I hope and pray that we can find a way to deal with the current conflict about definitions. And if we do not, then shame on us all, because this is the debate we’re having. We will win if we can focus on the baby, and 20 weeks, and is America in the right spot on this issue. I’m going to to do more than bring my bill up. I’m going to need your help to find a way out of this definitional problem of rape.
The rape exception will be part of the bill - that’s the Hyde position - we just need to find a way, definitionally, to not get us in a spot where we’re debating about what a legitimate rape is…We’re not here debating legitimate rapes, we’re here talking about saving babies at 20 weeks.
I’ve got to tell our local “Feminazi” @geegeetee about this!
How does this play out? Based on the belief that he had an obligation to give a fetus a chance for life, a judge in Washington, D.C., ordered a critically ill 27-year-old woman who was 26 weeks pregnant to undergo a cesarean section, which he understood might kill her. Neither the woman nor her baby survived.
There are a bunch of horror stories like this of women with absolutely no intention of aborting their pregnancy being arrested/detained/forced to give birth via cesarean. All in the name of personhood.
These are not isolated or rare cases. Last year, we published a peer-reviewed study documenting 413 arrests or equivalent actions depriving pregnant women of their physical liberty during the 32 years between 1973, when Roe v. Wade was decided, and 2005. In a majority of these cases, women who had no intention of ending a pregnancy went to term and gave birth to a healthy baby. This includes the many cases where the pregnant woman was alleged to have used some amount of alcohol or a criminalized drug.
Since 2005, we have identified an additional 380 cases, with more arrests occurring every week. This significant increase coincides with what the Guttmacher Institute describes as a “seismic shift” in the number of states with laws hostile to abortion rights.
I wanted to write about something else before this, but this post by Doktor Zoom was about something too sick to ignore. I really felt the need to get it out there, just how disgusting this person is. I might have written something on this myself instead of pointing out to you what Doktor Zoom has wrote, but I’m kind of in a hurry and I don’t think I could have done a much better job than he did.
Former executive director of the South Carolina GOP, Trayvon Martin clairvoyant, ethics-free attorney, and avid penis self-photographer Todd Kincannon is proudly pro-life — with one exception, of course, in that he wishes Wendy Davis had been aborted. But he also recognizes that sometimes, in the face of a serious health crisis, you just need to man up and kill everyone who’s been infected or exposed. At Wonkette, we are sometimes given to exaggeration. But this is not an exaggeration: in a series of tweets on Saturday, Todd Kincannon, not satisfied with rightwing prescriptions like travel bans or embargoes on affected nations, literally advocated killing all Ebola patients, and napalming their villages for good measure, too. And we mean literally literally, not Joe Biden literally:
*Note : Sorry you guys might have to scroll up a bit after clicking on the link to read the rest of the article. I can’t figure out how to get it not to jump down to the comments.
Bottom line here, a GOP candidate refuses to touch a Muslim than gives an excuse only teabagger would be dumb enough to believe.
Jim Galloway at the Atlanta Journal Constitution offers a roundup of the drama surrounding a congressional debate this week between Democratic Rep. John Barrow of Georgia and his Republican challenger Rick Allen, which included a last-minute venue change because Allen refused to debate at the “suspect venue” of an Augusta-area Islamic community center.
So, Galloway explains, the debate was moved to a smaller location (to the annoyance of some would-be attendees who were turned away), but the drama didn’t end there, as Allen “made every attempt to avoid” the 73-year-old Egyptian-American doctor who had arranged the debate and refused to shake his hand. This, Allen later explained, was not because of the doctor’s religion but because he specializes in high-risk pregnancies, which can sometimes end in abortion.
Of course, the whole point of this doctor’s practice is to prevent high-risk pregnancies from ending in abortion. The local GOP chairman did later apologize, but really, how many levels of bigotry and stupidity (not to mention, lack of civility) is this?
Leaders from the National Council of Jewish Women Come to Washington to Speak Up for Abortion Coverage
It’s a press release, so here’s the whole thing:
September 17, 2014, Washington, DC - Leaders representing members of the National Council of Jewish Women (NCJW) came to Washington today to urge members of Congress to end federal bans that deny abortion coverage to women enrolled in federal health plans and programs. They joined nearly 200 other like-minded individuals as part of an advocacy and education effort mounted by All Above All, an NCJW-endorsed national campaign that unites organizations and individuals to build support for lifting the bans that deny abortion coverage.
The Washington, DC, event was the culmination of All Above All’s Be Bold Road Trip, a cross country effort that coordinated events across eight states to raise awareness about the harmful impact of restrictive federal policies such as the Hyde Amendment. Since passage of Hyde in 1976, politicians have withheld abortion coverage from the nearly one in seven women of reproductive age enrolled in the Medicaid program, as well as women who are federal workers, Peace Corps volunteers, and Native American women, among others. NCJW has long fought to end such bans and to ensure that every woman has the ability to obtain an abortion on the same basis as she obtains any other needed reproductive health care service.
Rabbi Lori Koffman of New York City, NCJW national board member and chair of NCJW’s reproductive justice initiative, asserts that lifting bans on abortion coverage is key not only to protecting women’s health and safety, but safeguarding her moral agency. “Getting rid of bans is not only about protecting a woman’s health, but also her religious liberty. The decision to end a pregnancy is deeply personal, and every woman must be able to follow her own faith tradition, moral values, and conscience in making this decision,” Rabbi Koffman said, adding, “By denying abortion coverage, legislators impose one religious view about abortion on all of us — interfering in a woman’s personal decision and denying her religious freedom.”
Participants in the Washington Lobby Day were equally adamant. “I came to Washington because I believe our lawmakers have an obligation to ensure every woman can access the health care she needs, including abortion, without risking her or her family’s economic security,” said Linda Slucker, immediate past president of NCJW. She added, “Congress should not restrict one woman’s ability to obtain the care that is best for her, just because she is poor. That kind of discrimination is unacceptable, and many people of faith believe as I do.”
Bans such as the Hyde Amendment most harm low-income women, who today are disproportionately women of color. When a woman cannot afford to access abortion, the consequences on her and her family can be far-reaching. Women who seek abortion but are denied are three times more likely to fall into poverty than those who can obtain such care.
To highlight the myriad harmful ways that coverage bans impact women and families across the country, the All Above All road trip began in Los Angeles on August 9, visiting 12 cities and logging 10,000 miles. In addition to NCJW’s participation in the All Above All Hill Education Day, NCJW leaders spoke at rallies in Los Angeles and Philadelphia. They helped mobilize for the Chicago rally and the Philadelphia event, where they were also part of the planning efforts. In Rochester, NCJW assisted in the effort to gather signatures on a petition urging Congress to lift coverage bans and also helped plan the local event.
Additional NCJW participants in the Lobby Day include Linda Slucker of West Orange, New Jersey (NCJW immediate past president); Joni Cohan of Dallas, Texas; Meryl Gindin, Bala Cynwyd, Penn., Donna Gutman, Chicago and Carole Levine, Evanston, Ill.; Sharon Lipton, Waterford, Mich.; Anne London, Lutherville, Md.; Stella Sayles, New York City, N.Y.; Janet Solitt, Fort Lauderdale Fla.; and Sue Tilis, Atlanta, Ga.
The National Council of Jewish Women (NCJW) is a grassroots organization of volunteers and advocates who turn progressive ideals into action. Inspired by Jewish values, NCJW strives for social justice by improving the quality of life for women, children, and families and by safeguarding individual rights and freedoms. More information on Facebook and on Twitter at @NCJW.
Click through for contact information: NCJW Leaders Come to Washington to Speak Up for Abortion Coverage
As a September 1 deadline looms, nearly all of Texas’s 41 clinics have shut their doors—and a few are still fighting to stay open.
come next week, abortions can no longer legally be performed at that old facility thanks to HB 2, the omnibus abortion bill that made national headlines last summer after Texas Sen. Wendy Davis’ 11-hour filibuster. The law requires that abortions—though not vasectomies—be performed in ambulatory surgical centers, hospital-like facilities that specialize in outpatient surgery. This provision goes into effect on September 1.
Ahead of this deadline, women’s health care providers have raced to meet HB 2’s burdensome requirements, spending millions of dollars and countless hours of fundraising and construction labor. Converting a medical facility into a full-blown ambulatory surgical facility can be very expensive. Texas has 114 pages of regulations governing ASCs, which mandate wide, gurney-accommodating hallways, larger operating rooms, and sterile ventilation. According to one Texas provider, it will cost them about $40,000 more each month to operate an ASC than it would a regular clinic.
In the face of the law’s requirements, all but eight abortion clinics in the state will close by September 1. Many were forced to lock their doors earlier this year as other HB 2 provisions went into effect, including a rule that required doctors to have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of where they perform abortions by the end of October 2013.
Punishments to include jail time and hard labor.
I’m also guessing by the wording of the Amendment, that Michael Wilson has no respect for the establishment clause either. Man you can just smell the homophobia.
Oh and gay people have made it a zero sum game? No bigots like you have made it a zero sum game. You guys made it a zero sum game from day one. I’ll bet Wilson is a big supporter of that hideous “Kill The Gays” bill. American Religious right loons worked tirelessly to spread homophobia in Uganda which help to bring that about in the first place. I bet Wilson is proud of those people.
This makes me so glad its not easy to amend our constitution.
He doesn’t have much respect for “man’s law” either. He’d rather we have attacked the supreme court justices who ruled in favor of gay rights and abortion and just refuse to obey the law. Unsurprisingly he’s also a supporter of Cliven Bundy because he wants “the second commandment to be defended by the second amendment.” Wilson doesn’t even think “Fox News” is “conservative,” and I’m not joking when I say that.
I want to thank Jeremy Hooper for creating a post about this at his blog Good As You. He’s one of the people who’s “life style” Wilson wants to outlaw. If not for him I wouldn’t know about this this wingnut.
New York is known to be home to many of the world’s top hospitals. There are top doctors in every specialty and plastic surgery is no exception. However, did you know that any practicing medical doctor can try his hand at plastic surgery?
All that’s needed in New York to practice plastic surgery is a shingle saying you’re a licensed physician. That means you can get a gynecologist doing tummy tucks, face lifts, and breast augmentation surgeries in their offices as PIX11 found:
In New York, it is legal for any type of doctor to do any type of cosmetic procedure. And they can do them in non-inspected operating rooms, provided they only use local anesthesia and “mild sedation.”
Liposuction amounts must be kept below 500 ml, or about 2 cups.
But there is absolutely no inspection of these sites, no enforcing of the drug or lipo rules, by anyone.
Shahine, who does liposuction, breast implant and other surgeries has never had his OR inspected or accredited as safe or sanitary, according to the New York State Health Department.
“Office-based surgery suites that do significant operations should be accredited,” said Dr. Hector Vila, a board-certified anesthesiologist who is part of one of the accrediting agencies that inspects office-based surgery centers.
Vila is sounding the alarm about uninspected OR’s, warning that doctors can be putting patients’ lives at risk.
“Surgical offices are trying to do the bigger operations by skirting around the rules by using large doses of local anesthesia, doing multiple surgeries,” he said. “Those large doses of local anesthesia can result in toxicity … there’ve been deaths here in Florida.”
You read that bit right. There’s no need for a surgical suite. There’s no need for anethesiologists, particularly when the law specifies that procedures can be done that way unless you use more than a given quantity of anesthetic (but who’s checking?). There’s no requirement that plastic surgeons have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals, and the location where the doctor does his procedures does not have to be equipped as one would expect a surgical suite to be.
All of these revelations are troubling enough, but compare the outrage generated by the lack of regulation on plastic surgery with the vitriol and harsh restrictions put in place by the pro life movement on abortion clinics and the people who work there.
There were 14.6 million cosmetic plastic surgeries performed in 2012, which includes 1.6 cosmetic surgical procedures like breast augmentation, face lifts, or tummy tucks. More than 13 million were minimally invasive procedures that include botox, soft tissue fillers, and chemical peels.
For 2011 (the most recent year I could find), there were 1.06 million abortions performed.
The Pro-Life movement has repeatedly claimed that they’re enacting laws that protect the lives of the women by requiring that facilities be equipped in the same fashion as hospitals, that doctors have admitting privileges, and other onerous requirements that have the effect of shuttering abortion clinics in states that have adopted TRAP laws.
Yet, none of these TRAP requirements have been extended to plastic surgery mills where facilities are loosely regulated, the doctors can do tremendous damage, and the death rate for the women seeking out these procedures is far higher than the complication rate from the abortion clinics.
Proponents of the TRAP laws claim that these restrictions are necessary for the health and safety of the women seeking abortions in the state. As I’ve previously noted (in relation to the Texas TRAP law SB 5 debate), abortion procedures are exceptionally safe - and far safer than plastic surgery.
Based on CDC statistics, there were six fatalities out of 827,609 abortions reported to the CDC in 2007 (the last year for which I had figures), which translates to a fatality rate of 1 per 137,000 procedures. Natural childbirth or c-sections have a fatality rate of 12.7 per 100,000. That’s nearly 13 times worse (and there are parts of the country and demographic breakdowns where the fatality rate is even higher than that).
The fatality rate from plastic surgical procedures is nearly 20 times higher than the rate for abortions at 19.1 per 100,000 procedures.
So, if the pro-lifers really cared about the women who seek out medical care, they’d focus on improving the care and facilities that do plastic surgeries, often by doctors who are not even board-certified for plastic surgery.
But as we’ve seen time and again, the TRAP laws and claims of enacting these laws for the health and safety of women have little to do with the safety and well being of women, and everything to do with forcing abortion clinics to shutter and making it impossible to carry out abortions that are legal. They are more concerned with the fetus (or embryo or zygote, depending on how extreme the anti-abortion position - where they consider life to start), and see the woman as merely the vessel for carrying the fetus to term, with no support once the woman gives birth. While the pace of new TRAP laws has slowed this year, the cumulative effect of the recent spate of TRAP laws has been to restrict access to abortions in those states that have enacted them. 26 states have some form of TRAP laws on their books. Of those 26 states, 13 specify the size of procedure rooms, 13 specify corridor width, 11 states require facilities to be a certain distance from a hospital, 9 states require the facility to have an agreement with local hospital to transfer patients should complications arise, and 15 states place unnecessary requirements on doctors who perform the procedures, including requiring admitting procedures or an alternative arrangement or one that requires the clinician to be a board-certified obstetrician-gynecologist or eligible for certification.
There are things that women can do to protect themselves from unscrupulous plastic surgeons by checking credentials with American Board of Plastic Surgery or similar credentialing groups - they require periodic re-certification.
Amanda Marcotte has a great idea, however the right is going to fight it tooth and nail.
Democrats in the Senate on Tuesday took a major step in pushing back against the growing trend of regulations that are designed to shut down safe abortion clinics. The Senate Judiciary Committee is hearing testimony on a bill introduced by Sens. Richard Blumenthal and Tammy Baldwin, a bill that would do significant damage to anti-choice efforts to go around Roe v. Wade by regulating abortion clinics out of existence. It’s called the Women’s Health Protection Act, and it would end the attacks on abortion clinics through one simple measure: requiring states to regulate abortion providers in exactly the same way they do other clinics and doctors who provide comparable services. No more singling out abortion providers.
I also want to thank Mary at Skepchicks for alerting me to this