Why would anybody be surprised that the Bush administration plans to propose new federal regulations allowing
health care providers to run roughshod over established scientific and
medical principles, even when they are doing it with your taxpayer money?
Every day, I take a birth control pill (except during the "off" week). In this way, I am no different from a large number of American women. My daily pill is not an abortion under any recognizable definition of the word, but new regulations under consideration by the Department of Health and Human Services say that it is. Further, people who oppose abortions can deny me my right to medication that has been prescribed to me by a doctor.
(Image: Source Zimbio.
Photo by None/Getty Images North America. Taken at a a live taping of
Meet the Press at NBC Studios July 13, 2008 in Washington, DC. Even
Carly Fiorina, a top McCain surrogate, called birth control a choice.)
In other women's rights trampling, the Bush Administration is doing
the quick step to achieve as many of its oppressive agenda points as
possible before the President's term ends. This week's big move?
Removing the blockade and letting anti-choice activists storm the
health care castle in order to not only block women from getting
abortions that are, for the record, still legal, but also could
classify contraception products as abortions and enable "objectors" to
prevent women from accessing those too.
They call it "preventing discrimination" in hiring on the basis of
"religious belief" but it's clear---after reading all 39 pages of the
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) proposed rule
document---what it really is: trying to cut the legs out from under Roe
What does the document say? (Click here to read the complete PDF, provided courtesy of RH Reality Check.)
There is nothing enlightened about abortion. And now that cameras can see into the womb, life is undeniable. Now that preemies survive life outside the womb at a younger age than many of those aborted, the barbarism of this practice is clear to those who have eyes to see.
As a matter of advancing the cause of women, why is someone who treats her body as a commodity to be admired?
Why is a woman with so little self-respect as to have sex without commitment to be admired?
A few weeks ago, it occurred to me that reproductive rights were not a priority issue for women this election year. This insight struck me while I was in a writing class with nine other (mostly liberal) women in prime childbearing years (20s and 30s), and I was the only person who mentioned that repro rights were among the three issues I considered most important in this election. I wondered what this meant.
On July 1, Canada Day, Governor-General Michaëlle Jean's list of inductees to the Order of Canada was announced. It's usually a pretty ho-hum affair which "recognizes a lifetime of outstanding achievement, dedication to the community and service to the nation" and really not that exciting unless you actually know someone who is receiving it. This announcement was anything but boring. On the list was one name that caused Canadians to lose their collective minds - Henry Morgentaler. Words that come to mind when people say that name range from life-saver, to murderer, to abortionist.
I was planning to attend Barack Obama’s big
fundraising reception in New York tonight and make the maximum
contribution to his campaign, but I have torn up the invitation.
decision isn’t about the money, though the thought of writing a check
for $4600 for anything other than a mortgage payment or two takes my breath away. It seemed that important to do my part
to prevent the 100% anti-choice John McCain’s election and a de facto
third Bush term.
When our son was born, my husband and I were in a fairly good place. We had been together for three years, were fairly OK financially, we had some relatives living close by who were willing to lend a hand with the baby. We had just weathered a spot of adversity and were in a fabulous place in our relationship, connected, loving, strong, intimate. We thought of ourselves as kind, intelligent, patient people who were well-equipped to provide a stable and loving home to a child. We felt as ready as we would ever be for a child, and we wanted very much this baby that I was carrying.