorities, we in the 9th district must strongly question whether Mr. Lynch can effectively represent us and stand up for our values. In the coming days, I will be in discussion with my family, members of my community, activists, and voters from across the district as I consider challenging Mr. Lynch for the Democratic nomination for Congress from our 9th district.”

We don’t know enough about Harmony Wu yet to determine if she meets all of the qualifications outlined in our job description. But she is definitely one to watch.

A job opening and an induction

March 19, 2010
By

Wanted: A candidate for the Mass Ninth Congressional District. This individual will represent all of the people of the district and lead with courage and integrity. The candidate must value diversity and equality and must not allow their personal religious views to enter into politics. Must be able to vote for the people — not just to keep the seat. Disingenuous candidates need not apply. A strong track record of pro-woman actions and support is a plus. A small army of supporters is ready to assist you in this position. Applications will be reviewed immediately.

And now, an induction: Hello Ladies has “deemed” that Representative Stephen Lynch D-MA “passes” the test for an Ignorant Male Legislator Award and we are inducting him into the group. Rep. Lynch probably could have joined after he voted yes on the Stupak amendment, but we gave him a pass. However, after hearing his “disingenuous” reasons for why he plans to vote no on healthcare reform, we are welcoming him to the club.

Lynch told WBZ radio that the bill “stripped out all the significant reform.” We disagree. In the current system women pay significantly higher premiums and face other discriminatory practices based on pre-existing conditions that include having a c-section, being raped or having been the victim of domestic abuse. Righting those wrongs is pretty significant. The bill would also help the currently uninsured, an estimated 32 million Americans. Again, rather significant.

We agree with Lynch on one thing: this bill is far from perfect. For instance, the anti-abortion amendments in both the House and the Senate version are some of the most restrictive moves against reproductive rights in decades. And the lack of a public option is highly disappointing. But we need healthcare reform and cannot afford to “go back to the drawing board” for an indefinite number of years.

Lynch’s move smells of a calculated political play to hang onto his seat in November following a Brownswell of voters who shook up the Commonwealth in January.

One more thing: Katha Pollitt has a great piece in The Nation on pro-choicers and healthcare reform. Check it out here.

The Right to Life

March 16, 2010
By

More than two women die every day in the United States from pregnancy related causes. Repeat. More than two women die every day in the United States from pregnancy related causes. The incidences of “near misses,” complications where a woman comes close to dying, have increased since 2005. The maternal death rate has almost doubled since 1987. And some officials believe the numbers are underreported as the U.S. has no federal requirements to report maternal deaths.

These disturbing facts were recently highlighted in a report called “Deadly Delivery” published by Amnesty International. That’s right, Amnesty, the human rights organization. From the report, “According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), approximately half of all maternal deaths in the USA are preventable. Preventable maternal mortality is not just a public health issue, it is a human rights issue.”

The United States spends more on healthcare than any other country in the world. Yet women in this country face a greater risk of dying from pregnancy or childbirth than women in 40 other countries. Women of color face the highest risk. The risk of dying for a black woman is four times greater than for a white woman. The report points out that women of color are less likely to begin a pregnancy in good health due to lack of access to healthcare, thereby increasing the risk of pregnancy-related complications. Women of color represent 51 percent of all uninsured women even though they only represent 32 percent of all women in this country.

Said Larry Cox, executive director of Amnesty International USA, in a press release about the report, “Mothers die not because the United States can’t provide good care, but because it lacks the political will to make sure good care is available to all women.”

The report goes into great detail about what contributes to these staggering numbers including lack of protocols around c-sections and VBACs (virginal birth after caesarean), inadeqaute access to contraception and family planning methods, lack of comprehensive postpartum care and not enough prenatal care. Women cite lack of access to healthcare facilities, no paid time off from work, no childcare, language and a host of other barriers as obstacles to obtaining prenatal care. The challenges are greatest for women in poverty and women of color.

Amnesty also places responsibility on the current healthcare system. The report states, “…under the existing system, the way in which the health care system in the USA is structured and financed is failing to ensure that all women have equal access to the health care they need. …Half of all births are covered by private insurance. However, policies that exclude coverage for maternal care are not uncommon and pregnant women may also find that they cannot get private health insurance because pregnancy is regarded as a “pre-existing condition”. Some 42 percent of births are covered by a government-funded program for limited categories of people on low incomes – Medicaid. However, complicated bureaucratic requirements mean that women eligible for public assistance often experience significant delays in receiving prenatal care.”

Which brings us to healthcare reform. We have asserted all along that healthcare should not be a political issue. It is a matter of equity. As President Obama moves to pass some type of a healthcare overhaul, it is infuriating that people and organizations are derailing the efforts in the name of “life.” Supposedly, in the name of life, Reps. Stupak and Pitts, Senator Nelson, and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops would not only restrict access to the full spectrum of reproductive health services, but Stupak would also derail the entire process, if he can gain the votes. Let’s be honest. “Life” is not the issue here. If it were, wouldn’t the lives of American women matter too?

Stupak inspires deadline extension for Ignorant Male Legislator Week

March 4, 2010
By

 I was sick last week* and therefore did not finish the posts for Ignorant Male Legislator Week. But just for you, Rep. Bart Stupak, I have extended the deadline.

Mr. Stupak appeared on ABC’s “Good Morning America” today and vowed to block healthcare reform unless “that kind of language” in the Senate bill is removed. The language he is referring to is the language on abortion courtesy of Senator Ben Nelson (who also makes the Ignorant Male Legislator list). Cecile Richards, President of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, has said of the Nelson language, “If the current Senate language introduced by Senator Ben Nelson is maintained, it would result in the most significant restriction in access to abortion coverage in the nearly 35 years since the U.S. Congress first adopted the Hyde Amendment.”

But “that language” isn’t good enough for Stupak. Nope, Stupak says he and 11 other Democrats are prepared to block healthcare reform unless his even more stringent language from the House bill is included in the final bill. “We’re prepared to take the responsibility,” he said.

Stupak and Nelson are distorting the truth in order to advance their agenda – destroying a woman’s right to choose. Stupak says his bill merely protects current law that bars federal funding for abortion. Not true. His bill is much more restrictive than current law. And he claim’s Nelson’s bill would allow federal funding of abortion. More distortions.

Stupak told George Stephanopoulos, “I want to see health care pass. We must have health care but, boy, there are some principles and beliefs that some of us are not going to pass.”

Bottom line: Mr. Life-is-precious-Stupak is willing to gamble with the lives of all Americans in need of healthcare reform unless his principles and beliefs are adopted. And what does he believe? That women should not have rights.

Watch the GMA interview here. And for in-depth coverage on this unsettling issue, visit RH Reality Check.

*I received treatment because I, unlike tens of millions of Americans, am insured.

Healthcare Reform and Women’s Rights

March 3, 2010
By

While we’ve been away and busy so many interesting things have transpired. So today, a roundup.

One of the things that had me occupied last week was my health – nothing serious just the standard end-of-winter cough, fever, chills - and I had to visit the doctor and take medicine. My appointment was the same day as President Obama’s healthcare summit, and as I watched the proceedings on C-SPAN I was grateful to be insured and to receive timely treatment when I need it. It turns out Erin Kotecki Vest, aka Queen of Spain, was grateful too. Her story is more dramatic than mine and a highly recommended read on the need for healthcare reform.

Speaking of healthcare, there is a heartbreaking and blood-boiling story out of Nicaragua. A pregnant woman, with metastasized cancer, is not getting treatment. The reason? Chemotherapy or radiation might harm her 10 week fetus. Under Nicaragua’s draconian abortion laws, doctors are prohibited from doing anything to help her. Abortion, even when the mother’s health is in danger, is against the law in that country. This woman is the sole caregiver of her 10-year old daughter. While the government protects the rights of the unborn, who protects this 10-year old girl? As always, Jodi Jacobson at RH Reality Check has the details.

And while we are discussing the rights of women in other countries, remember this coming Monday, March 8, is International Woman’s Day. This year’s theme is “Equal rights, equal opportunity: Progress for all.” We will participate in Gender Across Borders blogging event that day. In the meantime, Morgan Warners wrote a post, “Why this man will be celebrating women on March 8″ over at the Huffington Post. It’s another great read. 

Enjoy.

Ignorant Male Legislator Week

February 24, 2010
By

This week Hello Ladies is observing “Ignorant Male Legislator Week.” Yesterday, we took note of Virginia Delegate Robert G. Marshall, and his outrageous comments about disabled children and abortion.

Today, we focus on Rep. Carl Wimmer of Utah, who sponsored bill HB12 which ”amends provisions of the Utah Criminal Code to describe the difference between abortion and criminal homicide of an unborn child and to remove prohibitions prosecution of a woman for killing an unborn child or committing criminal homicide of an unborn child.”

Here’s the problem. The bill states, “A person commits criminal homicide if the person intentionally, knowingly, recklessly, with criminal negligence, or acting with a mental state otherwise specified in the statute defining the offense, causes the death of another human being, including an unborn child at any stage of its development.”

Define “recklessly.” This bill could turn women who have miscarriages into murder suspects. Take me, for example. I slipped on the ice when I was pregnant. Was leaving my house between November and March reckless? I was in a fender bender when I was pregnant. Was driving reckless? I ate a salad with gorgonzola cheese in it when I was pregnant. Was eating one serving of blue-veined cheese reckless? If I had miscarried during that pregnancy, should I have been prosecuted? Will miscarriage become the new rape? Blame the woman and put her on trial for her poor choices and bad behavior?

It’s not that far-fetched. We’ve already seen a case where a woman was jailed for falling down the stairs while pregnant. Then there is Samantha Burton who was ordered by the court to remain in the hospital while pregnant. And don’t forget the woman who was jailed for being pregnant and HIV positive.

Wimmer also sponsored HB200, informed consent legislation that makes ultraounds available to women prior to having an abortion. Too bad he didn’t work to make more ultrasounds available to women as part of their prentatal care.

This is the same Wimmer who opposed a ban on cell phone use by under-18 drivers. On that topic he was quoted in The Salt Lake Tribune as saying, ”Government does not need to mandate every good idea…We are a free people.”

Men like Carl Wimmer claim to value human life. Sure they do, as long as that life doesn’t belong to a woman who has already been born. 

So, who should we feature tomorrow?

This is Ignorance: Updated

February 23, 2010
By

 (Update: Click here for video of Marshall making his remarks.)

A Virginia legislator, while protesting funding for Planned Parenthood, said disabled children are punishment for aborting  firstborns.

Virginia Delegate Robert G. Marshall (R) said, “The number of children who are born subsequent to a first abortion with handicaps has increased dramatically. Why? Because when you abort the first born of any, nature takes its vengeance on the subsequent children.”

“In the Old Testament, the first born of every being, animal and man, was dedicated to the Lord. There’s a special punishment Christians would suggest.”

You can hear the remarks  here.  

Marshall has since apologized, saying his comments were “misconstrued.” From his website:

“A story by Capital News Service regarding my remarks at a recent press conference opposing taxpayer funding for Planned Parenthood conveyed the impression that I believe disabled children are a punishment for prior abortions. No one who knows me or my record would imagine that I believe or intended to communicate such an offensive notion. I have devoted a generation of work to defending disabled and unwanted children, and have always maintained that they are special blessings to their parents. Nevertheless, I regret any misimpression my poorly chosen words may have created as to my deep commitment to fighting for these vulnerable children and their families.”

I don’t think I misinterpreted what he said about people with disabilities being “vengeance” and “punishment’. And his reasoning about first borns was absurd. How ignorant.  

But then again, this is the same man who supposedly  opposed abortion in the case of rape and incest because “sometimes incest is voluntary”.  And he is the same man that compared a budget bill to slavery.

Gender Parity at the Olympics? Not Yet

February 14, 2010
By

My five year old had the stomach bug this weekend which meant she spent most of the last two days lying on the couch, snuggling her Daddy and watching the Winter Olympics on TV. How sweet. Not really. Why? Because the Olympics are just one more piece of evidence for my little girl that women are not equal; that she can’t grow up and be anything she wants to be. At least not yet.

It’s disheartening. Men have been competing in ski jumping as an Olympic event since 1924. Women, however, are not allowed to compete in this event.

It’s not for lack of interest. Several women jumpers filed a discrimination suit against the Vancouver Organizing Committee (VANOC) and the International Olympic Committee (IOC), hoping to be able to compete this year.

David Amber of ESPN asked Alan Johnson, director and coach for the men’s project X U.S. Ski Jumping team, why women can’t compete. The numbers seem to be there. From the ESPN inteview: “This season [2009-10] there are eight ski cross International Ski Federation (FIS) events, with an average of 18 competitors representing seven different nations; there are 12 ski jumping FIS events with an average of 45 competitors representing 12 nations. So you must ask yourself, if the IOC denied ladies ski jumping based on lack of numbers and development of the sport on the same day they invited in ladies ski cross, how can this be justified when skier cross is far less developed than ski jumping? It’s not even close.”

Supposedly, in 2005 Gian-Franco Kasper, president of the International Ski Federation, said ski jumping was harmful to women’s reproductive health. How can that be the reason when young girls train so hard to be Olympic gymnasts they don’t begin to menstruate until they are in their 20s? I don’t buy the IOC’s concern for women’s health.

The most convincing argument I’ve read for barring women from ski jumping was this quote from Women’s Ski Jumping Vice President Vic Method in a Wall Street Journal article. “This is a big macho event in Europe. If suddenly you’ve got these little size-four girls jumping comparable distances, the men don’t look so macho anymore.”

For more on this topic, visit the website for “Women On Top,” a documentary that follows the U.S. Women’s Ski Jumping Team and their quest to compete in the Olympics.

I will hold off for now on telling my daughter that girls are considered equal to boys and can do or be anything. It’s not true at the Olympics. It’s not the case at work.  It doesn’t play out on the Op-Ed pages. It’s not the case in Washington. Some people don’t even want girls to make their own medical decisions.

But I do plan on telling her someday (perhap during the next Winter Olympics). So let’s get to work and reach true parity.

Super Bowl, Super Hypocrisy

February 3, 2010
By

As you have probably heard, there is a major controversy brewing around one of the Super Bowl ads scheduled to run this year. CBS has accepted an ad from Focus on the Family featuring college football player and Heisman trophy winner Tim Tebow and his mother Pam.

While living in the Philippines and pregnant with Tim, Pam Tebow says she was counseled to have an abortion because she had been taking harmful medication to treat dysentery. Pam chose to keep the baby and the result was her football star son.

Focus on the Family describes itself as, “a global non-profit Christian organization with a vision for healing brokenness in families, communities and societies worldwide through Christ. The purpose of the ministry is to strengthen, defend and celebrate the institution of the traditional family and to highlight the unique and irreplaceable role that it plays in God’s larger story of redemption.”

In January the group issued a press release about the ad. “The 30-second spot from the international family-help organization will feature college football star Tim Tebow and his mother, Pam. They will share a personal story centered on the theme of “Celebrate Family, Celebrate Life.”

The Women’s Media Center (WMC) has called on CBS to cancel the ad but so far the media entity is not budging.

I have been trying to write something about the ad and the controversy for days but there is just so much to say that I’ve been struggling to organize all of my thoughts. So, in the spirit of one of CBS’ own shows, I’ve decided to do a Top Ten List. Here are my “Top Ten Reasons CBS is the Most Hypocritical Organization Ever.”

  1. CBS had a policy not to air advocacy ads up until – well, nobody is really sure when.
  2. CBS reversed the policy but apparently only told Focus on the Family about the policy reversal. In fact, CBS and Focus on the Family have been discussing this ad for months.
  3. In past years, this “no advocacy” policy has been the excuse for blocking ads from PETA and MoveOn.org. CBS also blocked this religious ad.
  4. CBS ignored calls from the WMC to cancel the ad stating, “At CBS, our standards and practices process continues to adhere to a process that ensures all ads — on all sides of an issue — are appropriate for air. We will continue to consider responsibly produced ads from all groups for the few remaining spots in Super Bowl XLIV.”  But then we learned CBS rejected an ad from a man-only dating site. Stating, “…the creative is not within the Network’s Broadcast Standards for Super Bowl Sunday.” View the ad here.
  5. One of the concerns the WMC has with the Tebow ad is that women should have a choice in determining what is best for them when it comes to reproductive rights. Pam Tebow had a choice after all.  But did she really? Abortion is illegal in the Philippines and was when Tebow was pregnant with Tim.
  6. With its slippery, ever-changing policies, CBS is practicing censorship, plain and simple.
  7. CBS has no business, absolutely none, dictating morality. They are airing the Super Bowl after all. You know the Super Bowl, the annual winter rite where male athletes are super heroes and women wearing very little do suggestive dances on the sidelines to cheer them on.
  8.  8. CBS is the same organization that aired the Grammys. You know the Grammys, the show that featured Jamie Foxx singing his date rape anthem, “Blame it on the Alcohol.” Click here to read the repulsive lyrics.
  9. 9. At that same Grammy show last weekend, CBS bleeped out the f-words during a performance by Lil Wayne (who is headed to prison next week), Drake and Eminem.
  10. 10. According to the Parents Television Council report on violence in television, “Women in Peril,” CBS showed more incidences of violence against women on screen during 2004 to 2009 than ABC, NBC and even Fox. So while CBS wants to protect us from abortion and men kissing, and four-letter words, they have no problem airing violent imagery-especially when the victims of the violence are women.

Ladies, I’m not CBS so I am not going to try to dictate what is right and wrong, or what you should or shouldn’t do. If you enjoy football, or advertising, or the potato salad your friends serve, then by all means, tune in to the game, attend that party this Sunday. But be aware of what you are watching. The Super Bowl is not a family event. The Super Bowl is not some unifying, national celebration. The Super Bowl is a football game played by well-paid men, glorified for their athletic abilities. It is run by a major media entity with shifting censorship policies and it is paid for by organizations that make a pretty profit portraying women as sex objects and victims of violence.

Party on!

If you want to sign a petition asking CBS to pull the Focus on the Family ad, click here.

Related Posts with Thumbnails
Get Adobe Flash playerPlugin by wpburn.com wordpress themes