BlogHer - Legislation - Comments

Excellent

Virginia DeBolt — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 08:21:15 -0500

I went through to Women's Voices for Change and read your most excellent article, then tweeted and stumbled it.

Virginia DeBolt
BlogHer Technology CE | Web Teacher | First 50 Words

Mothers Act

blocker771 — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 09:05:48 -0500

Mother’s Act advocates get very shrill and angry at anyone who questions their advocacy and especially they get very shrill, angry and THREATENING towards anyone who presents the truth of what this bill is really all about, which they refuse to look at or discuss. The most repugnant aspect of this bill is how psychiatric interests work so hard to smoothly misrepresent the unnatural (drugging of pregnant mothers) as natural or okay when prior to psychotropic drugs, mothers were always counselled by traditional Western medical authorities not to take any drugs or as little as possible. How the authority of traditional doctors was usurped by nonmedical quasi medical(?) authorities would make an interesting investigation. Also, Mother’s Bill advocates are strangely silent about the birth defects that have been linked to these drugs and existing litigation against drug companies for compensation for the death, damage and disability to newborns linked to these drugs. The other point about the Mother’s Bill is that it is ironically named for a psychiatric victim and the legislation provides for millions of pregnant women to be able receive without their informed consent the damaging treatment that the woman named for this bill unfortunately was victimized by receiving without her informed consent.

Check!

mama2bna — Sun, 13 Apr 2008 09:28:43 -0500

I'll click the link right now and get this posted on Hibernate http://hibernate.sarabearco.com Amandahttp://lifewithbriar.blogspot.comhttp://toddlywinks.blogspot.com

I love the photo protest.

Catherine Morgan — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 19:23:48 -0600

I love the idea of a photo protest. Thanks for sharing this, I'm going to blog about it on my other blogs...and then do a photo of me and my daughter for the protest.

Contributing Editor Catherine Morgan
CatherineBlogs, The Political Voices of Women, Care2 Election Blog

Here's the letter the John Edwards campaign is sending out

Kim Pearson — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 16:48:02 -0600

This was in my inbox:

Dear Kim,

When it comes to protecting the rule of law, words are not enough. We need action.

It's wrong for your government to spy on you. That's why I'm asking you to join me today in calling on Senate Democrats to filibuster revisions to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) that would give "retroactive immunity" to the giant telecom companies for their role in aiding George W. Bush's illegal eavesdropping on American citizens.

The Senate is debating this issue right now -- which is why we must act right now. You can call your Senators here:

Frank R. Lautenberg, (D): (202) 224-3224
Robert Menendez, (D): (202) 224-4744

Granting retroactive immunity is wrong. It will let corporate law-breakers off the hook. It will hamstring efforts to learn the truth about Bush's illegal spying program. And it will flip on its head a core principle that has guided our nation since our founding: the belief that no one, no matter how well connected or what office they hold, is above the law.

But in Washington today, the telecom lobbyists have launched a full-court press for retroactive immunity. George Bush and Dick Cheney are doing everything in their power to ensure it passes. And too many Senate Democrats are ready to give the lobbyists and the Bush administration exactly what they want.

Please join me in calling on every Senate Democrat to do everything in their power -- including joining Senator Dodd's efforts to filibuster this legislation -- to stop retroactive immunity and stand up for the rule of law. The Constitution should not be for sale at any price.

Thank you for taking action.

John Edwards
January 24, 2008

Kim
BlogHer Contributing Editor|Professor Kim|