MISSISSIPPI on way to banning abortion

JACKSON, Miss. - A Mississippi House committee voted Tuesday to ban most abortions in the state - an unexpected move that left abortion opponents grappling to stake out a position on a proposal that could prompt a lengthy court battle.

The only abortions allowed under the bill would be if the life of the pregnant woman were in danger. There would be no abortions allowed in cases of pregnancy caused by rape or incest.

It's similar to a bill that South Dakota lawmakers passed last week.

House Public Health Chairman Steve Holland, D-Plantersville, persuaded his committee to put the abortion restrictions into a Senate bill that was originally written to require that sonograms be performed early in pregnancy so the woman could hear a fetal heartbeat.


http://www.sunherald.com/mld/sunherald/13984932.htm

The medicaid system here is already swamped. Too many (minority) children are in foster care, but no one wants to adopt them. Over 75% of abortions here are performed on black women. There's even a group of conservative black women here who liken this statistic to a genocide, and they beg black women to keep their children--wonder what they'll do about the many children who'll end up in DHS's care?

Hope the Republican fundies are prepared for what they'll get. Because I doubt it's what they want.

Mississippi is obviously a very pro-life state - how can there be so many unadopted kids in a population that so clearly loves and cares about children? :shrug:

:sarcasm:

I know you're being sarcastic, but I thought that maybe other DUers would like to read this, because it IS unbelievable.

http://www.clarionledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060225/FEAT04/602250319

"It's not a shameful topic anymore," she said. "Some people use it as birth control."

As a Women's Resource Center mentor, Joyner acts as a big sister to young pregnant women, and has even taken in a few to live with her.

"I'm not trying to talk them into or out of an abortion," she said. "I will let them know the consequences of their decision and some of the emotional toll it will have on them later on."


'...not trying to talk them into or out of an abortion....'

yeah, right.


Thisis how they're going to get rid of Roe Vs. Wade.
South Dakota started it, now this.
one of them will makeit intact to the Supreme Court and then it's back to back alleys or, for the rich, overseas trips.....

what a world...

Watch the news....I predict a new state (Red States) every month, maybe even more as we move towards the November election with atleast 6-10 states trying to introduce this kind of legislation. The Pro-fetus fundies are drawing the lines in the sand and it will become "The" election issue this fall.....they are taking this all the way to the Supreme Court and they are counting on the fact that they did make an exception for a woman's health that it won't be overturned.

Be afraid, be very afraid....

This is a war...a war on women, a war on our future....

My state has already begun work on bills to ban abortion...

It is a sad day for us liberals in Ohio....

So much of this sounds good to their pea brains but isn't practical in practice.

It reminds me of when our Gov Goodhair decided to ban homosexuals from fostering children. That brilliant plan to pander to the righteously bigoted lasted all of about 3 days. Someone much wiser than he pointed out to him there aren't enough homes for our children as it is now.

:rofl:

Good one.

Yet the fact remains that unwanted children need someone to care for them.

Children deserve a safe and loving home. Why is that an concept abstract to so many people?

After it happens. :mad: They're fucking with people's lives.

Just pointing that out.

And don't even get me started on those "academies" that white parents use when they don't want their kids going to school with black people.

I hope all the Vichy Dems who have told me and other women not to worry our pretty little heads about it because they'll NEVER actually try to ban abortion because they need it as a wedge issue feel like the shit-heels they are.

We. Told. You.

:kick:

it's a typical human reaction for those who lack power to try to cozy up to and self-identify with those that do. They hope it will win them some special consideration. It never works in the long run...but that doesn't seem to stop people from trying.

The sad part is that I understand the "liberal" men who talk a good game but really aren't trying to do anything to change a system that they benefit from. Who really wants to voluntarily give up power?

People suck.

I really don't.

but I've had too much education in human psychology not to understand how people react when they think they have no power in a situation.

I think what we have to do is use this as a wedge issue...the women who vote republican have to have a tremendous amount of cognitive dissonance going on inside. We have to find a way to exploit that. The more uncomfortable we can make them with the Hobson's choice they're making...well, the more likely we are to finally make them so uncomfortable that they finally start consciously looking at what they're doing TO THEMSELVES...and then they can change.

Republicans are so convinced that Democrats are going to take their money and let terrorists attack that they can't possibly take a step back through the lies and see that they are selling themselves down the river.

I think we can focus on. One is how they aren't just going after abortion...many of them want to prohibit women from having access to birth control pills as well. I think we need to talk about that. That it isn't just about "life" or abortion...it goes much deeper.

But I agree it is going to be difficult. Mostly I think we just need to talk constantly about the real-world consequences of voting republican...how what they say and what they do bear no resemblance to one another. How they've actually increased government spending and are taking more of people's money...but they aren't using it to help people or fund important things like education...they're giving it away to oil executives. Things like that. They just have to be hammered at constantly. It's like erosion...it takes time but eventually all the little things add up.

Can you imagine? We're fighting for contraception.

> We. Told. You.

More. Than. Once.

Tesha

but too many told us we should worry about more important issues. Six to ten states are trying to ban Plan B. How soon do you think it will take a state to ban the pill? But, but we have more important things to worry about :sarcasm: :argh:

after all the kids born into poverty rebel against the oppression of the Repukes.

it'll happen. We lost the southern states when Johnson did the right thing with the voting rights act but now I think we'll get it back. I think this will be the downplay of the republican party.

The southern states are among the most infiltrated with Christofacists. (I am surprised at South Dakota, but not at Mississippi.)

The mid-west is well more red than the South.

> Watch Mississippi turn blue in 20 years
> after all the kids born into poverty rebel
> against the oppression of the Repukes.

What makes you think they'll vote?

If kids born into poverty grew up to vote,
we wouldn't be in teh mess we're in today.

Tesha

I think this country is ready for a revolution

So what good will this do them?

http://www.surveyusa.com/SupremeCourtJuly05.htm

Who should have
the final say on abortion?
Your state government?
The Federal Government?
Or should the government
have no say?


State Federal Neither

19% 19% 58%

Jesus's voice is moot.

Maybe if the OP had been a comic, or what Limbaugh or the latest freeper had said, or whatever--

(and i realize that there aren't)

either the fetus is a human life or it isn't.

personally, i'm pro-choice...but i'm a guy who's been vasectomized- my opinion on the issue shouldn't really matter.

already been brutalized by not forcing them to birth the children of their attackers.

I don't think the state has any right to limit access, but these laws are particularly disgusting.

my personal view is that it isn't-

BUT- if they're going to ban abortion based on the fetus legally being a human life- the conditions under which that life started is irrelevant.

'cause we all know real live women aren't even nearly as important as a blob of cells.

the Catholic doctor told my grandmother that, in the event he had to choose between my aunt and the baby, he would save the baby. My grandmother was livid that he would let her daughter die.

The baby's life was more important than my aunt's. That is what a woman is worth to some people.

to count. Still. To this day. And the truly fucked up part is they don't seem to care that the woman will be leaving behind a child to grow up motherless. That she may have other children they're leaving without a mother. And even if the woman has specifically told the doctor she wishes to have her own life considered first...once she's unconscious they routinely ignore that kind of directive.

sacrament.

Only women are supposed to be self-less.

this was the mid-70's (3 years after RvW to be exact) My sister had been in labor for well over a day at this point and she just wasn't able to deliver. She and the baby were both in distress.

My mother was already angry because she had asked the doctor to do a C-section hours ago and the now ex son-in-law and doctor had refused ("not yet time") and neither the doctor or the sil would allow my mother in to tell her daughter what was happening ...so my Mom, hardcore pro-choicer - feminist-matriarch, was in a rage. Fit to be tied as they say. The doctor had already threatened to throw her out of the hospital.

So when the doctor asked, "who lives?", my mom grabbed the sil's arm and whispered in his ear. She then went and sat down.

In the end, everyone lived.

Society has long held a women's life worthless in it's misogyny. People want to say "but it's a baby" - but what if the baby is a girl? - she too will suffer under the ignorance and violence of misogyny. So it's not about the baby or life - it's about controlling the woman. It's about some people believing they know what's best for all women. If it was about "life", then those people would respect the life of the woman - the whole life and all that being alive entails. They'd respect the whole person if they had any real respect for life at all. They'd understand that there is a big difference in existing in a misogynistic system and living in a world where you do have worth as a person. But they don't want women to live as equals - they want women to exist to serve them. They want control.

and a blob of cells don't. Which does the government wish to represent?

I agree with QuestionAll. I'm firmly pro-choice and I think that the position that abortion should be prohibited except in cases of rape or incest to be the most immoral position possible.

I am pro-choice because I believe that a woman has total control over her own body. I understand why someone who honestly believes that a fetus has civil rights would be opposed to abortion. I don't agree with them and think that most of them are a little crazy, but I understand their consternation. I also understand why these people might make exceptions when the life of the woman is threatened (although they rarely do because their thing isn't about honestly believing that a fetus has civil rights).

But, once they worrying about how a fetus was conceived, they are no longer concerned with a fetus' "rights." The argument that abortion is morally wrong completely falls apart and it becomes all about punishing people for having sex and nothing more.

because the baby is a person.

What the heck is the mother, chopped liver? She pays her taxes so the government can deny her reproductive rights? You are going to force her not only to deliver the rapist's child, but to also have to deal with that rapist for the rest of her life? She must respect his "fathers rights".

I refuse to pay taxes to a government that forces women to be receptacles for rapist men.

i said VERY CLEARLY that i'm pro-choice.

BUT- if they are going to outlaw abortion on the grounds that the fetus is a human life- how can the condition under which that life was started matter? either it's a human life or it isn't. it's as simple as that.(and once again- i say that it's not)

As brutal as that appears.

Tax payers have a right to be represented, especially if they are to be a receptacle for a male rapist.

logic. If a fetus is a person--and a person whose rights supercede those of the woman it inhabits--then of course the wackos would be against abortion in cases of rape and incest.

Women are only receptacles to the wackos.

and not by the govt taking control over their body. Does the government offer to pay to support this child or force it back to the woman. And the rapist.

Who is going to prove the man was a rapist? Who is going to define this? Is the woman's body now left up to the discretion of a jury in a rape trial, if as W says, exceptions should be made for victims of rape.

Is a woman now just a receptacle where courts will determine the fate? If a woman dies during childbirth, can her reps sue the government for forcing her to bear the child?

Get used to the questions and the lawsuits. If women lose the freedom to choose, you ain't seen nothing yet.

i have ABSOLUTELY no idea what you're trying to say there...

That has always annoyed me too. Who's to say what pregnancy is more emotionally harmful than the next. What about a woman and an abusive husband, maybe she just got the courage to leave and discovers she's pregnant. Who's to say her pregnancy wouldn't be more emotionally destructive than a different woman who could cope with a rape. Why do we think it's okay for us to pass judgment on any of it. And the people who are willing to play god with some blastocysts, but not other, if it's life, it's life, end of story. I think people are hypcrites any time they start saying this abortion is okay, but this other one isn't. Protect it all, from blastocyst to birth, or let women make their own decisions.

> Who's to say what pregnancy is more emotionally harmful
> than the next. What about a woman and an abusive husband,
> maybe she just got the courage to leave and discovers she's
> pregnant. Who's to say her pregnancy wouldn't be more
> emotionally destructive than a different woman who could
> cope with a rape.

You know, it's probably not a good idea to allow rapists to breed

Or paedophiles.

Or men who think incest is best.

Well, unless you want a planet populated by rapists, paedophiles,
and people who commit incest.

Tesha

"...You know, it's probably not a good idea to allow rapists to breed

Or paedophiles.

Or men who think incest is best.

Well, unless you want a planet populated by rapists, paedophiles,
and people who commit incest."

i wasn't aware that the propensity toward being a rapist was an inherited trait...

> i wasn't aware that the propensity toward being a rapist was an inherited trait...

Gee, I'd expect that sort of thing to be *STRONGLY* influenced by genetics
(as well as by environment, of course); most traits having to do with how
people reproduce *ARE* influenced by genetics.

There may be research, but I'll leave it to you to Google for it.

But in the absence of hard data, why would you want to take a chance
(and bring rapist-spawn to term)?

Tesha

a post like that really makes me wonder what's happened to the educational system in this country...

So you're trying to impugn me with your "witty" remarks?

Let's make it personal, well, as personal as we can since
your profile says you're a man and you'll never actually
become pregnant, short of a miracle.

Your sister is violently raped and is now quite definitely
pregnant. Do you want her to be vring the baby to term just
because it's an alleged human being, just like its rapist
daddy?

Tesha

as i said quite clearly, and more than once- i'm pro-choice.

what cites are you asking about...the thing about there supposedly being a rapist gene...? it's so utterly stupid on it's face that i didn't bother. YOU'RE the one claiming that such a gene exists- YOU supply the proof.

> what cites are you asking about...the thing about
> there supposedly being a rapist gene...? it's so utterly
> stupid on it's face that i didn't bother. YOU'RE the one
> claiming that such a gene exists- YOU supply the proof.

There's an interesting study of ducks in New Zealand.
Someone brought American Mallards over there and the
mallards are able to interbreed with the native grey
ducks.

Unfortunately for the grey males, the Mallards have a
much greater level of sexual aggressiveness compared to
the native grey males, and have now pushed the grey males
out of most areas.

Yes, my idea is obviously "utterly stupid on it's face".

Not.

Tesha

and you don't have to go all the way to new zealand to look at ducks- LOTS of species engage in similar practices.

and it proves the existence of a human rape gene, how exactly...?

nice hostility in the subject kind tho-
yikes.
:eyes:

somebody has...issues.

> and it proves the existence of a human rape gene, how exactly...?

Only *YOU* are expecting me to defend the existence
of a unitary rape gene, and really, that style of
straw-man argumentation is for children.

As you doubtless realize, I'm expecting a rather-more-
complex mix of aggression factors, as evidenced in many,
many species we're already very familiar with.

As we have done with other species, if we chose to, we
could probably turn down the dial on all the human
"aggression" factors in a few generations. And rape
might become far more rare if we did so.

Tesha

or didn't you realize that by saying that YOU were the one who was claiming the existence of a "rape gene" (since that's what it means to have an inherited trait...?)

sheesh...
some women...

:eyes:

> YOU'RE the one who suggested that rape is an inherited trait-

And that, as you *OUGHT TO KNOW*, has exactly Dick to do
with whether or not the trait is confined to a single gene.

Tesha

See, if you don't want an abortion - THEN DON'T HAVE ONE

However, for another person that may be a different CHOICE

because i'm not sure what you're trying to say, in the context of what i posted that generated your reply.

:puke:

?

It's like pulling teeth.

unfortnately, it's the only way to bring the issues to the Supreme Court.

someone who has been brain dead for the past 6 months.

These incidents demonstrate it does matter who runs the presidency and congress. I want to win back congress and the white house.

These new efforts by states to limit abortion will help do that.

What if the voting is rigged?

What if Murdoch, Fox, and MSNBC start to spin anti-choice rhetoric and images?

What happens when these "abstinence-educated" teens become the next generation of pundits and opinion-makers?

What do we do? Do we take to the streets with our righteous rage? Will the anti-choice politicians shake in their boots when they see 300,000 women take to the streets in New York City and Washington D.C.? Will there be protests of 10-20,000 women in the streets of smaller cities like Atlanta and Denver? And what will this accomplish?

If protesting the streets and voting is all we need, then why do we have what we have this intensely regressive and hostile government in office?

Giving up abortion rights with the hopes that it will "motivate the base" to vote in a mideterm election that very well may be rigged is a dangerous strategy.

:scared:

for example

in supporting all of the children who end up being born as a result of it. I.E., all of those who would otherwise have been aborted but were not because of this bill.

But I highly doubt that. :eyes:

Probably time to build a network to support an underground railroad to Canada and back. Or something like that.

Access to abortion will still be easy for the wealthy -- it's always the poor who must suffer at the hands of repression.

to help those who need it most.

struck down by the SC if it ever gets there. These cases may get struck down in other courts and die but it won't be in front of the SC for at least another year and the court may not even take the case.

I know the main character was trying to escape.

Atwood really had it right on the money.

That was the first thing I (re)read after Shrub was selected
by the Supreme Court in December of 2000.

Yipes!

Tesha

wouldn't come true. False hope. I don't know how we will ever get back from this.

And I'm glad to see this thread finally got more than 4 votes.

Yep, I knew you'd be one to take a stand. Who'd have thought women would have to fight this damned battle all over again!! Makes you wonder what all those sacrifices were for.

Look at all the unwanted children who have to be taken care of? Fine.

With Alito and Roberts sitting on the Supreme Court, abortion will be outlawed. Period. It's too late.

But it was certainly *CONFIRMED* when the Dems failed
to filibuster Alito. They proved, once again, that they
are useless.

Tesha

I know I sound horrible and I'll get shredded by other DUers for this stance. But you know, these states supported that asshole and got him into office and fucked up our country. And the thing is, it was the poor white trash in those states (hey, I'm poor and I'm white but definitely not trash - which is anyone so fricking uneducated that they would vote for an idiot to run this country instead of understanding the consequences of their vote) that helped get that idiot in office even though in the past 5 years Bush has never once done anything to help out poor white trash except maybe a tax rebate check for $300 back in 2001 (like that made a difference with the skyrocketting cost of living)

If RoeVWade is overturned it will go back to the states to make the choice of whether abortion should be allowed. And to be honest, I live in a nice blue state with pro-women people who understand that sometimes accidents happens and women need options. My state sends democrats to congress (well and one pro-choice republican) and has supported a democrat for president for the past several elections.

I barely remember this world before RoeVWade because hell, I was only 6-7 years old. But maybe we need a fricking revolution in order to give people a fricking wakeup call to the horrors they have created. We can ban abortions all we want and all that means is the rich will just find other options to get their abortions and the poor will be stuck with an unwanted pregnancy. Maybe then the poor white trash will realize just how screwed they are when they try to accomplish their dreams but can't because their saddle with too many kids and perhaps some of them not wanted because of circumstances not their own.

I feel for those liberal compatriots stuck in red state hell. But consider this, sometimes when the truly radical is forced upon the people then the people will wake up and realize they better do something before it gets too far out of hand. It can happen and it did - just look at the Dover School board 2005 elections in Dover PA. Although Dover is in a blue state it's in a strong red section of the state. And yet when the old school board insisted on pushing forward with shoving Intelligent Design down the throats of their student, the Dover voters woke up and voted them ALL out.

Let's hope we can do the same kind of revolution in red states across the country.

blame themselves, or life, or God's wrath or whatever. If they don't understand cause & effect related to voting for Junior, they are certainly not going to understand cause (loss of reproductive rights) and effect (continued poverty and helplessness).

why should the stupidity of these people in other states affect the progressive values of my state? I wish I could do more and I would if Abortion is banned in other states but only that I would provide a free place to bunk for out-of-towners in need of services.

I can't worry about what South Dakota or Mississippi is doing to repress their people. I need to fight to ensure that the repression doesn't spread into my state. Even as blue as Delaware is, the southern part of our state rivals that of Mississippi or South Dakota. My attitude to those in Delaware who want to repress women in my own state, well they need to move the fuck out to somewhere in Jesusland where they can have all the repression they want. Maybe they can swap homes/job with some smart progressives in a red state and in the end will all be happy!

and securing those bastions of blue that we have. God knows those Christofacists will be riling up places like Garden Grove and San Bernardino here in CA.

To borrow a quote from Dr. King "Injustice anywhere threatens justice everywhere".

You can't worry about repression in South Dakota or Mississippi? Then why are you even a Democrat?

what's left.

Personally, I am for fighting these bastards everywhere and anywhere. Sent donations out this morning and will send more with my next paycheck.

I've been fighting the battle for 20+ years.

I can't be worrying about elsewhere and then find out that the fundies start taking over my own state.

And to be honest, until some people start hitting rock bottom then they are never going to do anything to make a change. It's obvious that states like Mississippi and South Dakota are willing to do whatever it takes to repress people even though for 20+ years I've been a part of the battle to show them why they shouldn't.

This isn't me being a bad democrat, this is me showing tough love. You don't have to post some thread questioning my commitment to the democratic party because if anything it tells me I'm even more right than ever before. Red States need some fricking tough love. If I had a friend who time and time again disregarded the sound advice given to them and putting themselves into peril, eventually I'm going to stop handing it out and let them fall on their ass.

But the beauty of tough love is that even while their floudering I would never be far from their side. Because eventually when it gets bad enough they'll ask for our help and we'll be there. And then we'll be able to rid our country of fundamentalism!

but I'm not buying it. You aren't practicing tough love on a friend. What you're doing is abandoning your actual friends is those states when they need you most because you don't think the rest of the people in those states are worth the effort. As a liberal woman in a deeply fucked up right-leaning state I think I have a little perspective on this issue. I really have no time for people who would write me and my rights off until some amazing enlightenment happens for the rest of Texas.

I don't disagree that you need to fight there where you are. But your attitude about people in states that aren't so fabulously liberal as yours is annoying and condescending.

Why in the name of all that's holy would you wish hitting rock bottom on me and other women like me who are stuck in red states? That's the part that sticks in my craw. It isn't just fundy republican women and those too apathetic to vote that you are condemning to live with "rock bottom"...it's ME Lynne and other hard-working progressive women like me. Try to remember that when you decide to practice your so-called "tough love" on the population of entire states.

where the republicans are trying but maybe we can make a difference.

And my attitude is 20 years of frustration watching fundies taking over these states and trying hard as I can to fight it only to have them keep doing it and keep doing it even worse.

It's obvious that these states do not want it or this deep slide would have stopped ages ago. Hell I remember when Texas was a haven of liberalism.

You can call it all that you want and I know that's out of frustration of being stuck in a red state. But personally I think it's this entire country getting too lax on understanding the importance of why women need choice and maybe when they realize what they've lost then these lazy-ass people who are too stupid to vote anything outside of the one party that is repressing them the most will fight back.

Revolution can be a good thing and personally that's what it's going to take to finally wake up these people and make them realize the stupid decisions they've made at the election polls for the past 20-30 years.

watching fundies take over those states...try living in one for the last 35 years.

I know we're fundamentally on the same side here. And I know we're both speaking from frustration.

My problem is that it's really easy to say a revolution is needed or that states need to hit "rock bottom" when it isn't your state where it's going to happen.

Try to remember when you express your frustration with people in "red" states that many of the people you are talking to are living this nightmare and we react from that place.

I'm going to take a break from this for a while. Try to get my head in a better place so that I don't scream at people who don't deserve it.

Yelling at people who do deserve it...now that's a completely difference matter altogether. :evilgrin:

P.S. You should be here this weekend...we're having a Fillibuster for Independence down at the capital. Can you image a whole bunch of feisty Texas Dems like you know with a microphone and 24 solid hours to talk? :scared: ;)

but my mind isn't changed a bit.

We've got our own problems up here. I mean, it's not like we're solidly blue up here in the Mid-Atlantic region. More and more I see dumbass fundie crap show up like the school-prayer issue down in the southern part of my state. To me, fighting to keep church & state separate in my own state is a higher priority that what is happening in Mississippi, South Dakota or elsewhere.

I just don't want to wake up one day and find that my state has turned red too.

who has seen it happen...you have to nip it in the bud NOW. They're insidious those fundies. Like crabgrass. When you think you've finally gotten rid of them...they pop right back up. And for allegely moral people they're tricky. They lie. When they started down here they were not even close to 100 percent up front about what it was they would do if elected. They'd pick one or two issues to get people all het up about. So people would vote for someone who is "against taxes" and end up with someone who wants forced prayer in school, burkas on women, and a return to the gold standard.

Do whatever you have to do to eradicate them now. If nothing else, my state's Democratic response can serve as your bad example of what NOT to do to deal with them. For years the party down here blew the fundy nuts off...we had control of the state legislature and thought nothing could change that. So we got complacent and we didn't take the threat seriously. I hope people in other states can see that and do something a LOT more pro-active.

Good luck.

Lynne, I said this the other day here at DU, and if my
posting was any indicator, yes, you can expect to get
roundly trashed for your/our belief, at least if your
post is noticed.

But I really think the poor women of Jesusland who keep
on voting for Rich, White, Christian, Republican Men to
oppress them really need the metaphorical equivalent of
a 2x6 applied to their heads to wake them the F**K up!

And I'm actually sufficiently cyncical to beleive that
*NOT EVEN THIS* will be sufficient; they'll just hit
the snooze button again.

Secession from Jesusland is the only alternative that
I see working.

Tesha

if they are not married.

That is their view.

Christ died to I could force my personal morality on YOU.
Christ died so I could hate YOU.
Anyone who is not like me is YOU.

Same thing with the Dakotas?

And why the hell are Democrats spearheading this attack on choice? in SD it was a Woman Democrat!

But the purpose of these laws is to be test cases to overturn Roe v Wade.

Re: Dems

This is why you need to check out a candidate's beliefs and not just vote the letter D.

my home state of PA had a brutal attack on abortion by a flaming liberal Democratic governor, Bob Casey. He even refused to endorse Clinton over abortion and was denied speaking rights at the Dem convention. He was great on all the other issues though.

But in the meantime, we need to watch the primaries.

and they had a plan ready to implement.

I read in a post yesterday that protest marches by NARAL and Planned Parenthood are completely ineffective anymore. The only way to fight this is to actively register to vote the 20 MILLION SINGLE WOMEN who don't vote.

We have to stir them up (by providing history of suffrage and women's reproductivity and privacy rights) the way that the Christian rightwing stirs up the pro-fetus/anti-gay community!

That would make such a difference!

Because if we concentrate on a particular area, you can be sure that the voting will be rigged in that area next election.

because of different laws and rights in this new America. It's going to get chaotic.

We're going to see more of these bills. They'll be challenged in court. When the cases get to SCOTUS, the new laws will be upheld. Good-bye Roe.

///

Are they hellbent on creating serfs of the women in those states? Are women really going to let these people force them into pregnancy, and basically uterine servitude???

The second state in a week!!!! After bush got his fundamentalists appointed to SCOTUS (without much opposition, I might add with much disgust!) the religious right feels its time to push the issue.
I just wonder what they would do if their new judges sided agaist them and determined their state laws unconstitutional. THAT would be something!!!!

sad to say

I heard on a pro-life radio station today, that the legislation is on Gov Rounds desk and he may not sign it. There have been signals from President Bush not to pass the legislation. Bush said "I have always supported a women's right to an abortion in cases of rape, incest and the life of the mother". The pro-lifers are feeling they are losing the battle because of Bush's statements.


http://www.state.sd.us/governor/

Great post

Remember, that, for many Americans, Bush is still to far to the left. I think we oughta chew on that lest we choke on it someday.

Since if this is the only way that someone who can't travel out of MS can get an abortion, they will do anything to abort a baby if they're that desperate. Probably end up killing themselves in the meantime also.

Besides, here's pregnantpause's abortion law map.



Are we saying we want to regress to that of a third world country? In general, the countries that outlaw abortion or heavily restrict it are in Africa and Latin America. (Of course there are exceptions).

Pro lifers - killing women one coathanger at a time.

Everyone gets upset when these loons start banning abortion but no one wants to confront them/ Why?