Here's this week's reproductive rights news brought to you by the women of Our Word (and at least one of the guys!). If you see something you find relevant please email it to me, bayprairie at gmail dot com

The National Abortion Federation is Launching a Blog, "The Saporta Reporter," on February 13.

On February 13, the National Abortion Federation will launch our first-ever web-log. Entitled "The Saporta Reporter" the blog will keep pro-choice supporters up to date on all the latest in the pro-choice world. Vicki Saporta, the NAF president and CEO, decided that a blog was the ideal way to keep NAF members, donors, and activists informed about all the pro-choice news that’s happening around the world. Vicki’s blog will offer frequent updates on news items, NAF programs, as well as stories from the women, doctors, and activists in the pro-choice world.

Remember to check our page on February 13 for Vicki’s first post at www.prochoice.org/blog.

::::more below the fold::::also posted at Our Word::::

Here's a story on another front in the anti-choice war. Keep in mind that anti-choicers are working in many states to write into law that human life begins at conception.

A Surplus Of Embryos

One of 10 couples in the United States is infertile, and more and more of them are seeking help through in vitro fertilization. In that process, eggs extracted from the woman are fertilized with the man’s sperm in a Petri dish and the resulting embryos are implanted back into the woman.

:::snip:::

The Madsen's personal story began with their having a heck of time getting pregnant.

"It was not totally her. It was not totally me. It was a combination factor, and we started with the IVF programs," explains Kai.

Asked what the programs do, Pam explains: "They want to make many eggs. They want … many embryos."

:::snip:::

Like most couples who go through fertility treatments, the Madsens ended up with excess embryos. They have four that have been frozen ever since the birth of their second son, 13 years ago.

:::snip:::

There are thousands upon thousands of couples like the Madsens. In fact, there are 400,000 frozen embryos in storage in fertility clinics across the country.

:::snip:::

The Madsens say there are five options.

"Well, one, we could have used them to have a third child, the potential of a third child. We could have destroyed them, not used them and … have them thawed and put away. We could have donated them to another couple who's having reproductive difficulties and wants to have a baby. We could continue to do nothing. Or we could donate them to medical research," Pam explains.

____________

Here's a story on the abortion debate from Australia. The debate there is a bit different than it is here in the United States. It's downright civil.

Debate on Abortion Pill in Australia Becomes Personal

SYDNEY, Australia, Feb. 9 — The continuing debate here over the so-called abortion pill RU-486 — the Senate voted Thursday to make it more easily available — has revealed many of the same fierce emotions as abortion debates do in the United States.

But it has also produced some moments unfathomable in the United States.

:::snip:::

What was perhaps more stunningly personal was the statement on the Senate floor by Senator Lynette Allison, a sponsor of the legislation.

"An estimated one in three women have had an abortion," she said. "And I am one of them."

She was 18, and abortion was illegal then, in the 1960's, she said in an interview. She came from a conservative family, "which would have been ashamed of their daughter having an illegitimate child," added Ms. Allison, 59, who was a secondary school teacher before she got into politics. It was not difficult to make the public statement, and she did so out of solidarity with other women, she said.

"There are a lot of efforts to shame women who have had a termination," Ms. Allison said. "It was important to send a message to women that they were not alone, that there were people who understood."

Abortion here is regulated by the states, and it has generally been legal for 30 years.

"It is a decision for a woman and her doctor," said Wendy McCarthy, a businesswoman who recently stepped down as chancellor of the University of Canberra and advocates abortion rights.

:::snip:::

The Senate debate lasted two days — longer than the Senate recently spent debating antiterrorism laws, which gave the police and intelligence agencies sweeping powers to monitor, arrest and detain terrorism suspects.

"It is galling to listen to the men — and it is mostly men — who have such contempt for women who terminate unwanted pregnancies who have neither the compassion nor the understanding of the huge, and for many, daunting task of taking an embryo the size of a grain of rice to adulthood," Ms. Allison said during the debate.

____________

Here's an fetal-death bill thats so poorly conceived both Planned Parenthood and Wisconsin Right to Life are allied against it. For different reasons, of course.

Abortion issue rivals oppose fetal death bill

In a rare alliance, Planned Parenthood and Wisconsin Right to Life are fighting a Republican bill that would lead to prison terms for women who take illegal drugs that result in the death of a fetus.

:::snip:::

If charged under the state's fetal homicide bill, a woman could receive a maximum sentence of life in prison for murder, or 15 years in confinement if convicted of second-degree recklss homicide.

:::snip:::

Lyons said the proposal would also jeopardize the state's fetal homicide law because it does not deal equally with such other potentially harmful substances as alcohol.

:::snip:::

On the other hand, Chris Taylor, political director of Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin, says the bill would also subject any woman who produces a fertilized egg - but who might not yet even be pregnant - to drug trafficking charges if she takes a controlled substance.

"This bill is so broad that virtually any woman having sex could be charged with a variety of crimes," she told members of the Assembly Judiciary Committee, which held a hearing on the bill Thursday.

Taylor said this "dangerous and ridiculous" bill would threaten, rather than enhance, maternal and fetal health.

"This bill punishes pregnant woman who are addicted to controlled substances, rather than facilitating the help and prenatal care they need," she added.

:::snip:::

Feinberg said that the fear of incarceration drives addicted pregnant women from prenatal care and keeps them from seeking treatment. If they are in treatment, they walk out, Feinberg said.

"If our goal is what we say it is - to have healthy moms deliver healthy babies - you want legislation that encourages women by not being punitive to seek that kind of help. They need to know they can go to doctors and not be turned in. They need to know we can offer them a safe respite."

If you're truly interested in learning about the issue of women who are pregnant and are dealing with substance abuse you must go to the National Advocates for Pregnant Women and browse the articles. The site contains a wealth of information and even more caring.

NAPW has a vision of a world where women enjoy full personhood and where neither pregnancy nor drug use serve as an excuse to dehumanize and punish select groups of people. Our mission is to secure the human and civil rights, health, and welfare of pregnant and parenting women while protecting children from punitive and misguided state policies. We advocate on behalf of all women, especially those who are most marginalized: women of color, low-income women, and women who use drugs.

____________

There's a link to a great editorial that ran in the Los Angeles Times this week.

The Rights Of the Born

EVERYTHING WAS going swimmingly on the panel. The subject was politics and faith, and I was on stage with two clergymen with progressive spiritual leanings, and a moderator who is liberal and Catholic. We were having a discussion with the audience of 1,300 people in Washington about many of the social justice topics on which we agree — the immorality of the federal budget, the wrongness of the president's war in Iraq. Then an older man came to the mike and raised the issue of abortion, and everyone just lost his or her mind.

Or, at any rate, I did.

Maybe it was the way in which the man couched the question, which was about how we should reconcile our progressive stances on peace and justice with the "murder of a million babies every year in America." The man who asked the question was soft-spoken, neatly and casually dressed.

First Richard, a Franciscan priest, answered that this is indeed a painful issue but that it is not the only "pro-life" issue that progressives — even Catholics — should concern themselves with during elections. There are also the matters of capital punishment and the war in Iraq, and of HIV. Then Jim, an evangelical, spoke about the need to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies, and the need to diffuse abortion as a political issue, by welcoming pro-choice and pro-life supporters to the discussion, with equal respect for their positions. He spoke gently about how "morally ambiguous" the issue is.

I sat there simmering, like a samovar; nice Jesusy me. The moderator turned to me and asked quietly if I would like to respond. I did: I wanted to respond by pushing over our table.

____________

In Oregon news, at least one anti-choicer is livid.

Court faults wording of abortion initiative

SALEM -- The Oregon Supreme Court has kicked back to the attorney general a proposed November ballot initiative that would require parents to be notified before their daughter has an abortion.

The decision, issued Thursday, left Gayle Atteberry, executive director of Oregon Right to Life, "livid" that the court not only ordered the attorney general to rewrite the ballot title and summary language, but also that it took more than two months to come to a decision.

"The Supreme Court is playing politics," Atteberry said. "This is a stalling tactic."

:::snip:::

The attorney general has five business days to resubmit language, which could be challenged again. Oregon Right to Life has until July 7 to collect 75,630 signatures from registered voters. But it cannot move forward without the court's approval.

Atteberry said she has no doubt her group could collect the signatures necessary -- even with a shortened time. Even so, she said Right to Life will wait to see the proposed changes before deciding whether to proceed.

The group has decided to drop an initiative that would have expanded the definition of criminal homicide to include the killing of a fetus as a result of an assault or murder of its mother. The so-called Laci Peterson initiative, mirrored laws adopted in other states following the highly publicized murder of Peterson, a California woman who was eight months' pregnant when she was killed by her husband.

The ballot title written by the attorney general summarized the measure as: "Amends homicide law definition of 'human being' to include human zygote, embryo, fetus."

Right to Life challenged the language and lost.

"How can we win with a ballot title that says that?" Atteberry asked.

____________

The Bill referred to in this story has really generated a lot of stories on blogs this week. What's interesting is the same bill was introduced last year too, and made it as far as the governors desk, and much less mention was made of it. The difference? Hard to say, really, probably Roberts and Alito.

Abortion measure advances

PIERRE, S.D. - The South Dakota House overwhelmingly passed a bill Thursday that would ban nearly all abortions in the state, ushering the issue to the Senate.

Supporters are pushing the measure as a means of drawing the attention of the U.S. Supreme Court, hoping to set up a legal challenge that ultimately will result in reversal of the high court's 1973 decision legalizing abortion.

The bill banning abortion, HB1215, was passed 47-22 in the House after more than an hour of debate.

:::snip:::

Although saying they personally abhor abortion, opponents made several unsuccessful attempts to make exceptions in cases of rape and incest, and to protect pregnant women whose health may be endangered.

:::snip:::

Among those to vote against the bill was Rep. Joni Cutler, R-Sioux Falls.

"The vote for this bill is an experiment in the courts, is done at the expense and suffering of those rape and incest victims who'd be forced by the government into pregnancy," she said. "The disregard for their pain and suffering ... was apparent to me. This certainly challenges my notion of the land of the free and the brave."

:::snip:::

Rep. Tom Hennies, R-Rapid City, said he is against abortion but could not vote for the bill without an exception for rape and incest. He offered such an amendment, but it was rejected.

:::snip:::

Legislatures in several states are considering similar measures, Hunt said.

____________

Here's a really great editorial from Australia

Pro-choice and Catholic: A mother's story

When my first baby, a beautiful, perfect girl, was born I returned to my studies to complete a course in Ethics. Our tutor was a very well known ethicist and a marvellously skilled teacher. I hung on his every word as he brilliantly demonstrated the arguments in favour of “family values�.

At a mid morning break, I proudly showed photographs of my miraculous, wonder-filled child. “Look,� I said, “Look at my new baby�. Our lecturer did not even feign interest: as a celibate man the reality of motherhood and babies merely got in the way of Christian Ethics 101. “Oh, yes,� he uttered, though not unkindly, before attacking the coffee urn. I was dismayed. A couple of fellow students, older nurses and midwives, looked on. They'd seen it before. I silently asked my question. "Don't worry, it's all theory for them," they said.

This wonderful priest hadn't the faintest idea of what motherhood means to a woman, or how it changes her. He was simply revealing the church's two card trick: motherhood is your highest goal, but once you are a mother you are nothing. What you produced is nothing.

This was my first inkling that the pro life position was about more than protecting the unborn. For my lecturer, the not-yet-born are primarily important as a proposition to be defended, an argument in favour of of an ethical position, a precedent to be protected. The priest's disinterest in my flesh and blood baby therefore becomes understandable, if sort of indefensible.

This attitude is writ large in the anti choice movement. For them, the unborn - because they represent an Ultimate Principle - must have even more human rights than the already-born. Their persistent refrain is “every abortion kills a human life�. But when do you hear the pro-life activist protesting against the murder of little Iraqi children by Australian bombs? When do you see them agitating for increased resources to avoid the scandalously high mortality rates amongst Aboriginal infants? When do you hear them agitating for greater economic equity for poorer families, for whom the endless, dis-spiriting financial struggle is the direct cause of a significant number of abortions? You do not hear any of this from the anti choice camp: because their real object is not the protection of the innocent unborn, but the control of powerful, vulnerable women - with whom God has shared divine power.

____________

Here's a disturbing story from Europe.

Polish woman fights abortion case

A Polish woman who was refused an abortion despite warnings that having a baby could make her blind is taking her case to Europe's human rights court.

Alicja Tysiac's eyesight worsened drastically after she had her third baby, and she fears she will go blind.

In staunchly Catholic Poland, abortion is illegal unless the health of the mother or unborn child is at risk.

:::snip:::

Poland has some of the strictest abortion laws in Europe.

:::snip:::

Abortion was widely available in Poland under communism.

Following its collapse, a resurgent Catholic church sponsored legislation that said a pregnancy could only be terminated in three circumstances:

• Where it could save the mother's life
• Where the foetus was irreparably damaged
• Where the pregnancy was the result of rape or incest.

As the article states the practice of this Polish law is even stricter than the law itself. This is a perfect example of a government making decisions it has no business making. These choices should have been left to the woman and the physican involved but the physicans feared the consequences and did nothing. I hope the European court finds for the woman, although thats no recompense for the loss of eyesight.

Here's the press release from the court hearing the case:

EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS - Press release issued by the Registrar - CHAMBER HEARING - TYSIAC v. POLAND

I suggest that if you read the details of the press release closely, remember Alicja Tysiac no longer can, due to the childbirth that was forced upon her, against her will, by the state.

____________

Here's a story on South Dakota legislation thats stalled.

School contraceptive measure stalls

PIERRE, S.D. - South Dakota legislators stripped a bill of a provision that could have resulted in jail for teachers and school counselors who send or take students to abortion clinics or family planning services.

I suppose taxi operators, airline pilots and ambulance drivers will be next.

____________

A fetus feels pain because, well because the medical professionals grandstanding in your local legislature say so.

'Fetal pain' bills advance in states

A new front in the debate over abortion is emerging in statehouses across the nation. Abortion foes are gaining ground with bills to force doctors to tell women seeking abortions that fetuses could feel pain during the procedure.

:::snip::::

...Fetal pain bills were introduced in 19 states in 2005, and were passed in Arkansas, Georgia, Minnesota and Wisconsin

:::snip:::

The bills are the latest attempt by abortion foes to put more restrictions on the procedure and potentially pave the way for the Supreme Court to reverse "Roe v. Wade," the 1973 ruling that made abortion legal nationwide. Such a historic reversal is unlikely soon: There are few proposals in state legislatures that would challenge "Roe" directly, and five of the nine Supreme Court justices have supported abortion rights.

:::snip:::

Karrie Galloway of Planned Parenthood of Utah counters that fetal pain bills are merely a provocative way to discourage abortion. "There is no medical or scientific consensus" that fetuses feel pain at 20 weeks.

____________

Here's some more news from that circus that winters in Kansas, ringmastered by Attorney General Phill Kline.

Witness: Teen girls hurt most by sex

A child psychiatrist testifying for Kansas Attorney General Phill Kline told a federal judge that teenage girls' access to birth control pills should be limited but not boys' ability to buy condoms.

But Allan Josephson of Louisville, Ky., also testified Monday that his expert opinion had been influenced by a private consultant for the state.

The consultant, Vincent Rue, has received more than $150,000, Kline's office told The Eagle, to help defend the attorney general in a lawsuit entering its second week.

Josephson's opinions included that sex causes more harm to girls than to boys and that, if a pregnancy results, abortion doesn't teach kids the lesson they need to learn.

:::snip:::

Josephson said girls who lose their virginity before they're married suffer most.

"A core sense of self or personhood is lost in that experience," Josephson testified.

:::snip:::

Josephson does think that once a teen gets pregnant, abortion shouldn't be an option.

"If it's safe, say the pelvis isn't too small, a child could be better served by having a child, putting it up for adoption and then dealing with the behavior that led to the pregnancy," Josephson said. "The product of that behavior should not be eliminated."

Josephson added that teen girls would be discouraged from seeking abortions, or from even having sex, if their activities were required to be reported to social services.

Expert witness indeed.

____________

Here's a Pharmacist "rights" story concerning refusal to dispense birth control.

Wisconsin Judge Upholds Pharmacy Board's Punishment of Pharmacist Who Refused To Refill Oral Contraceptive Prescription

Barron County, Wis., Circuit Judge James Babler on Friday upheld the ruling of the state Pharmacy Examining Board against a pharmacist who refused to refill a woman's oral contraceptive prescription because of moral objections to contraception. Neil Noesen in July 2002 refused to fill university student Amanda Phiede's oral contraceptive prescription while he was working as a substitute pharmacist at a Kmart pharmacy in Menomonie, Wis. When Phiede confirmed that she was taking the drug for birth control, Noesen told her that he would not fill the prescription. Phiede then asked him where else she could get the prescription filled, and Noesen refused to provide her with that information. Phiede later went to a Wal-Mart pharmacy, but when the Wal-Mart pharmacist called Noesen to have the prescription transferred, Noesen refused, saying again that artificial contraception is against his personal beliefs. Noesen continued to refuse to fill the prescription even after two police officers and the Kmart assistant manager spoke with him. The police took no further action and the managing pharmacist filled Phiede's prescription. The examining board in April 2005 reprimanded and limited the license of the pharmacist. Under the reprimand, Noesen has to prepare written notices five days before beginning work at a pharmacy, specifying which practices he will not perform and the steps he would take to ensure that customers have access to the necessary medications. In addition, the board required that Noesen attend six hours of ethics education and pay court costs, which are estimated to be about $20,000

To illustrate the anti-choice viewpoint on this story read the way anti-choicers characterize BC.

Judge Upholds Pharmacist’s Fine, Sanction for Failing to Fill Birth-Control Prescription

BARRON, Wisconsin, February 9, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A Wisconsin pharmacist who contested sanctions and a fine he received in 2004 for failing to dispense the abortifacient birth-control-pill has had the sanction against him upheld by a local judge.

The anti-choice movement won't let scientific facts stand in the way of their goals and this story proves it. To them birth control is an abortion drug. Laughable. But make no mistake about it. If they have they way, you won't be able to attain BC anywhere in these United States and they are working to make that reality.

The good news is many pharmacists take their obligation to their patients seriously. Here's an example of a pharmacist who feels birth control is morally wrong, but still fills prescriptions for it, putting the patient's need above his own.

No remedy in sight

In the controversy over whether pharmacists should be allowed to refuse to fill prescriptions because of their moral beliefs, Caliente pharmacist Adam Katschke could be the poster boy.

Emergency contraception -- the "morning-after pill" -- conflicts with Katschke's Mormon beliefs. But his professional obligation to give people the pills that their doctors say they need tugs him in the other direction.

"My religion is against it, but as a professional, I feel I can't be," Katschke said in a recent interview. "I know, if I went to my clergy, I know what they'd say."

And yet he knows that his independently owned drugstore, Meadow Valley Pharmacy, is the only place to fill prescriptions within 110 miles. If he turned down a patient, the next-nearest place to get the medication would be St. George, Utah.

:::snip:::

The situation came to a head when a patient handed Katschke a prescription for emergency contraception. Forced to make a decision, his professional obligation won out over his faith's doctrine.

"If I were in the city, I don't think I would have a problem denying someone, because there would be plenty of other pharmacies that would fill (the prescription)," Katschke said. "But out here, I felt I had to handle it professionally."

To Katschke, it was a matter of common sense and compassion.

____________

The following story is one of the most sigificant of the week.

Britain defies US with funding to boost safe abortion services

Attempt to replace lost dollars after 'global gag'

The British government will today publicly defy the United States by giving money for safe abortion services in developing countries to organisations that have been cut off from American funding.

Nearly 70,000 women and girls died last year because they went to back-street abortionists. Hundreds of thousands of others suffered serious injuries.

Critics of America's aid policy say some might have lived if the US had not withdrawn funding from clinics that provide safe services - or that simply tell women where to find them.

The "global gag" rule, as it has become known, was imposed by President George Bush in 2001. It requires any organisation applying for US funds to sign an undertaking not to counsel women on abortion - other than advising against it - or provide abortion services.

The UK will today become the founder donor of a fund set up specifically to attempt to replace the lost dollars and increase safe abortion services.

The Department for International Development will contribute £3m over two years. DFID and the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) - whose clinics across the world have suffered badly - hope that others, particularly the Scandinavians, Dutch and Canadians, will be emboldened to put money in too.

"I think the UK is being very brave and very progressive in making this commitment," said Steven Sinding, director general of the IPPF. "We're deeply grateful for this gesture not only financially but also politically.

"Tens of thousands of women who depend on our services are not able to get them. We're committed to the expansion of safe abortion because in any society no matter how efficiently contraception is made available there will be unplanned and unwanted pregnancies."

Britian, always a staunch ally of freedom.

____________

Here's a brief story on the anti-choice reaction to the story above.

Anti-Abortion Group Outraged by Funding

Feb. 6, 2006 — A U.S. anti-abortion group has expressed outrage over the announcement that Britain will pledge more than $5 million — about 3 million pounds — to the Global Safe Abortion Programme, which helps women in developing nations receive access to safe abortions.

Joe Scheidler, the national director of the U.S. Pro-Life Action League, said the funding wouldn't solve the problems of women in developing nations.

:::snip::::

Scheidler said that aid should be directed to preventing the need for abortion in the first place, and helping families stay together.

____________

Here's a sensible editorial on the Utah Fetal pain bill that we've discussed in the past. It's from the Salt Lake City Tribune.

ABORTION LEGISLATION: Bill leaves too many medical questions unanswered

A bill that would require physicians to tell a woman who is having a late-term abortion that the procedure might be painful to the fetus and to therefore administer anesthetic would unwisely interject the state into private medical decisions best left to a woman and her doctor.

The most recent study on fetal pain, published by the Journal of the American Medical Association, states that a fetus cannot sense pain until 29 or 30 weeks, if at all. Further, physicians have testified that administering pain-relief medication to a fetus may not even be feasible.

HB222 would needlessly inflict emotional pain on a woman, who very likely has considered all alternatives and made the difficult decision, for medical or other reasons, to end her pregnancy.

:::snip:::

These medical questions ignored by the bill, and the fact that it would affect so few pregnancies - 18 in 2003, the most recent year for which statistics are available - are compelling reasons to kill it. But Ray and the House members who backed his bill know full well that abortion is always a handy hot-button issue in an election year. We don't know to what extent that reality is in play here, but we have seen political grandstanding at the expense of women in Utah before, and it is unconscionable.

The House acted irresponsibly in passing this bill. We urge the Senate to take a closer look at HB222 and its ramifications and reject it.

There's the word. Unconscionable.

_____________

Here's a good news story on a South Dakota TRAP law that was so incredibly offensive it failed to get out of committee in the South Dakota Legislature. The good news is it was killed. The bad news is they'll probably try it again next year, albeit with a few modifications.

Anti-abortion measure fails

PIERRE, S.D. - Lawmakers rejected a bill Monday that would have required Planned Parenthood in Sioux Falls to do a professional assessment of the physical and emotional risks facing each woman who asks for an abortion.

Supporters of HB1216 said many women who get abortions are later subject to depression, alcohol or drug abuse, suicide and other problems. They said abortion doctors or other medical professionals who work where women go to get abortions should provide much more information about the potential risks.

:::snip:::

HB1216 would have allowed women to sue abortion doctors for negligence if they later developed problems that they believed were linked to their abortions and felt they had not been fully informed about those problems.

:::snip:::

The bill is legally questionable because it would set up two classes of doctors in South Dakota, said Dave Gerdes, lobbyist for the South Dakota Medical Association.

"It's completely unreasonable and unworkable," he said.

If heart surgeons had to meet the same requirements as those proposed for doctors who do abortions and had to worry about later getting sued for failure to inform patients of some potential risks, heart surgery would stop in South Dakota, he said.

"Not only is it illegal, but it's grossly unfair," he said of the bill.

____________

Here's a news story from an anti-choice source on the new majority leader of the U.S. House of Representatives.

New 'Catholic pro-life' majority leader states commitment to unborn

WASHINGTON (Catholic Online) -- The new majority leader of the U.S. House is committed “completely, totally, and without equivocation� to the protection of the lives of the unborn, according to a letter sent to fellow members of the Republican caucus before his election as the second-ranking member of the leadership, according to a letter received by Catholic Online.

:::snip:::

In the Jan. 17, 2006, campaign letter for the majority leader position, Boehner referred to himself as “a lifelong Roman Catholic� and “a Catholic, pro-life legislator� who has “always believed that life begins at conception.�

:::snip:::

Boehner said he is committed to “refuse to compromise� on “any legislation that condones the destruction of innocent human life� and to continue his “consistent� voting record to “safeguard the lives of unborn children in our nation and across the world.�

:::snip:::

“I have a moral responsibility to fight for that which the late pope fought, and to oppose any legislation that would result in new graves being added,� Boehner wrote.

Sounds like Representative Boehner is the pope's man in Washington. What about the women he supposedly represents? Who will protect their freedoms?

____________

Here's another good editorial that we found at the Austin American Statesman, under a Cleveland Plain Dealer byline.

Schultz: Abortion can be a sacred choice

With the simplest of gestures, any woman in America can lay her hands on the battleground here at home.

It's beneath the soft flesh of her own body, the area nestled between her hips where babies are conceived or not, carried to term or not. By merely resting her hand across her abdomen, a woman can find the combustible intersection of politics and religion where the mighty turf war is being waged.

If you listen only to those who scream the loudest, you might think that most Americans of faith believe abortion is a sin against God. It's a common misperception, and one that deeply troubles the Rev. Dr. Carlton Veazey, who heads the Washington, D.C.-based Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice and founded its Black Church Initiative.

"The majority of religious people in this country support choice, but you wouldn't know it by the noise and ink in the media from the other side," says the 69-year-old Baptist minister. "People tend to identify religious people with anti-choice, but that is the opposite of reality."

:::snip:::

"I was raised by my father, who was also a minister, to believe in the moral agency of individuals, that they had a right to make moral choices. Choice is a God-given right. To have a child can be a sacred choice. By the same token, to not have a child can be a sacred choice.

"The woman may not be prepared to bring a new life into the world. She may not be able to provide for a child. She may decide, 'My life is not where it should be.' "

The willingness to empathize with a woman facing an unplanned pregnancy is what brings many of us to support the right to reproductive freedom. Even those who are certain they could never abort a fetus under any circumstances can understand why someone else would, if only they start to imagine a whole different set of circumstances in their lives.

____________

Here's an excellent article that was sent to the list that was published by the Catholics For A Free Choice organization.

The Economics of Abortion Access in the US

Sarah is a 31-year-old Alaskan mother who works full time, making $1,000 a month. She has no health insurance. When she was 15 weeks pregnant and unable to get an abortion in Alaska (where there are only three abortion providers and none perform abortions after 14 weeks), she had to use her rent money to fly to Washington state to get one.[1]

In 2005, more than three decades after the Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion, there are thousands of "Sarahs" each year - women of all ages, races and ethnicities, religions, women in prison, in the military, women who are single and married. The only thing these women have in common is that they cannot afford to pay for the abortions they need and want. This "Sarah" was one of the fortunate women who, with financial assistance from grassroots abortion funds and a friend who provided a place to stay, was able to overcome the barriers and obtain an abortion. Too many others in her situation are not as fortunate. While this network of abortion funds helps thousands of women each yeaer, it cannot meet the enormous need of all the women like Sarah.

This problem is getting worse - even though abortion rates are dropping, they continue to rise for poor and low-income women.[2] Abortions are economically out of reach for so many women - primarily because of restrictive laws and policies. In order to more fully understand the financial barriers to abortion access, we need to examine the restrictions placed on abortion funding, the cost of abortion and the history of advocacy for abortion funding.

____________

In Kentucky, legislators propose legislation sure to be ruled unconstitutional.

Ky. abortion bill proposed

FRANKFORT - Most abortions would be outlawed in Kentucky under legislation proposed by a Republican lawmaker from Florence.

:::snip:::

State Rep. Addia Wuchner, R-Florence, introduced the bill to make performing an abortion a felony for a physician.

:::snip:::

"Now that we have experienced (33) years of legalized abortion, we have the experience of medical and biological research that now confirms what we have always thought, that life begins when the ovum is fertilized," Wuchner said. "Life begins at fertilization. There is a unique human being possessing the qualities of neither the mother or father."

:::snip:::

Wuchner says some Democrats in the legislature will support the anti-abortion bill.

That's all we need. More democratic woman-haters enabling the oppressive Republican party.

____________

Here's more forced-birth action from those medical geniuses in the South Dakota Lege.

Senate rejects emergency room contraception measure

PIERRE, S.D. - A proposal to make medical facilities provide information on emergency contraception to all rape victims who seek treatment was rejected by the South Dakota Senate on Tuesday after opponents said the measure is not needed.

:::snip:::

SB175 would have required that all rape victims who seek emergency treatment be told about emergency contraception, defined as any drug or device approved by the federal Food and Drug Administration that can prevent pregnancy after sex. When a rape victim asked for emergency contraception, a medical facility would have had to provide the drug, provide a prescription or refer the woman to another doctor or facility that could provide emergency contraception.

:::snip:::

Schoenbeck said the measure was intended to politicize rape victims as a way to support abortion.

:::snip:::

Sen. Tom Hansen, R-Huron, said he opposes the measure because it could result in the abortion of a fetus.

"No matter how serious the crime that's been committed, it's not the baby's fault," Hansen said. "There's another voice that needs to be heard, and I tend to side with that baby."

South Dakota has some especially offsensive males running the state government, don't you feel? What a house full of jerks.

____________

Here's an upfront look at both sides of the line at the clinic level

Both sides believe they save lives

Every week, the 40-foot sidewalk in front of the Hope Clinic for Women is flanked by protesters who greet, scold or plead with everyone - staff or patient - who comes to the door.

But nurses, doctors, counselors and administrators rarely shy away from the front entrance or try to slip in the back. Working here, many say, is a badge to be worn with pride.

For their part, the anti-abortion activists mostly stand back, giving some space and not encroaching on private property. Instead, they typically plant themselves in the alley or along the streets.

This zone of protest is what grabs headlines and TV coverage. The media often simplify the abortion debate into shouting matches.

The nation watched last month as tens of thousands on the National Mall in Washington marched against the landmark abortion decision Roe. v. Wade, but rarely does the public eye see what goes on away from the protest lines. Recently a Post-Dispatch reporter spent time with advocates on both sides for a behind-the-scenes perspective to the abortion debate.

Average:

0

 

Your rating: Select ratingGive it 1/5Give it 2/5Give it 3/5Give it 4/5Give it 5/5