The slippery slope toward gradually giving up women's rights, bit by bit.

I was reading an article I had saved from the New York Times in 2006 called Pro-Life Nation. It is about the criminalization of doctors and women in El Salvador. When I read it the first time I did not take it that seriously, as it seemed not to apply to our world so much. As I read it again, I realize we are actually giving up bits and pieces of rights for women all the time now. And it is not just the pro-life Republicans doing it.

Pro-Life Nation



I don't know how the bills fared since then, but failure of one bill will not stop them from trying again. Two supposedly enlightened countries moving toward more restrictions and criminalization of abortions. Tragic.




Donna Ferrato for The New York Times
The Judge: Margarita Sanabria, a magistrate who has handled several abortion cases. "The more years one can send someone away for, the better it is for the prosecutors," she says.

Don't forget to look at the other photos at the link.

There is more.



We are easily accepting in our party now of telling women they must understand and accept the pro-lifers into the party. I agree there is a place. I just don't think some of our leaders realize that some of these groups who are now dictating our right to choose policies (Democrats for Life is one) are not looking for moderation and compromise. They are looking for control.

We are, a few of us, questioning that our new party chairman is not pro-choice and doesn't not even support civil unions. Most don't see a problem. I do see one.

There is a lot going on in our country. Until the religious right made a big deal and coined a new term...partial birth abortions...there weren't many. Only those that were matters of life or death, or serious deformity...decisions best left between the woman and her doctor. Now it has gone so far that the Supreme Court will permit a ban on them..with no exception for the health of the mother.

New laws taking away women's rights.



The Supreme Court went further than they had before and did not allow the part about the health of the woman.



It was easy enough to get the ban on late term abortions. The Democrats helped it along.



I am been thinking a lot this week with all the events that are happening. I think when the rights of women are compromised, when the rights of the GLBT community are compromised...when both are asked to step back and be respectful of the new pro-life Democrats...then we truly are heading down that slippery slope. Ever try to scramble back up one of those slopes? Very hard to do.

No disrespect intended, I just don't get it.

I'm old enough to remember Roe v Wade and the voice of the women's movements, news coverage, legislative actions, etc.

Now it's as if the subject is irrelevant (a done deal) for the vast majority of women.

Like I said, I just don't get that.

the days when it was illegal. Hasn't really been that long ago, and we seem to heading there again.

women are their own worst enemies when they play into how they can be portrayed or manipulated by money and position. Women's rights are fragile. They've not had them here in America very long...and less all around the world for centuries.

I have been an RN for a whole lotta years, a major portion being spent in the NICU (Newborn Intensive Care Unit). This, both before and after Roe vs. Wade. The difference between these two eras gives new meaning to the term "like night and day." There are HORROR stories that I will someday write about in the "before" era. Suffice it to say, I am fiercely protective of a EVERONE'S right to choose what happens to their own body.

It is unsettling to watch male political pundits moralizing about what a woman “should” or “should not” be allowed to do with her reproductive system. They sit in judgement with their male reproductive organs totally "safe" from unwanted intrusion, never having experienced the miracle of the uterine lining shedding itself every month, or the ineffable joy of feeling the first flutter of life in utero or the agonizing and heartfelt childbearing decisions made by millions of women every day.

I want to scream at these men, It is none of your business. This is MY body! How dare you invade the most vulnerable, softest, most nurturing and loving part of myself with your righteous dictums? Is there no right to privacy? Is there no respect for my basic right to dominion over my most intimate bodily functions?

And I imagine how it would play out if the roles were reversed.

As for the women who fantasize that their righteous "Godly" cause gives them permission to control what happens in MY body, I repeat, imagine how it would play out if the roles were reversed, and STAY THE HELL OUT OF MY UTERUS!

Yes, the slippery slope is alive and well. It has been generously greased with Bush's latest legislative atrocity. There is a lot of work ahead of us.

and welcome to DU, on the number of posts if not the "member since" date.

:hug:

before Roe v. Wade and have grown up with what I consider a dangerous sense of entitlement. And yes, the "every sperm is sacred" crowd is doing its level best to return us to the coathanger days.

As long as there are herbs, there will be those who know how to use them to control conception and unwanted pregnancies.

yet ok for the death penalty? They are in the same species "made in god's image". What Bible verse, what magickal power, what spirit-power do they get? This is really about power; the nations that strongly restrict birth control tend to have a brain drain, they are not known for innovating much of anything. Also, those nations devalue their children-the OPPOSITE of what fundy types SAY; the doc "Born into Brothels" & even closer to home, that state that passed a law to drop off infants & older children have also been dropped off.

They have a fetish for the fetus. It ends at birth, they are usually against school lunches & breakfasts, usually against healthcoverage for children, against schools' anti-bully laws, against the UN's Rights of Children measure.

that people who were pro-life/pro-death penalty are like fisherman: They have the attitude of, "Throw it back, wait until it gets bigger, and THEN kill it." It was meant as a joke, but it's so true, IMO.

Death penalty and killing babies has absolutely nothing to do with the REAL agenda of the *pro-life* movement.

Women are getting entirely too uppity. What with their reproductive freedom and all. And if they are allowed to marry other women!!! OMG!!! Imagine how horrible the world would be if women didn't submit to their biologically based NEED for male control. :sarcasm:

Its all about it REMAINING a man's world. We women are just to clean the toilets and provide other treats.

Thanks for articulating the inherent hubris in the those who would "play God" with women's reproductive organs.

that many of them are too young to remember.

Those of us who were around in the days before abortion was legal are now past childbearing age. I sometimes wonder how many younger women are actively taking up the torch from the generation before it.

Maybe they just assume that it's a right that can never be taken away...

Maybe their lives are too busy to give much thought to the possibility that it could be taken away.

I don't know why they seem to be dropping the ball, but it disturbs me to see where this might all be headed...

:(

From what I can see, none. A couple years ago I took a US Government class, and the make up was roughly 50-50 male to female. When we got to Roe v Wade, the professor asked who supported the decision. Two people held their hands up, me and another guy about my age (40 now). I was shocked. The next three lectures may have swayed a few, but this is the babble belt.

maybe even older women, who knows. people just assume that that right is there and will be there. so they don't really pay attention to folks trying to take it away. it's like habeus corpus. people who supported the patriot act and bush's bs in trying to get rid of our rights figured it was ok because we always have the right to go before a judge and we are american citizens... so the wiretapping and all that... no biggie. but they fail to realize that it is like letting someone plant vegetables on your property. once you let that slide then say in a couple of years if you want to use that for something else, because they were able to use it then they can keep using it. you give up the right to stop it by just doing nothing.

i know i am making no sense here, but in my head it makes sense. lol. people are taking these rights for granted. we cannot do that. we must be vigilant. or else we will lose our freedoms and rights. and it will be our own fault.

And plenty of affluent women may have the attitude that if they or their daughter get pregnant unexpectedly, they can simply be flown to a state or country where abortion is legal, never mind the laws in their own state.

Why wouldn't I? I was born after Roe v Wade. I knew the women before me fought hard to give me the right to choose just like the women before them fought for the right to birth control and the women before them fought for the right to vote. Young Americans aren't taught that they're rights could vanish. We learn that once it's in the Constitution, then it's a done deal. Forever.

What pisses me off is that women DO need to know that past battles might have to be fought again. The amount of time and energy spent on defending the rights we already have takes away time and energy we owe our daughters to fight the remaining battles needed to bring them closer to equality.

for voting for Hillary. That was a vote for reproductive choice, because faced with a man and a woman, most women will trust the woman more when it comes to guarding her reproductive health.

All through the Democratic primary, women who worried about women's issue were told to shut up and vote for Obama. I find it a little bit peculiar that women are now being told that they have not defended their own interests---especially after 18 million Americans tried to elect a women president.

I think that it is still the men who take women's rights for granted, and the men who are willing to compromise on "women's" issues, because they do not think that they are as important.

Sorry for the rant, but after reading the way that a whole bunch of people insisted that women in this country suffer no discrimination and have no problems to speak of for months last winter, I just find this discussion a bit surreal. Please, do not blame it on the women.

No, I don't blame it on the women. And you make a very valid point. In fact my wife's primary (pun) interest in Clinton was for the reason you state.

It's interesting how the M$M never really framed Clinton as a pro-women's voice choice.

How could anyone forget "I'm not voting with my vagina?"

Until the FL primary fiasco I would just as happily supported Hillary. It changed when the Clintons took Florida's side. That really angered me. but I was never that way.

It was never a good enough explanation that women were trying to protect their own interests in supporting Hillary.

I think we can expect little progress for women in the near future. I even fear some of the compromises Obama might be willing to make. I hope I'm wrong and will have to be happy with at least (hopefully) some reversals of Bush policy. I was hoping for a little more, but we just don't seem to be a priority.

oh, yeah, the corporations and the religious Right...at least it's starting to look that way (again).

n/t

Sex alone should not be the sole driving factor. JMO.

poor wages, single parenting, lesser retirement benefits (benefits accrue as a percentage of income...lower wages equal lower benefits)

the "priorities" continue to be the men, simply because they continue to be largely in charge. Women everywhere are still taught that women's rights take a back seat to men.

Did you notice that, during all of the uproar over the Warren choice for the inaugural invocation, the focus was 99% on the GLBT community, but the fact that Warren preaches that women should be obedient to their husbands was largely ignored, both on MSM and right here at DU.

Yes, there were mentions of that, here and there, but very few, and no real outrage.

I have almost stopped pointing out any sexism here, since I ws actually called a Nazi when I said that sexist references should be made as unacceptable in this country as are racist reference.

When women are viewed as truly equal, then we will be more able to think our rights are secure.

And I think the fact that there was no real outrage on display is because, honestly, there was no real outrage. It's considered a joke, not a threat, mostly by those who have nothing to lose by the threat being real.

And now you are lying and revising history to fit your victim narrative.

what planet are you living on?

There is no credible evidence- NONE- that Obama is less solid on reproductive choice than Hillary would have been. In fact, when Obama made comments that were interpreted by some in the press as calling an unplanned teen pregnancy "punishment", Hillary's brilliant team of savvy campaign doofuses pounced on him, accusing Obama of being, essentially, too pro choice.

So which is it? Obama's too pro choice, or not pro choice enough? You can't have both.

Anyway, the primaries, and the election, are over. For fuck's sake.

I think that the congressional Dems have been recruiting anti-choice to get more votes in red states.

I don't think women's rights are a high priority for our party right now.

I think you and I have talked about this before. We agree 100%.

:kick:

Hillary's win was dismissed as the "old girls voting for Hillary because she cried" vote, though her voice had cracked but she never really cried. How did the media react when Bush, Bill and Romney had tears falling down their faces? They said it showed these men's sensitive side. I remember how many put Hillary down for having a human moment and how many asked if she hadn't just faked it, as if she was not allowed any real emotion, but at the same time condemning her for being a "cold bitch". I also recall Jesse Jr. mocking her and asking why hadn't she cried for the victims of Katrina.

Too many excused the sexism and misogyny that went on for months because it was directed at Hillary and not at some other woman who they liked. Even the party leaders stayed mute on the subject. What was Dean's comment after receiving thousands of letters and emails from people complaining that the party leadership hadn't spoken up against sexism as it had against racism? Dean said that he hadn't been aware of it because he didn't watch much cable TV.

The primaries have left a festering open wound in some of us and, I for one, will never ever trust the party leadership again. The DNC won't get a minute of my time nor a penny of my money. I will only support the local and state candidates whose views are similar to mine. No more voting for any and every candidate blindly only because they had a "D" after their name.

Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me...........

:-(

because they were afraid of the black man.

Hmmm.

and a prime example of race baiting. The color of HIS skin meant nothing to me. Well, other than the opportunity and progress it represented. I was excited over that aspect of the equation, but never hopeful that HE would have anywhere near the level of understanding, or impetus, to stand up for women's equality as she. Why does it have to be one way or the other for people like you? Is it possible that both are good but that one represents a specific issue in an outstanding way?

on abortion talking about the need for "compromise" ...!!!

And more sensitivity to "pro-life" side ...!!!

There is now a Democrstic Party Catholic/"Pro-Life" group in Congress ...

They may be worse, but what HRC was saying was really alarming --!!

Ended up with police in riot gear surrounding the pharmacy.

It *is* irrelevant for the vast majority of American women today because they have had no problem. But when it becomes a problem ... the corporate American women of today are not about to put up with this kind of shit.

subscribe to the whiggish view, one that assumes that history follows a steady uphill course of progress and improvement; they assume that rights, once given, won't be rescinded. Talking about the bad old days--when all abortion was illegal, birth control was difficult to acquire, and young women were sent to live with Aunt Agnes for the summer when they 'gained a bit of weight'--is often greeted with glazed eyes, because that was soooo long ago and it's not like it could ever happen again. It could.

"rights, once given, won't be rescinded" is clearly not watching the news. That is exactly what just happened in California with Prop 8. Homophobia has its roots in sexism, it is sexism basically.
So anyone making that assumption needs to open their eyes and take a good look around. Or get ready to spend some time with Aunt Agnes to please Ricky Warren.

It doesn't mean we don't have a lot of work to do, but I'm very optimistic that the next decade will bring major improvements in the civil rights of all oppressed groups.

It's up to us to make it happen.

By pointing out the things our Democrats have done to squelch these rights. By pointing out that our pro-choice, pro gay rights chair was replaced with one who is anti-choice and even anti-civil unions.

I don't feel that good about where we are right now on these issues.

because I am a woman, and I will speak up when my party caves in on women's rights.

The guy who is supposed to be the new Secretary of Health and Human Services!?

WTF!?

Does anyone know the circumstances under which he voted?

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/3096

""Daschle's so-called compromise bill, as quoted in the New York Times, permits an exception to the ban for `a severely debilitating disease or impairment specifically caused by the pregnancy (emphasis added),' but makes no provision for a pre-existing, life- and health-threatening `debilitating disease or impairment' that is being exacerbated by the pregnancy. This could include kidney disease, severe hypertension and some cancers. Nor does the Daschle bill allow for an abortion in cases of severe fetal abnormality where it is unlikely the fetus would live long outside the womb, even with technological support.

"The physician certification requirement and the potential loss of a medical license in the Daschle language invites government scrutiny of private medical matters and threatens doctor-patient confidentiality. The intent of this and other abortion ban bills is to control women and to limit their ability to make critical reproductive decisions that affect their families, their health and their lives. These bills represent the ultimate in Congressional arrogance," Gandy charged."

He and Bill Clinton both advocated for it...it was far more rigid than the GOP one.

I don't really know. Worries me, though.

He hasn't done anything lately to make me believe he has grown as a healthcare policy-maker.

I don't think anyone can change that drastically.

I think we are heading down that slippery slope with Dems afraid to stop it.

If that doesn't scare the hell out of women, nothing will.

:hi:

I am glad you posted this.

have lost over the last 8 years. Horrified is probably a more accurate term. I've lived through (and continue to live with) the saddest possible outcome of what criminalizing abortion does to women. (My mom's death from an abortion in 1964) It is an unrelenting and tragic part of my life that I would like to forget, but never will.

There was a time when I was, at least, comforted by the knowledge that women would never again have to pay the price my mother did. I thought we were protected. I was under the misunderstanding that knowledge could not be dismissed, and that progress, even the slowest moving, was not negotiable. Criminalizing and/or restricting abortion makes as much sense as bringing back slavery, or believing the world is flat. It is a contradiction to intelligent thinking.

I'm at a loss these days. I think our democratic party could further the rights of women over the next 4 - 8 years. I just don't think they will, unless forced. We're (women) just not that important to them.

I believe another version was also defeated in 2008.

Hope they give up trying to get one through, but I doubt it.

My tongue is bleeding so much I may need a transfusion.

The sneakiness of the plan to sift pedal women and glbt rights is designed to keep is from sounding the alarm and insisting upon our rights. and to keep us from aligning with pro-choice women who are not Democrats. At present we have 2 major parties, both male dominated and only 17% female representation in Congress.

into a company town.
:kick:

Well, start up funding, anyway ...

Patriarchy was going down ...

"Jesus was dead" ...

Organized patriarchal religion is patriarchy's underpinning ...

"Manifest Destiny" and "Man's Dominion Over Nature" are the religious licenses

to the few to exploit nature, natural resources, animal-life ...

and even other human beings according to various myths of inferiority taught by religion.


Vatican invented Capitalism when Feudalism was no longer sufficient to run their

Papal States ..

In 2008.

Ortega in Nicaragua made deal with Catholic Church to ban abortion totally in order to get back in power. Women are dying in Nicaragua due to this alliance between male leftists and male dominated power religion.

holding men accountable for their irresponsible actions. Child support by men does not begin to cover the cost to women of raising a child.

so, anyone who is framing this as men against women is being quite dishonest.
in this country, the prolifers would never have gotten out of the gate without phyllis schafly, et al.

in matters of faith, They are barred from priesthood, just as in many Muslim countries the interpretation of religion is the sole province of male only religious power structure.
The church provides certain other positive benefits and so it endures and certainly millions of men and women do not follow the church position.

I am not anti-male by any means. I know and work with many male feminists and women need their help, input, and leadership.

I am concerned with the phenomenon of the Ortega/ Catholic Church movement in Nicaragua. Ortega championed women's liberation in the 70's but made an agreement with the the church in Nicaragua more recently in order to regain power. Teenage girls and women are dying as a result.

Women's rights seem to be in play right now. There are enormous gains in places like Rwanda and Turkey and losses in places like Nicaragua.

You are quite right about Phyllis-she made a highly successful career out of opposing women's rights and her career was greatly helped because the media-which initially made fun of women's rights just about created her as the voice of the opposition.

You are quite right about Phyllis-she made a highly successful career out of opposing women's rights and her career was greatly helped because the media-which initially made fun of women's rights just about created her as the voice of the opposition.

The Churches financed a huge anti-ERA campaign with tax-exempt dollars -- !!!

Long time relationship between these two churches with US government -- they both ran

and profited hugely from "government run schools" for native-Americans.


Great violence in those schools -- sexual abuse, beatings, torture, odd suicides.

Native Americans say:

"When they came, they had the Bible and we had the land.

When they left, we had the Bible and they had the land."


If last Pope was CIA . . . what is this Pope?

Last Pope went to Italian Government and spoke publickly to them about "making Italian

women have more children"...!! The reason: To supply corporate labor!

There is no dishonesty there --

from "Hammer of Witches" and actual Witch Hunts to ...

Vatican still refusing to acknowledge the full personhood of females

as it acknowledges the full personhood of males ...

also barring females from ritual and authority within the Church ---

And using government influence to enforce their church's teachings on

birth control and abortion.

and I worry too

I'm not respectful of those who want to control women. I'm downright contemptuous of them.

Once a right is taken, it's damn near impossible to gain it back...because the momentum is now pushing against you and your rights - straight down that slope.

but I did not know it was actually from a real life event. I think I thought it was a joke.

It's not a joke, though, is it.

It's what the policing unit is called

and it's not funny at all :(

and people can claim it can't happen here...but well, we know how that goes don't we?

Here is more from the very long NYT article. Yet we just keep on with no one really taking stands. It's the start of a vicious circle.

"When the woman is first detained, the form of custody can vary. Wandee Mira, an obstetrician at a hospital in San Salvador, told me that she had seen "a young girl handcuffed to her hospital bed with a police officer standing outside the door." In El Salvador, a person accused of a major crime is typically held in jail in "preventative detention" until the trial begins. Tópez, who said she had prosecuted perhaps 10 or 15 abortion cases in the last eight years, said that she took the severity of the case into account and sometimes argued for "substitutive measures instead of jail," like house arrest, while the accused was awaiting trial. My impression was that Tópez was emphasizing such relative leniencies as house arrest instead of detention, as well as suspended sentences for women who report the abortionist, because, like most people, she was uncomfortable with the inevitable logic that insists upon making a woman who has had an abortion into a criminal. Even Regina de Cardenal, whose group was instrumental in passing the ban, could not quite square the circle.

"I believe the woman is a victim," de Cardenal told me. "The criminals are the people who perform the abortions." When pressed about the fact that the law she helped pass does treat the woman as a criminal, she said: "Yes, it's part of the law of our country. Because the woman has murdered her baby — and that's why she is sent to jail. But I believe that the woman who is sent to jail remains a victim of the abortion doctor, the abortionist, who knows exactly what he is doing."

In the United States, this conundrum is only beginning to emerge, as it did on "Meet the Press" in October 2004, when Tim Russert, the host, asked Jim DeMint, a South Carolina Republican representative then in the middle of what turned out to be a successful campaign for the U.S. Senate, to explain his position in favor of a total ban on all abortion procedures. DeMint was reluctant to answer Russert's repeated question: Would you prosecute a woman who had an abortion? DeMint said he thought Congress should outlaw all abortions first and worry about the fallout later. "We've got to make laws first that protect life," he said. "How those laws are shaped are going to be a long debate."

Russert refused to leave the congressman alone. "Who would you prosecute?" he persisted.

For how else can you ensure that they never do anything to the more important fetus within? You lock them up and watch them-24 hours a day, seven days a week...

this information at your peril. Our fight is not yet done and we can be overturned at any moment. I am waiting to see if the administration promise on signing FOCA into law immediately on or after Jan.20th is kept.

Many women just vanished for months.

due to botched abortions. My mother has always been a big advocate for women's rights and supported the ERA. She remembered the women who ended up dead or were left incapable of ever getting pregnant again.

;)

I know a woman who almost died twice during miscarriage from violently hemorraging. One doctor risked everything to help her live. The other did nothing.

It makes me furious that the powers that be in MY party are willing to go along even a little bit with those who would like to take us back to those good old days.

the laws cheapened the lives of females ---

I just wanted to add, as I recall, there isn't even a consideration for ectopic pregnancy in El Salvador. For those unfamiliar with ectopic - the condition is when a fertilized egg has implanted outside the uterus, usually in a fallopian tube. It is a death sentence for the woman, if not surgically removed.

They start with the view that women are inferior to men. Otherwise how could they think they could "supervise" their decisions. Scary stuff.

is inevitably going to up. People without jobs or health insurance are going to have a tough time going through a pregnancy and bringing a child into the world.

And many states have huge restrictions in place already, most people don't even know about it.

Here's a list of "who decides" from NARAL by state.

http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/choice-action-center/in_your_state/who-decides/state-profiles/

to self-abort or find "alternative" providers .. i.e., back alleys --!!!

That's my opinion ...

Difficult times create more illegalities ...

Was just reading my TOWN newspaper -- evidently our police arrested probably

15 or more drivers who had outstanding tickets ... many from our town ...

Tickets usually totaled $150 and tops $250 -- arrest and bail!!

Our town has been running tickets thru on resident and visitors .. lots of

complaints --!!!

There'll be more of these kinds of things --

A useful reminder for those of us (on the right, as well as, sadly, many on the so-called "left") who seem way too enthusiastic at the prospect of letting government tell citizens what they may or may not do with their own bodies.

All it takes is a little bit at a time.

that were lost to gain them rights that they take for granted today. Rights that they would not defend just for others even if they have no use for them for themselves. It is sad and frightening.
I am way past the age where I would need an abortion, and yet I still fight for the right to choose.
The same is true for the right to vote, the right to equal pay, and the right to equal opportunities in sports, in employment and education.
So many of the young women of today assume that these rights are there for them and always will be there. They have no idea how fragile they are and how easily they could be lost. They are totally ignorant of the struggles that others have gone thru before them, so as to ensure these rights for the future...

There were over a million of us at this march..and the MSM barely mentioned it!!!!!

and their lack of coverage...it was a tiny inch on pg. 3, but they did include random-person comments by several christians who weren't there---but were against it! The first page of that issue featured a human interest story about a young couple and how tough their lives as evangelicals are!! :wtf: :mad: :mad:

As many people have mentioned here, the public awareness of women as human beings, of issues that affect us is abysmal. M$M is aware of us only if we fall within a very few limited roles: eye-candy, kidnap/assault/murder victims, mommy-role, or thrilled consumers.

I've seen some graffiti at the college I work at that was a real downer-- "Feminists are stupid".

very sad!

the other side feels just as strongly that it's about saving the life of unborn children. neither side is ever going to be successful in swaying the other to their point of view, and neither side is willing to compromise, because both sides see at the core of their argument a principle too valuable to compromise on.

nothing short of the second coming of jesus christ is going to change any attitudes on either side of the equation- and since that ain't exactly too likely to happen, EVER, the issue isn't EVER going to go away.

and people in power LOVE a dependable issue they can use to motivate their constituents.

are standing with the religious right so far.

:shrug:

Do we want "Pro-Life" influence on the Democratic Party . . . ?

Are you going to offer financial support to "Pro-Life" Democrats . . . ?

Vote for them . . . ?

Not me --

as a vasectomized male, i have no irons in that fire. if their stance on issues that matter to me match my own, then yes, i could see supporting them financially.

as you can see from Kaine . . . anti-abortion candidates are usually

also religious fanatics --

However, how separated are you from all females that this issue wouldn't

concern you whatsoever? No sisters? No SO? No nieces?

Even, perhaps, simply as an issue of reproductive freedom because behind

the attempts to end abortion are also strong desires to end birth control.

my mother and my sister have both had hysterectomies, and my wife is married to a guy who had a vasectomy.

and- even if by some extremely odd turn of events, abortion were to become illegal in all 50 states- birth control itself won't be going away. it's already too firmly entrenched in society- to the point that there's no way to totally deny it to the general public. people who think otherwise probably weren't paying attention when they covered prohibition in history class.

You'd be amazed at how quickly it could disappear ---

Remember, it was still ILLEGAL even for married couples in '67 . . . !!!

Think that was the date --

50 states -- how far would someone want to travel for birth control!

How long did prohibition last?

Keep in mind we overturned capital punishment -- and those with a strong urge

to punish revived it at great expense to every taxpayer --

It's still with us now . . . more than 20 years?

I don't think you appreciate the fanaticsm of organized patriarchal religion

nor capitalism.

but- legislators do.

they've also come to understand/imagine what a plague of std's and lots of illegitimate births can do to a society, and ergo their chances of being re-elected.

birth control isn't going away. that's one thing i AM 110% positive about.

all it takes is a little common-sense and a few minutes of thoughtful reflection to realize it.

if the trend continues, that is what they are after --

I don't think Americans are newly "horny" . . . but the consequences of that are

children -- and that's the age we have come from. Lots of children, women at

home "barefoot and pregnant."

There have always been STDs -- but more shame attached to them -- closeted.

Illegitimacy ---? No problem ... they'll simply open more of their institutions ...

homes for unwed mothers where they can be abused --- and orphanages where children

can be abused!

"Re-elected" . . . ?

Do you think there were just one or two steals -- 2000 and 2004?

http://www.constitution.org/vote/votescam__.htm

The wheels on the lever machines were shaved going back to, perhaps, as early as 1959!

Then the large computer counters used by media came in with very frequent odd results.

Later the electronic voting machines came in and can be used to steal larger blocs of votes

from greater distances. The family keeps this book/investigation on line free to inform.

birth control will always be very available in the u.s.of a.

although- since i've had my vasectomy, it wouldn't really matter too much to me if it weren't.

but it ALWAYS will be.

emergency contraception ...?

:shrug:

birth control that prevents conception will always be available to americans.

is that better? :shrug:

that's part of the difference.

even rational people can agree that a case can be made for 'life' beginning at conception.

the same case cannot be made that preventing conception is the taking of a life. sorry.

yes it can be considered to be an abortifacient - or if it has already done so.

ALL will not be trying to ban the pill or any birth control --

It is the FEW fanatics we are discussing.

but not rubbers and diaphragms and foam-it just won't happen. especially not in the age of killer std's.

as other women ...

PLUS these attacks and legislation are male-run and male-inspired ...

for everyone else.

Don't we teach by example . . . ?

I get so angry when I read of crap like this and how the Supreme Court only cares if my life is directly threatened, not indirectly. I have good friends who are very pro-life, and we've gotten into big arguments over this. They tell me just to rely on God, and I tell them to wait for the day when a doctor tells them that they could die from it.

Now that my husband (who got fixed ages ago) and I are divorcing, if I decide to become sexually active or marry again, it'll be a big problem. I can't do the pill (my body hates all hormonal meds that we've tried so far), and I'm still recovering from two major abdominal surgeries in seven months two years ago, so getting my tubes tied doesn't sound like a great option to me. That leaves me barrier methods, which aren't 100%, or the guy being fixed. Great.

Have you thought about trying an IUD? I have the Mirena. Lasts for 5 years. More effective than the pill and sterilization. Nothing to remember, take, use etc.

Something to consider or look into, perhaps?

Thought I would throw it out there. Hope you can find a solution that works for you. :hug:

Like I was on chemo. Made my pain worse, periods heavier, and my mood swings quite severe. Got that thing out at three months. *sigh*

I'm sorry you've had such a rough time. Mirena hasn't been quite as wonderful for me as it seems to be for most - my periods flucuate between heavy and very light, sometimes even skipping one now and then. (I was hoping for consistently light). It's actually normal and common for periods to get heavier for the first 6 months or so on Mirena - mine were for several months. But that other stuff..... yikes.

Again, I hope you can find a reasonable solution - I notice the poster below me mentioned Paraguard. I know there are several different IUD's available, so maybe one of them (a non-hormonal one) will work ok for you. :shrug:

Hugs and luck to you.

:hug:

Considering how much my body seems to hate most anything, I'm leery of trying anything at this point. I get the darndest reactions to even the simplest drugs, and it's getting to the point that my doctor's refusing to try anything new with me unless I really need it (and then very, very carefully).

I can't recommend ParaGard enough.

I've had friends whose periods have gotten heavier on it, though, and with as bad as mine are, that doesn't sound pleasant at all.

or lacking that- oral and/or anal sex, and/or mutual masturbation. we're loaded with options.

and oral and/or anal sex, and/or mutual masturbation and rubbers and diaphrams or you wouldn't have gotten fixed yourself.

The media has concentrated on the protests by the LGBT community but quite a few organizations that deal with womens rights and domestic abuse/violence have protested as well. And have been ignored by the media.

Among other things Rick Warren does not believe domestic abuse/violence is a legitimate reason for divorce. Apparently you can "pray it away" as well. Or just be a more obedient wife?

I really do not like Obama's table. Too many simply have no place at the table in terms of where we are and where we have been and where some of those at the table may return us to.

Cuba moves forward (and has been since the Revolution) while the US moves backward.

Glad for Cuba, sad for us. :(

understanding of the past or what it will mean to lose the right to choose. they HAVE grown up with roe v wade and don't know that it needs to be defended. the question is . . . how can we educate them?

ellen fl

Harold Ford and the like are not Democrats - the further this party gets away from a Pro-Choice stance, it will no longer be the Democratic Party. There will be a one party state. And frankly, I don't think any of them care.

Also the GLBT community.

What is next? Making any extra(hetero)marital sex illegal? The enforcement of these laws would be the best vehicle for massive surveillance and complete absence of confidentiality regarding medical records, and jails would be full of--people whose crime was to seek pleasure? What kind of country do these people want?

That's right, pleasure in all its forms should be made illegal. Sex should be for procreation only (sarcasm)... It is so tempting not to take this all seriously since it is so INSANE, but it truly is terrifying if you are a sexually active (normal) person.

I hope to live to see a massive rebellion against 3rd world draconian fundamentalist insane thinking, and to see real sane adults running this country.

The pleasure police are coming to put you in jail.

And my old church, the Southern Baptists, are teaching such stuff in their seminary.

This is the "Life is about pain and fear" set ---

Where were they?

:(

Please tell me it isn't so!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What is up with Obama and his transition team choosing people like this. He could have had Howard Dean or any number of superior people, and he choose someone who voted anti-choice.

Overplanned Parenthood:
Ceausescu's cruel law

http://www.ceausescu.org/ceausescu_texts/overplanned_parenthood.htm

Nicolae Ceausescu loved nothing better than a monument to himself. But his ministerial palaces and avenues paled next to another of his schemes for building socialism: a plan to increase Romania's population from 23 million to 30 million by the year 2000. He began his campaign in 1966 with a decree that virtually made pregnancy a state policy. "The fetus is the property of the entire society," Ceausescu proclaimed. "Anyone who avoids having children is a deserter who abandons the laws of national continuity."

It was one of the late dictator's cruelest commands. At first Romania's birthrate nearly doubled. But poor nutrition and inadequate prenatal care endangered many pregnant women. The country's infant-mortality rate soard to 83 deaths in every 1,000 births (against a Western European average of less than 10 per thousand). About one in 10 babies was born underweight; newborns weighing 1,500 grams (3 pounds, 5 ounces) were classified as miscarriages and denied treatment. Unwanted survivors often ended up in orphanages. "The law only forbade abortion," says Dr. Alexander Floran Anca of Bucharest. "It did nothing to promote life."

Ceausescu made mockery of family planning. He forbade sex education. Books on human sexuality and reproduction were classified as "state secrets," to be used only as medical textbooks. With contraception banned, Romanians had to smuggle in condoms and birth-control pills. Though strictly illegal, abortions remained a widespread birth-control measure of last resort. Nationwide, Western sources estimate, 60 percent of all pregnancies ended in abortion or miscarriage.

The government's enforcement techniques were as bad as the law. Women under the age of 45 were rounded up at their workplaces every one to three months and taken to clinics, where they were examined for signs of pregnancy, often in the presence of government agents - dubbed the "menstrual police" by some Romanians. A pregnant woman who failed to "produce" a baby at the proper time could expect to be summoned for questioning. Women who miscarried were suspected of arranging an abortion. Some doctors resorted for forging statistics. "If a child died in our district, we lost 10 to 25 percent of our salary," says Dr. Geta Stanescu of Bucharest. "But it wasn't our fault: we had no medicine or milk, and the families were poor."

snip

"Celibacy tax": A woman didn't have to be pregnant to come under scrutiny. In 1986 members of the Communist youth group were sent to quiz citizens about their sex lives. "How often do you have sexual intercourse?" the questionnaire read. "Why have you failed to conceive?" Women who did not have children, even if they could not, paid a "celibacy tax" of up to 10 percent of their monthly salaries.

I don't have words.

Sounds like something out of A Handmaid's Tale.

:hi:

Nothing ever comes easy.. it is always an all out battle

What are all those old white men so afraid of???

i guess mad eye moody is right.
It will take some time to undo the crap of george bush.

i do hope we keep an eye on the new administration.
We must be sure that we do not give them to many benefits of doubt.
Before we erect too many shrines to mr obama can we please first see what he DOES.

Large number of Catholics now in Congress ---

Did we think patriarcy/organized patriarchal religions would see the light--???

Call off their war on women ...?

:kick:

An Opinion article in the NYT

Public & Private; A Public Matter

By ANNA QUINDLEN
Published: June 17, 1992

(snip)

"If I was in your position I'd do exactly what you're doing. I can't say that in public -- I know you understand that." -- The High School Principal "You're not the only one, Mrs. Finkbine. We do a lot of terminations here." -- The Hospital Administrator

Sherri Finkbine was infamous once. She was pregnant. She took tranquilizers. She discovered that they were Thalidomide, a teratogen that was being linked to the births of thousands of European babies without limbs. Her doctor recommended a termination. She already had four small children. She couldn't imagine caring for them and a fifth with serious impairments. The doctor scheduled a therapeutic abortion.

"You know what I hate about it most? The way it has to be a secret. Like I'm doing something dirty." -- Sherri Finkbine in "A Private Matter"

"There are ways as long as nobody talks about it." -- The Doctor

Then Sherri Finkbine made a big mistake. She told a reporter. She wanted to warn other women about thalidomide. They were her friends, the small clique of newspeople in Phoenix, Ariz. In what would seem later to be God's gift to the media, she was a TV personality herself: Miss Sherri, the local hostess of "Romper Room."

Do Bee quiet about your abortion.

She lost that job. The abortion was canceled. It was finally performed in Sweden. The movie ends as she and her husband board the plane. It airs Saturday night on HBO, the networks loving cancer and true crime but steering clear of abortion.

Why dramatize this now, 30 years later, when many women don't even recognize Sherri Finkbine's name? Because they'll recognize her life.

Because we still keep quiet. Because our silence perpetuates the fiction that abortions are performed only on the promiscuous, the thoughtless and the uninformed. One survey showed that almost 50 percent of American women having abortions already had children. Loving mothers have abortions every day. After her abortion, Sherri Finkbine went on to have two more children.

"I'll have the baby. Spend the rest of my life taking care of him like everybody wants. And everybody'll say, 'Isn't she wonderful?' " -- Sherri Finkbine in "A Private Matter"

(snip)

…So many want to do that today: insist that they know best what makes us good mothers, women, people, and then leave us to live with the consequences of their convictions. Sherri Finkbine said no. She doesn't regret that, only that three decades later we still have to say no over and over and over and over again.

more…
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E0CEEDE113EF934A25755C0A964958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=print

This article was published in 1992, 16 years ago, when "A Private Affair" aired on TV Nothing's changed.

"Thirty years later, and she is a pile of clippings on my desk, a memory in the minds of some, a "Who?" in the collective unconscious of others. So many people wanted to tell her what was best for her life, then walk away and leave her to live it. So many want to do that today: insist that they know best what makes us good mothers, women, people, and then leave us to live with the consequences of their convictions. Sherri Finkbine said no. She doesn't regret that, only that three decades later we still have to say no over and over and over and over again."

Constantly