Showing posts tagged abortion

Pennsylvania poised to enact most restrictive abortion law of 2012

(Reblogged from diadoumenos)

"A federal judge has temporarily blocked Kansas from enforcing new licensing regulations against its three abortion providers pending the resolution of a lawsuit..."s,

(Reblogged from diadoumenos)
“

Post-abortion syndrome is not real, according to the APA. But, you know, who trusts the American Psychological Association? Women who experienced psychological issues after an abortion were likely to have exhibited symptoms prior to their abortion which means the abortion did not cause their psychological issues.

[Abort73.com] is a clearly biased pro-life website. Of course it’s going to manipulate information about abortions. Unbiased sources are important because it adds credibility to your argument. My sources are unbiased. The National Cancer Institute has nothing to gain by being pro-life or pro-choice. The Guttmacher Institute has nothing to gain by giving information on abortions, who gets them, and when they’re done. The American Psychological Associtaion has nothing to gain from being pro-life or pro-choice. The BBC has nothing to gain from being pro-life or pro-choice. The success of their websites and organizations do not rely on the support of one group of people (like pro-life advocates) so they are free to report the facts, unlike abort73.com which not only pan-handles to pro-life advocates, it requires their support to exist because it has no scientific or professional credibility out side of pro-life propaganda.

Being able to control what happens to your body is not pointless. When people try to take away your right to make decisions, it’s something to get pissed off about. Don’t act like CPCs don’t manipulate women when they do. Believe what you want but don’t blatantly ignore something that’s true. That’s just willingly ignoring reality.

Rabble, writing an excellent take-down of a born-again bigot’s anti-choice nonsense. My only quibble: Using the term “pro-life” for anti-choice groups implies that pro-choicers are anti-life when we’re not. The term also allows anti-choicers to stigmatize abortion, and that stigma advances their overall agenda. — Ryking (via ryking)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I and my fellow pro-choicers were using the term “anti-choice” back in the 80’s…I’m not sure why or when that was basically abandoned because I rarely hear it used anymore.  But it is accurate, and puts any debate on a more level playing field - the subject really is “choice” about one’s own body.  The mere term “pro-life” makes any counterargument begin at a disadvantage because of the psychological implications inherent in the term, which are very misleading.

Always appreciative of Rabble’s fearlessness, whichever term is used!   ~whyinthehell

(Reblogged from diadoumenos)

The Real Victims of Stupak-Pitts

rabbleprochoice:

From Renee E. Mestad, MD:

My patient Sherry is 24, pregnant, and the mother of a 7-month-old son. Although her pregnancy was not planned, Sherry and her husband were initially excited to have a little brother or sister for their boy. Then Sherry’s early ultrasound showed she had twins. She and her husband spent several weeks eagerly anticipating the growth of their family.

But the next ultrasound showed that the twins are conjoined, or Siamese. The babies are joined at the head, sharing a brain, and chest, sharing a heart. They have two spines, four arms, and four legs. It would be impossible to separate them. If they survive after birth, it would only be for a few minutes. One heart can’t keep two bodies alive. The risk of stillbirth is also very high.

Now 19 weeks into her pregnancy, Sherry tells me she is depressed. She wakes up every morning wondering if today will be the day her babies will die inside her. How would she deliver them? She knows that she would probably need a cesarean section because their combined size might make them too large for the birth canal. Sherry then imagines carrying the twins for another four and a half months. She sees herself delivering stillborns or watching her babies die minutes after their birth.

Sherry must decide whether to continue her pregnancy. An abortion might give her and her husband some emotional relief. And if the twins are small enough, she might not need surgery to remove them.

But because Sherry’s insurance will not pay for her abortion, she has to worry about money on top of her other fears. She is on Medicaid, which will cover the twins’ delivery, alive or dead, but not an abortion—fetal abnormality isn’t enough to get around the Hyde amendment. Although the abortion would be less expensive in a clinic, Sherry would have to go to a hospital since she could need surgery. She would be responsible for the entire bill of at least $10,000 to cover the operating room, anesthesia, medication, and other fees. This expense would destroy her family’s financial well-being.

Sherry can carry her babies to term who cannot and will not live, or she can have an abortion and possibly bankrupt her family.

Sherry’s pregnancy is medically rare, but her dilemma about money is all too familiar. When a woman doesn’t have insurance coverage for abortion, she and her family suffer.

(Reblogged from rabbleprochoice)

With “Democrats” Like These…

ryking:

…who needs Republicans? 64 Democrats joined 176 Republicans to stick a shiv in the backs of hundreds of thousands of poor women; bipartisanship at its “finest.” Notice how it’s always one-sided and hews to the right?

The U.S. House of Representatives voted on Saturday to tighten a ban against using federal funds to finance abortions under the proposed Democratic healthcare reform legislation.

Opposition Republicans joined forces with anti-abortion Democrats to pass the amendment to the healthcare legislation on a vote of 240-194.

The amendment angered liberal Democrats who support abortion rights…

This is the kind of betrayal that led to me join the Green Party in 2008, and it’s the kind of betrayal that keeps me from donating to the odd Dem who still remembers that being a Democrat means not acting like a piece of right-wing trash.

Aaarghh!  This may be the last straw for me and the Democratic Party.  I think I’m switching to Green.  What a pathetic group of zip-lipped, sit-on-their-hands, self-destructive puppets the Dems are proving to be…over and over and over.

(Reblogged from diadoumenos)