Category Archives: Abortion

My uterus is not a political tool.

I’m so sick of bully politicians pretending that they know more about my body and what my health care needs are than I do.

Out of touch men should not try to address how a woman’s body reacts to rape unless they are a doctor… and I’m pretty sure that Ron Paul is the only high profile elected official that is also a gynecologist. He’s also the only one who seems to have been able to keep his mouth shut regarding Todd Akin. For this I am grateful, because I’d be highly uncomfortable with Uncle Ron discussing girly bits.

To clarify: I don’t believe that men should be silent on all things regarding women and their health. They have wives, sisters, mothers and daughters – they should be invested in their rights and their well being. Issues like abortion and birth control clearly impact the male population in a significant way.

Sometimes, however, it is prudent to not speak about something you cannot fully understand. Rape is generally one of those times. It’s pretty simple messaging: You are against rape, you support women who have been raped, and you do not differentiate between different kinds. This is abortion politics 101. Rape bad. The end. Speaking as a woman who has also been a rape victim, I do not want to hear a man who clearly has no idea what he’s talking about discussing how my body reacts in that situation. It’s not helpful. In fact, it’s pretty much the opposite.

There have been many comparisons to rape gaffes from Joe Biden, etc. Fine. Joe Biden is an idiot. That’s a pretty low bar to set for a candidate, and anyone who claims to be a conservative should be better than that. This is also not an opportunity for pro-lifers to take a stand and flex their muscle. Todd Akin was not voicing a pro-life view. He was spewing nonsense and had no facts to back himself up. It was offensive. It was vile.

He should be better than this, and being utterly uneducated on such a basic issue is unacceptable at best. He needs to go.

Continue reading

Democrats and Suffragettes

I received an email from the Jen O’Malley Dillon, Executive Director of the DNC today. I’ll spare you the absurd text of the entire email, but here are some excerpts:

For the first 144 years of this country’s existence, women were not guaranteed the right to vote — and winning that right did not come easily.

Women’s suffrage took a movement. It took organizers who worked tirelessly and allies who fought for the cause in the halls of power. On August 18th, 1920, when the legislature of the state of Tennessee voted to ratify the 19th Amendment and affirm its place in the Constitution, it passed by a single vote.

But the fight for full equality is not finished. In 2008, a woman in the United States earned only 77 cents for every dollar earned by a man. For women of color, the disparity is even greater.

We have a choice with this election about whether we want to continue the fight to bring down barriers — whether we want to move forward or backward. We’ll decide whether we want to honor the legacy of those who couldn’t vote but reached for that right. But all those decisions begin with the promise that you will participate in the fall elections.

That’s right, everyone. Just vote Democrat. Everyone will be equal! We’ll all sit around and praise Dear Leader and ride our unicorns beneath the double rainbows. All it takes is your vote for a Democrat.

The reality is this: Democrats have absolutely no authority to claim that they have a woman’s best interest at heart. For example, Obama talked a big game on closing the wage gap. Except… he refused to pay women the same as he paid men in his Senate office. From NRO almost 2 years ago (source):

Obama’s commitment to federally mandated pay equity stretches from the Rockies to Wall Street and beyond. And yet it seems to have eluded his United States Senate office. Compensation figures for his legislative staff reveal that Obama pays women just 83 cents for every dollar his men make. Continue reading

Conversation about Oklahoma abortion law is… well, exactly what you'd expect

The Oklahoma AG recently placed a block on the enforcement of a new state law – one which requires a woman to obtain an ultrasound prior to an abortion. They announced the action on Monday.

Specifically, here is what is required:

The person who performs the ultrasound must describe the dimensions of the fetus, whether arms, legs and internal organs are visible and whether the physician can detect cardiac activity. He or she must also turn a screen depicting the images toward the woman so she can see them.

In other words, the law is designed to give women an understanding of what exactly they are terminating; that there is a body with arms and legs and a heartbeat (now referred to as simply “cardiac activity”).

The ladies on The View weighed in on this yesterday… and it was what should be expected of those women. Some highlights from the conversation:

WHOOPI GOLDBERG: A new law in Oklahoma has been temporarily blocked that requires pregnant women to watch a detailed ultrasound and hear a description of the fetus before they can get an abortion. (PAUSES WITH SARCASTIC FACIAL EXPRESSION) Yeah.

SHERRI SHEPHERD: You know, when I heard that, because I’m one, I am, after going through what I went through, I am not for abortion, but I do believe women should have a choice about what they do with their bodies, and so-

JOY BEHAR: You’re not for abortion for yourself anymore.

SHEPHERD: Anymore, anymore. That’s what I’m saying. I went through it because I had abortions, and I know how, what it did to my spirit. But I don’t feel that the government should tell a woman what she should do with her body. Everybody has a choice to make. But hearing this right here, I still feel it’s an invasion to force a woman to hear this, to force a woman to see this.

So now it is an invasion to show women their own body. Which is fascinating if you consider that the Left doesn’t consider it an invasion to, say, tell you how much salt you can take in. But I digress.

Pretending that it’s just some extra tissue and not a life is an absurd way to “help” women make their decision to terminate a life. Sherri Shepard admits in this segment that she “couldn’t deal with” the idea that it was a life inside her when she had multiple abortions, so she chose not to acknowledge that it was a “moving, breathing” baby. Will it make most women’s decision harder? YES. That’s the point.

Whoopi seems to think that all women have thought it through when they go in for the procedure. That is entirely false. Many women are lied to. They are coerced by people in their life. They are scared and feel like they have no other options. Do some understand what they’re doing? Yes. Probably. That is absolutely not the case for all.

Then Whoopi drops a gem:

GOLDBERG: But what difference does it make if you can’t have the baby? What difference does it make if you’re going to bring a baby in and you can’t feed it and you can’t take care of it and then people end up killing their kids? I hate it! (AUDIENCE APPLAUSE)

and later…

GOLDBERG: But why do it, I mean, here’s the first thing that I want to do. I am also pro-life, and I am pro-choice. I’m for the best possible life that you can give your child. And if you end up having to give your child away, which many people do, you know, the guilt of knowing that that kid is out there, or what some people have resorted to doing when they discover they actually can’t deal with it, they do terrible things to their kids. And so I wonder, you know, if it isn’t because they ask you – or they used to ask you – a gazillion questions, they used to make you go home and then come back and decide if you wanted to do it.

So the gist of what she’s saying is that people that don’t have abortions that don’t want kids end up beating and killing them. Joy Behar interjects by inferring that young pro-life women just don’t understand the ramifications – that laws that favor life lead to back alley abortions.

I am a young, pro-life woman. Pro-life is not, as some would have us think, anti-contraception, anti-fertility treatment, and the like. Since in this segment from The View Whoopi claims to be both pro-choice and pro-life I will say the same: your CHOICE as a woman lies in the decisions leading up to your pregnancy. Once you’re sharing your body with another person, they’ve got their own set of rights. It’s a liberty thing – not a choice thing.

So Whoopi, once again, reveals herself as soulless. So I suppose it’s not a baby-baby until it can, what, walk? Talk? If it’s not when there is a beating heart, developing limbs and internal organs, and movement, then when?

God bless Elizabeth Hasselbeck for bringing it home: “Change hearts, not laws.”

Are Democrats losing their hold over women?

Politico had a great article today on women in the Tea Party movement.

It’s clear that woman have been a driving force in this movement, probably more than ever before on the Right. It can be attributed to a lot of things, not the least of which is, as Darla DeWald said in the Politico piece, is the “mama bear” instinct that kicks in when women feel that their children are at risk. Now that it’s clear that the issues at hand are going to effect every child in this country, the maternal instincts are kicking in. Mothers will fight for their children.

This potentially points to a greater problems for Democrats in upcoming months. Women have largely swung toward the Democratic party for ages. The reasons have been hashed out over and over, but here are some quick bullet points:

  • Women as a whole make less money. Therefore, they are generally in a tougher spot when they are single/divorced. Democratic platforms are all about a safety net for when one is vulnerable.
  • Abortion. The idea of it being outlawed is a sticking point for many women, who feel threatened at the idea of losing that option. In addition, a majority of the modern feminist movement bases their entire existence on trying to fight those evil Republicans that are trying to “police their wombs”. Or something. Which is funny when you consider the health care legislation they were so excited about getting rammed through.
  • The Democratic party has worked to paint themselves as the champions of the downtrodden. Poor people, minorities, and women have long been beholden to the false sense of security that the Democratic party strives to provide. See: first pullet point.

So what’s changing now? The fact that, despite claiming to provide a safety net, Democrats are losing popularity. They have passed legislation that the Left has been fighting to pass for 50 years. They have control of the House, Senate, and White House. They should be riding high… but they’re not. And this is in no small part because of the women that are becoming a loud, fierce voice in this battle.

Nancy Pelosi, as the highest ranking female elected official in the country, has tried to spin nearly every issue as a women’s issue. She did it with climate change. She did it with health care. And let’s face it, in the past, this has been a winner for the Democrats. The ladies, however, aren’t buying it.

Maybe it’s because some of those women who have been chanting “hands off my body” for 40 years finally realized that government involvement means that they’re involved when it’s inconvenient too. Maybe women on the left are realizing that they are more than their uterus, and that there is more to “women’s rights” than abortion. Maybe it’s because those same women want freedom for their daughters. Who knows. The bottom line is that some of the biggest political players on the Right in the past year have been women, and that is likely to continue. Some of the most passionate, effective activists and minds springing up out of this movement have been women. Smart Girl Politics has been on the forefront of the conservative women’s movement, and has provided a unique outlet for women to connect, learn, and mobilize locally. The beauty of all this? Women are drawn to other women in leadership, and the effect has been a groundswell of new female voters, candidates, and activists on the Right.

Nancy Pelosi’s thinly veiled attempt to make this health care legislation a win for women’s rights was laughable. Just a reminder from RedState’s Lori Ziganto of how this bill actually effects women:

Because a quick search of the product classification database shows just how much women, and particularly Moms, will be punitively taxed. Tampons will be taxed; we are hereby punished not just by our monthly visitor, but because of it. Breast pumps will be taxed.  Those of us who are “punished by a baby”,  will now truly be punished monetarily by Congress for choosing (so much for choice!) to breast feed our children. What happened to wanting women to have it all? You are punishing women who work and need to pump to provide the best possible sustenance to their infants. It’s organic; I thought y’all liked that? Or is that just another thing to which you merely pay lip service for political expediency and “cool” points?

Birth control will now be more expensive as well, including diaphragms and condoms. Condoms, hmm, what shall we call that one? The roll-down tax? I suppose they figure who cares if people can’t afford condoms. Who needs personal responsibility? Pesky pregnancies won’t be a problem; abortions will be fully funded! That’s feminism for you. You’ve come a long way, baby! They should probably change that phrase, since they don’t seem to care much for actual babies.

So… what was this about Republicans punishing you for having girly plumbing? We’re not buying it anymore, Nancy. The bottom line is that unless the Dems find a way to stop the bleeding they’re going to pay for it in November. In fact, I’m banking on that very thing.

In defense of Dan Riehl…

Here’s the deal. Dan wrote a post about Harry Ried that has lefty panties in a wad. What did he say?

I’m not sure I quite understand this, given that cost is so important as a burden to taxpayers when it comes to health care. If Democrats want so badly to abort babies because of it, why are we bothering with someone who has a broken neck and back at 69? It sounds to me like she’s pretty well used up and has probably been living off the taxpayers for plenty of years to begin with. Aren’t we at least going to get a vote on it?

I realize her crook of a husband and his pals in Congress have excluded themselves from the mess they’re going to compel everyone else to join, but we’re still paying the bills, are we not? I don’t see that she’s worth it at this point, frankly. I can’t recall her ever doing anything for me.
Come on, Harry – do your civic duty. The nation’s broke and counting on you guy. Pull the plug and get back to work. And don’t bill us for a full day today, either. This is no time to be sloughing off. Air freight her home, you can bury her during recess on your own time and dime. Or are you going to bill us for that, too?

Clearly, this is satire. Dan’s a snarky bastard, and he is ruthless about the truth – both qualities I sincerely appreciate. The language of the post is meant to draw attention to the hypocrisy of the left, and highlight the callousness of Democratic leadership in light of Stupak’s statements. The attitude that life is an obstacle for their proposed health care program is nauseating at best, and rightly pissed a lot of people off this week.

The thing is, this isn’t a new attitude. This has been Democratic attitude for a long time – it’s become life vs. their health care takeover. Pregnancies and new people are an inconvenience when you’ve decided it’s your duty to control all of them. Remember last year when Pelosi said that birth control was the best economic stimulus?

PELOSI: Well, the family planning services reduce cost. They reduce cost. The states are in terrible fiscal budget crises now and part of what we do for children’s health, education and some of those elements are to help the states meet their financial needs. One of those – one of the initiatives you mentioned, the contraception, will reduce costs to the states and to the federal government.

Dan pointed out the hypocrisy of their stance, and the nasty motivation behind it… so effectively that he’s being torched by anyone and everyone. Apparently the “vile” nature of the post hit home for some…

Well done, Dan.

UPDATE: Linked by The Other McCain. Thanks!

"Last chance to legally strangle your baby."

Oh. My. Word.

There are no words for this. None. I’m sick.

The caller said a woman in her early 20s was in labor. When deputies arrived, they discovered the baby had actually been born around 1:00a.m., about ten hours earlier. Investigators say the baby was already dead when deputies got there.

Investigators tell WSLS the baby’s airway was still blocked. They say the baby was under bedding and had been suffocated by her mother. Investigators say because the mother and baby were still connected by the umbilical cord and placenta, state law does not consider the baby to be a separate life. Therefore, the mother cannot be charged.

“In the state of Virginia as long as the umbilical cord is attached and the placenta is still in the mother, if the baby comes out alive the mother can do whatever she wants to with that baby to kill it.“, says Investigator Tracy Emerson. “She could shoot the baby, stab the baby. As long as it’s still attached to her in some form by umbilical cord or something it’s no crime in the state of Virginia.“

I don’t have anything to say. Ed Morrissey says:

Ironically, if the baby had been killed by someone else in an assault on the mother before its birth, that person would have been charged with murder, which sets up a really interesting double standard. Are legislators in Virginia so afraid of the abortion industry that they can’t take steps to protect full-term babies after their birth? Sounds like Virginians need a new class of lawmakers.

But of COURSE conservatives are paranoid!

Remember all the outcry when we raised hell about President Obama’s address to students? Our concerns were “baseless“. We’re clearly nothing but “paranoid right wing nut jobs“. And of course, don’t forget RAAAACIST!! Fine, other Presidents have spoken to students before. THAT is not what we took issue with! How many Presidents issued study guides? And how many treated everything the President said as fact? I wrote about this yesterday:

So much for objectivity, right? As I said yesterday, the things that are being presented as fact are, well, not so much fact. When the experts are still hotly debating the legislation, and there can be no clear answers derived from the bill itself, it is NOT fact. Go read this, from HSLDA.

The most interesting thing about the abortion issue? BOTH sides are protesting! The right is angry because they believe it IS included, and the left is angry for the opposite reason. The wording is SO loose that no one actually knows what’s in it. The fact that a teacher presumes to know the truth and teach it to the class as fact is inexcusable. Of course, abortion is NOT the only issue. The rest of the numbers used are skewed at best, if not flat out wrong. Such as the number of people who are uninsured, which mysteriously changes. This is EXACTLY the issue we were concerned about. Then yesterday, this video was released (which I’m sure most of you have seen by now): So this is all after the fact. Are we just looking for things to justify our accusations after the fact? No. My first cue that there would be indoctrination of children involved was this: THIS IS NOT NORMAL. And parents are right to object. When there are teachers like Diantha Harris around, there is a justifiable concern for parents who are sending their children to public school every day. So lefties, keep your head in the sand. Pretend your children are independent thinkers. But if you think your 5 year old has the intellect and wit to out-think an authority figure and come to their own conclusions regarding the President of the United States, I feel for your child.

Abortion Addiction.

Un-freaking-believable.

Irene Vilar worries that her self-described “abortion addiction” will be misunderstood, twisted by the pro-life movement to deny women the right to choose.

Her book, “Impossible Motherhood,” which will be released by Other Press on Oct. 6, chronicles her own dark choices: 15 abortions in 16 years, much of it as a married woman.

15 abortions. You figure at some point she would realize what caused the pregnancies and you know, not do that thing. FIFTEEN. I’m amazed she even has a uterus left. That is NOT easy on a woman’s body.

I have so many questions I don’t even know where to start. Why? What possesses a woman to become pregnant REPEATEDLY. There ARE things that can prevent that, you know. What kind of doctor allows that to happen? What did her HUSBAND say?

This is entirely inexcusable. Abortion is NOT a form of birth control. I’m not a proponent of abortion at all, so let me ask a question of pro-choicers out there: at what point does personal accountability kick in? Why is it LESS okay at 15 than it is at say, 1. Just a thought.

FIFTEEN. Gah.

More Astroturfing! Except… it's the Lefties again.

From Hot Air:

A Hot Air reader working at a non-profit received this RFP from the Ohio chapter of UHCAN, the organization behind the Health Care for America Now counter-demonstrations at town-hall forums, where volunteers are trained to disrupt and shut down dissent. With elected officials escaping their constituents and fleeing back to the Beltway, UHCAN Ohio wants to start Astroturfing churches:

Request for Proposals

UHCAN Ohio is looking to engage in a short term contract with a person who has a background in working with faith communities in the Southwest Ohio area, primarily Cincinnati and its suburbs. The purpose of the contract is to engage faith community leaders to communicate with their congregations about the movement for national health care reform. We want to provide them with materials that will assist them to talk about the moral issues involved in the lack of health care for a large portion of our population, and the desire to do it during this great debate on health care in this country.

The health care reform work of UHCAN Ohio, and the coalition it staffs, Ohio Consumers for Health Coverage can be reviewed by going to www.ohioconsumersforhealth.org or www.uhcanohio.org

Deliverables:

1. Prepare a packet of materials with input from the OCHC leadership team that can be used by faith-based leaders and can be easily copied and distributed to faith leaders. Such materials are available from the Faithful Reform in Health Care web site, but may need to be supplemented with other materials and you may need to search further than the FRHC website. The packet should also be able to be posted on-line on the UHCAN Ohio and OCHC websites, with links to the appropriate original sites.

2. Reach out to forty faith congregations in the Cincinnati area and its suburbs, asking their faith leader to communicate to his/her congregation about federal health care reform in a religious/moral context. This will require face to face or at least individual phone conversations with pastors/leaders asking them to preach on the subject, or to carry out a discussion within the congregation, or to sign on to a letter to policymakers. We need a success rate of at least 33 percent. It will also involve providing them with the materials that will fit their situation.

In preparing a proposal keep in mind that because individual congregations respond to the instructions/directions they receive from their denominational leadership, this project will involve becoming familiar with the directives that have already been developed by regional or state offices of the various denominations and the various faith traditions, and probably conversations with key denominational staff to determine what is the most effective way to work within anyone denomination.

Time-Frame: End of August through October, frontloading the project so much of the contact initiation happens in late August, early to mid September.

In preparing a proposal please specify the number of hours and rate/hour required to carry out these deliverables. The contractor will be responsible for all expenses such as phone calls and mileage, so please build that into your rate. Expenses for copying materials will be borne by UHCAN Ohio.

Please submit a proposal to Kathleen Gmeiner, Ohio Consumers for Health Coverage Project Director, UHCAN Ohio, 404 S. Third St., Columbus, Ohio 43215. Questions may be directed to [redacted].

The proposal deadline is 5 PM Monday August 24, 2009.

Holy crap. How blatant can you be? ” Reach out to forty faith congregations in the Cincinnati area and its suburbs, asking their faith leader to communicate to his/her congregation about federal health care reform in a religious/moral context. This will require face to face or at least individual phone conversations with pastors/leaders asking them to preach on the subject, or to carry out a discussion within the congregation, or to sign on to a letter to policymakers”. In other words, get pastor’s to preach the wonders of Obamacare to their congregation.

Now, first of all, let’s look at the surface hypocrisy of the situation. How many times have we been called astroturfers for the past six months or so? Ever since the Tea Parties began, accusations from the left have been flying in from every angle regarding the nature of the protests. We’ve been quick to dismiss them, but it’s becoming more and more apparent that the reason they are so quick to assume is that, well, they don’t understand organic protests because the never have them. They are the professionals.

On a more fundamental level, I have a huge problem with churches addressing health care legislation. So does the government, but I suppose that they’d be quick to overlook the violation of non-profit tax status that comes along with endorsing legislation from the pulpit if it worked in their favor.

Any church in their right mind would run screaming from this legislation. We do not need federal support for abortions. You’d also be hard pressed to find a congregation of any denomination, Catholic or Protestant, that would overlook support for euthanasia or embryonic stem cell research.

The language used when addressing congregations is also, erm, troublesome. “In preparing a proposal keep in mind that because individual congregations respond to the instructions/directions they receive from their denominational leadership“… what are we, sheep? It is immediately followed by this: “This project will involve becoming familiar with the directives that have already been developed by regional or state offices of the various denominations and the various faith traditions, and probably conversations with key denominational staff to determine what is the most effective way to work within anyone denomination.” Infiltration. Figure out how to best market to the evangelical demographic.

Leave the churches alone. Just stop. This is not appropriate.

My Body Is Not A Road.

Okay. I’ve broken down all kinds of health care legislation this week. I will continue to break down more. Regardless of emotional, squishy arguments about the necessity for free available health care for everyone and the exhausting line by line dissection of the actual legislation, let’s lay this on the line. I’m just talking at you here for a second.

I am tired of hearing health care being viewed as a fundamental function of government. Because it isn’t. If it were, it would be outlined in the Constitution. Nowhere in our founding documents is there an outline for health care, nor is it even mentioned. The government was not given the power to control health care. I don’t believe that is an accident.

In the Age of Obama, there are certain things that I’m particularly concerned with maintaining control over. My body is one of those things. I understand the connotation of a “hands off my body” statement to most liberals. In their minds, it applies to abortion. Here is the difference: when a woman becomes pregnant she has already made a choice, and that choice resulted in sharing her body. At that point, her body is no longer entirely hers. She relinquished that control to the life inside her, at least for nine months or so. Stop equating the two.

I have heard way too many people compare health care to road maintenance, implying that it is the obligation of a government to provide upkeep for the health care system. Pavement warrants government involvement. My doctor visits do not. And people, if you think that government is going to pick up the tab for your health care costs without having their say, you are sadly mistaken. This is going to affect everything from prenatal care to end of life care, and everything in between.

How much will they actually control? I’m going to pull, words for word, some of the pieces out of here.

  • Page 124, lines 24 and 25: LIMITATIONS ON REVIEW. — There shall be no administrative or judicial review of a payment rate or methodology established under this section or under section. The government can not be reviewed regarding the rates it sets.
  • Page 272, Section 1145: AUTHORIZATION OF ADJUSTMENT FOR CANCER HOSPITALS.—  ‘‘(A) STUDY.—The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine if, under the system under this subsection, costs incurred by hospitals described in section 1886(d)(1)(B)(v) with respect to ambulatory payment classification groups exceed those costs incurred by other hospitals furnishing services under this subsection (as determined appropriate by the Secretary). Cancer patients: This is the beginning of rationing. They are conducting a study to determine which costs are deemed appropriate.
  • Page 280 Sec 1151: ADJUSTMENT TO HOSPITAL PAYMENTS FOR EXCESS READMISSIONS.—  ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—With respect to payment for discharges from an applicable hospital (as defined in paragraph (5)(C)) occurring during a fiscal year beginning on or after October 1, 2011, in order to account for excess readmissions in the hospital, the Secretary shall reduce the payments that would otherwise be made to such hospital under subsection (d) (or section 14(b)(3), as the case may be) for such a discharge by an amount equal to the product of—
    • ‘‘(A) the base operating DRG payment amount (as defined in paragraph (2)) for the discharge; and
    • ‘‘(B) the adjustment factor (described in paragraph (3)(A)) for the hospital for the fiscal year. The Secretary decides which readmissions are necessary or not. So much for it being between you and your doctor!

This goes on for ages, but those are just a few examples. The text is there. If you feel it is taken out of context, I welcome you to research it yourself as I have. The problem is, even if they do not intend it to be interpreted this way, the fact that it can be means the language is too loose. It leaves too much wiggle room for Congress to manipulate as they see fit. This is just not okay.

In the words of our President, let me be clear: Childbirth is not a pothole. Cancer is not a guardrail. My body is not a road. Please leave it alone.