Harris' video is very good, makes the most important point of all which is to get the government control out of our bedrooms. Why aren't the libertarians up in arms about this, (because they are mostly men and don't care?)?
I vacillate between two states -- thinking 'bring it on, we will show you' to worrying about what if if he really wins because people who should really be voting him out will once again sit on the side lines. There are more of us than them and we should not even be here. Once we escape this nightmare, we should think about how to punish these fuckers, shunning them, ostracizing them, and make them pariahs in a civil society.
If I were a commencement speaker I would tell the kids to become Investigators, for lo, the demand will never die.
I do think we have to distinguish between a politician or other bloviator who has a consensual affair with another adult (although it certainly might justify their spouse in kicking them to the curb) and a workplace harasser, sexual assault perpetrator, or rapist. One of the major issues of intellectual debate in the Middle Ages was the "criminous cleric"--i.e., if you received the sacraments from a priest who was a sinner, were the sacraments valid? The consensus was first of all, that you wouldn't want to stand on one foot waiting to find a priest who WASN'T a sinner, and anyway, the sacraments were still the sacraments. In this case, Hyde was not only dead wrong about an important subject but an unpleasant person. But someone can be a person of dubious morality in private life who is nevertheless correct (or sorta-kinda-mostly correct) on an important public issue.
I think conservatives want to redefine abortion. A local county near mine (Ottawa county in Michigan) seems to be a testing ground for lots of far-right Republican strategies. An organization there called ‘Ottawa Impact’ has done a takeover of the county commission. They are pushing a right wing, fear-based, Christian agenda. It’s a shit show. They recently passed a ‘resolution for life’ – which really does nothing at the moment, but states their position. When pressed on how this resolution would affect access to abortion for women who might be miscarrying, etc., the head commissioner, Joe Moss, stated “Miscarriage care & ectopic pregnancy care is not abortion.” Excuse me, what?? I’ve also seen several social media posts lately with the following quote, “medical intervention to save a woman’s life that is not done with the intent to kill a child in utero is not an abortion. An abortion is the intent to kill a child.“ I keep seeing it more and more… I almost think Repubicans want the many, current horror stories out in the open at the moment — to use as reasons to separate abortion from ‘medical care’. With the intent to control women by reframing abortion. It’s odd. Could they (with help from the Supreme Court, perhaps with cases like the EMTALA one?) put new guidelines and definitions in place? Or the Comstock Act - to refuse Mifepristone through the mail to individuals? (But allow only doctors to prescribe for a *newly named* medical procedure that *gets rid of a fetus but only for emergency reasons*???) Ugh. I just have a gut feeling they want to redefine abortion and create a bizarro world with new laws/restrictions. Then they could also keep their Republican women voters happy - because the *newly named not-abortion procedure* is now OK. I dunno. Maybe it’s just the never-ending anxiety, rage and doom I feel. Not sure if I can post links, but this is a snippet of the county commission meeting. https://www.fox17online.com/news/local-news/lakeshore/ottawa/ottawa-co-resolution-to-promote-life-passes-will-not-include-employee-health-care-clarifications
I read that story. I was horrified. I was born in Massachusetts and NH is definitely an interesting state but it was not known for its extremism. These women sounded completely unhinged.
If anyone can't access the Rolling Stone article on LA reclassifying mifepristone as a controlled substance, here's coverage from Jezebel. The disgusting twist to this ---
"The amendments are part of an effort to make “coerced criminal abortion by means of fraud” a crime. State Sen. Thomas Pressly (R) filed the bill, SB 276, on behalf of his sister, whose husband added abortion pills to her drink without her consent. Pressly claimed at a committee hearing on Tuesday that he’s “aware of increasing incidents of men using threats of violence or duress to cause women to take abortion pills against their will,” pushing a common anti-abortion narrative that ignores how taking away the option of accessing abortion can trap women in abusive situations. "
“Your husband should not slip you abortion pills without you knowing it, that story is terrible. But linking that with this is totally backwards,” an OB-GYN told Rolling Stone. They added that using this bill as a backdoor to criminalize possession of abortion pills “feels very sneaky.”
The guys that have done this, have all been republicans, another one was trump's boy Jason Miller, the one who looks like someone painted a face on a thumb.
The Cecile Richards comment: "...this is not some theoretical debate over an abstract issue” is so true.
Exactly. It never was. The anti crowd just doesn't get it. I think there are a core who do and don't care and would force birth even if the mother died during it. But there's a whole slew who think "I'm pro-life" of course (!) with no understanding or deeper thought into what that really means for women. Until it hits them, or their family.
The quotes in this edition from Florida are absolutely gut wrenching. This edition was hard to read. I feel sick.
All my kids and grandkids live in Florida. I worry for my daughter and granddaughter. My daughter has a two year old. There is NO WAY I would encourage my daughter to have another child, especially since the closest hospital to her is a Catholic Ascension Health hospital. That chain does not enjoy a good reputation for quality healthcare. It just infuriates me that some of want to force their practice of religion on others.
I’m still grappling with how little I’m seeing about EMTALA in the news. Maybe people will have more to say when the decision comes out, but I’m worried that people are just going to say, “Ho hum, this only affects a few women.” And that makes me want to ****throw things****
The way they justify tricking the voters if they were ever being honest is that, in the service of God and whatever they psychotically believe is the only way to live one’s life, any and all tactics are justified. This is how we got the fucking crusades. Why can’t more people see this? Despite the divisions in this country I’m pretty sure the majority of Americans don’t want to live like we are in puritan Salem circa 1690.
Not sure if you can access this, but story is on Littleton, NH and how an understated gay rights mural on a building unleashed a fury, mostly led by a totally homophobic woman who used her religion to discriminate and spew pretty hateful stuff. It's just gross.
New Hampshire has always had a high asshole quotient for such a small state. (I'm originally from Maine) They have a high percentage of Libertarians. This is an article about one that went feral.
I love that - 'high asshole quotient'. Yes, it's a cultural thing. They encourage it. 'Live free or die' could have a benevolent meaning, but it could also be the motto for a sociopath.
I know it seems like Medicare would not have to cover abortion care, but in fact a million women aged 20-49 are covered by Medicare because they have been disabled for two years or more. Meredith Freed, Juliette Cubanski, Michelle Long, Nancy Ochleng, and Alina Salganicoff released a new paper, "Coverage of Sexual and Reproductive Health Services in Medicare," (April 30, 2024), https://www.kff.org/medicaer/issue-brief-cverage-of-sexual-and-reproductive-health-services-in-medicare. Medicare covers preventive health care and screening. Medicare Part D (prescription drug coverage) covers many contraceptives, although coverage of IUDs and implants is limited. The Hyde Amendment forbids the use of federal funds for Medicare as well as Medicaid abortions. About 79% of reproductive-age Medicare beneficiaries are "dual eligibles" (covered by Medicaid as well as Medicare). 20% of reproductive-age Medicare beneficiaries are Black, 9% Latinx. 73% of reproductive-age Medicare beneficiaries have incomes of under $20,000 a year.
Henry Hyde was a vile man. While leading the charge to impeach Clinton, he was carrying on an affair with a married woman, and excused it as youthful indiscretion. He was 41 at the time. His amendment needs to turn to dust.
Every one of Bill's accusers went on to have a sex scandal of his own. Ken Starr was the last to be revealed (he had a mistress). And there was that whole refusing to investigate rape charges against his football players at Baylor. You would have thought he would have been quite good at that, but evidently he only investigated democratic politicians.
The sadist republican politicians who would like us to think they're Christians take my breath away. There needs to be a special place in hell for them for the pain and suffering they're causing women and girls.
I've never been a big fan of Harris; her rhetoric always seems a bit contrived to me. But at this time and place I am very grateful that the second in command is an articulate, relatable, WOMAN because abortion is an issue only for those with a capacity to be pregnant (and their allies). Everyone else needs to zip their lips.
Apropos religious support for abortion access: I am wrestling with a comment that came through the inter-faith Texas Impact (https://texasimpact.org/our-issues/human-rights/) email today. Someone wrote "I urge everyone to make a statement from the point of view of their faith. For myself, something like, "I am a cradle-to-grave Methodist. While the United Methodist Church's stand is that abortion is a tragedy, our faith tradition centers the woman, her needs, her decisional capacity, and her bodily autonomy. In order to decrease the abortion rate, the Methodist Church advocates for better socioeconomic support for women and children, rather than criminalizing abortion.""
By saying "abortion is a tragedy" and that we should "decrease the abortion rate" we are NOT centering women, and we are stigmatizing normal, common healthcare. I want to push back on this, but not sure if it's worth it. Comments or suggestions?
By calling it a tragedy, the assumption is that the abortion is being done casually as simple birth control. Just state that you are a Christian in the United Methodist Church and why the Church chooses to support women and their freedom to know their healthcare needs and life situations. I’m a Methodist in Red Arizona and my wonderful church lets me collect signatures for Abortion Access legislation on the patio after service.
You are absolutely right. It is healthcare of the reproductive nature, and no one should be shamed or judged for it. Abortion has existed in every society, regardless of prohibitions against it. The only thing they do is hurt vulnerable women with that attitude.
I had one. I even almost posted it. Then I realized that it felt dirty to thank someone for acknowledging the pregnant woman’s humanity. And to realize we are thankful because in general this is not the norm for those opposed to abortion.
I used to think that if prolife people were sincere about what they believed, they would be in favor of birth control and helping women and children. But now I realize that even if they did those things, that it’s not enough.
We are still sinners, but hooray there’s a religion that wants to love us out of our sin instead of punish us. I want better for my daughter.
"Prolife" was a marketing term, made up by those selling their religion. If they were 'prolife' they would not be so excited about war, and executions, and do things to promote education about sex, and reproduction, and promote contraceptives. They work against societal good by thwarting all those things, and don't you dare ask them to pay higher taxes to support all the children they want to force poor women to have (because rich ones can always get an abortion somewhere else.).
"In the months before the Supreme Court ruled on Roe v. Wade, the Willkes published How to teach people the pro-life story, a modern-day sales manual on how to effectively market the movement. It was a play-by-play on how the Willkes communicated pro-life arguments so that other speakers might follow their lead. As described in the book, they never showed visuals of embryos less than six weeks old because “the audience may change their minds from their conviction that this is a human life.” They began their lectures with pictures of babies nearing full-term and subsequently moved through the fetal development process in reverse chronological order, asking the audience with each image: is this still a human?"
I agree with you. But it’s hard because you don’t want to alienate those who are trying to argue to keep abortion safe and legal. Maybe try to push back in as gentle way as possible.
You are correct; they are stigmatizing women's healthcare while NOT centering women; it's not your imagination. I don't know if the blowback you may get makes it worthwhile for you. Do they also support robust and accurate sex education and are they proponents for easy access to various forms of contraception? Or, lacking those conditions, is the position to have women go through the travails of pregnancy and relinquish the child for adoption?
Their policy statement actually goes beyond the limited positions of each of the religious faiths in the organization (https://texasimpact.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/8-Page_Abortion.pdf) so I don't want to criticize overly much, but to say "abortion is a tragedy" is SO WRONG. From the linked document:
THE WAY FORWARD FOR TEXAS
Increase funding for family planning
Secure access to birth control
Expand Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act
Provide 12 months postpartum coverage under Medicaid
Limit civil and criminal penalties for abortion by shielding medical providers’ actions
from non-medical evaluation or intervention
Eliminate private causes of action that allow individuals to sue Texans for alleged
activities related to abortion
Affirm privacy and bodily autonomy for all Texans
Repeal civil or criminal penalties for providing non-medical assistance to people
seeking abortions
Maybe I just wanted validation; not sure I am the right person to push back in a way that didn't just make enemies of potential friends.
The policy statement isn't bad. Perhaps you could just point out that the use of "tragedy" is language that might be alienating to some. Abortion is healthcare that some need to access without interference from third parties. There isn't any other healthcare that's subject to approval from outsiders.
This story puts to rest the idea that Catholic hospitals don’t have to follow EMTALA because they don’t take federal money. They do take federal money and should not be allowed to deny women life-saving care. I sure wish we would hear more from this group. They can be an important voice in this debate.
Trump also said he would release his health plan to replace Obamacare in 2 weeks and that was 8 years ago, so I wouldn't hold my breath.
Harris' video is very good, makes the most important point of all which is to get the government control out of our bedrooms. Why aren't the libertarians up in arms about this, (because they are mostly men and don't care?)?
I vacillate between two states -- thinking 'bring it on, we will show you' to worrying about what if if he really wins because people who should really be voting him out will once again sit on the side lines. There are more of us than them and we should not even be here. Once we escape this nightmare, we should think about how to punish these fuckers, shunning them, ostracizing them, and make them pariahs in a civil society.
If I were a commencement speaker I would tell the kids to become Investigators, for lo, the demand will never die.
I do think we have to distinguish between a politician or other bloviator who has a consensual affair with another adult (although it certainly might justify their spouse in kicking them to the curb) and a workplace harasser, sexual assault perpetrator, or rapist. One of the major issues of intellectual debate in the Middle Ages was the "criminous cleric"--i.e., if you received the sacraments from a priest who was a sinner, were the sacraments valid? The consensus was first of all, that you wouldn't want to stand on one foot waiting to find a priest who WASN'T a sinner, and anyway, the sacraments were still the sacraments. In this case, Hyde was not only dead wrong about an important subject but an unpleasant person. But someone can be a person of dubious morality in private life who is nevertheless correct (or sorta-kinda-mostly correct) on an important public issue.
I think conservatives want to redefine abortion. A local county near mine (Ottawa county in Michigan) seems to be a testing ground for lots of far-right Republican strategies. An organization there called ‘Ottawa Impact’ has done a takeover of the county commission. They are pushing a right wing, fear-based, Christian agenda. It’s a shit show. They recently passed a ‘resolution for life’ – which really does nothing at the moment, but states their position. When pressed on how this resolution would affect access to abortion for women who might be miscarrying, etc., the head commissioner, Joe Moss, stated “Miscarriage care & ectopic pregnancy care is not abortion.” Excuse me, what?? I’ve also seen several social media posts lately with the following quote, “medical intervention to save a woman’s life that is not done with the intent to kill a child in utero is not an abortion. An abortion is the intent to kill a child.“ I keep seeing it more and more… I almost think Repubicans want the many, current horror stories out in the open at the moment — to use as reasons to separate abortion from ‘medical care’. With the intent to control women by reframing abortion. It’s odd. Could they (with help from the Supreme Court, perhaps with cases like the EMTALA one?) put new guidelines and definitions in place? Or the Comstock Act - to refuse Mifepristone through the mail to individuals? (But allow only doctors to prescribe for a *newly named* medical procedure that *gets rid of a fetus but only for emergency reasons*???) Ugh. I just have a gut feeling they want to redefine abortion and create a bizarro world with new laws/restrictions. Then they could also keep their Republican women voters happy - because the *newly named not-abortion procedure* is now OK. I dunno. Maybe it’s just the never-ending anxiety, rage and doom I feel. Not sure if I can post links, but this is a snippet of the county commission meeting. https://www.fox17online.com/news/local-news/lakeshore/ottawa/ottawa-co-resolution-to-promote-life-passes-will-not-include-employee-health-care-clarifications
Thanks. I'm not a good writer, so I try to make up for it by drawing pictures :)
I read that story. I was horrified. I was born in Massachusetts and NH is definitely an interesting state but it was not known for its extremism. These women sounded completely unhinged.
If anyone can't access the Rolling Stone article on LA reclassifying mifepristone as a controlled substance, here's coverage from Jezebel. The disgusting twist to this ---
"The amendments are part of an effort to make “coerced criminal abortion by means of fraud” a crime. State Sen. Thomas Pressly (R) filed the bill, SB 276, on behalf of his sister, whose husband added abortion pills to her drink without her consent. Pressly claimed at a committee hearing on Tuesday that he’s “aware of increasing incidents of men using threats of violence or duress to cause women to take abortion pills against their will,” pushing a common anti-abortion narrative that ignores how taking away the option of accessing abortion can trap women in abusive situations. "
“Your husband should not slip you abortion pills without you knowing it, that story is terrible. But linking that with this is totally backwards,” an OB-GYN told Rolling Stone. They added that using this bill as a backdoor to criminalize possession of abortion pills “feels very sneaky.”
https://www.jezebel.com/louisiana-republicans-want-to-add-abortion-pills-to-the-states-controlled-substances-list
So they reframed this horrible incident as an excuse to try to reclassify the drug.
The guys that have done this, have all been republicans, another one was trump's boy Jason Miller, the one who looks like someone painted a face on a thumb.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/jason-miller-abortion-pill-smoothie-trump-aide-aj-delgado-a8552321.html
The Cecile Richards comment: "...this is not some theoretical debate over an abstract issue” is so true.
Exactly. It never was. The anti crowd just doesn't get it. I think there are a core who do and don't care and would force birth even if the mother died during it. But there's a whole slew who think "I'm pro-life" of course (!) with no understanding or deeper thought into what that really means for women. Until it hits them, or their family.
The quotes in this edition from Florida are absolutely gut wrenching. This edition was hard to read. I feel sick.
Kamala Harris is getting better at slogans. She's followed up "Trump did this" in ads with branding the bans as "Trump abortion bans."
All my kids and grandkids live in Florida. I worry for my daughter and granddaughter. My daughter has a two year old. There is NO WAY I would encourage my daughter to have another child, especially since the closest hospital to her is a Catholic Ascension Health hospital. That chain does not enjoy a good reputation for quality healthcare. It just infuriates me that some of want to force their practice of religion on others.
I’m still grappling with how little I’m seeing about EMTALA in the news. Maybe people will have more to say when the decision comes out, but I’m worried that people are just going to say, “Ho hum, this only affects a few women.” And that makes me want to ****throw things****
The way they justify tricking the voters if they were ever being honest is that, in the service of God and whatever they psychotically believe is the only way to live one’s life, any and all tactics are justified. This is how we got the fucking crusades. Why can’t more people see this? Despite the divisions in this country I’m pretty sure the majority of Americans don’t want to live like we are in puritan Salem circa 1690.
Not sure if you can access this, but story is on Littleton, NH and how an understated gay rights mural on a building unleashed a fury, mostly led by a totally homophobic woman who used her religion to discriminate and spew pretty hateful stuff. It's just gross.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/28/us/littleton-new-hampshire-mural.html?searchResultPosition=1
New Hampshire has always had a high asshole quotient for such a small state. (I'm originally from Maine) They have a high percentage of Libertarians. This is an article about one that went feral.
https://newrepublic.com/article/159662/libertarian-walks-into-bear-book-review-free-town-project
I love that - 'high asshole quotient'. Yes, it's a cultural thing. They encourage it. 'Live free or die' could have a benevolent meaning, but it could also be the motto for a sociopath.
It is my Canadian-born husband's evocative phrase, he is ususally very subtle, in his snark.
Gotta love Canadians! 🇨🇦
I sure do! except the right-wingers.
I know it seems like Medicare would not have to cover abortion care, but in fact a million women aged 20-49 are covered by Medicare because they have been disabled for two years or more. Meredith Freed, Juliette Cubanski, Michelle Long, Nancy Ochleng, and Alina Salganicoff released a new paper, "Coverage of Sexual and Reproductive Health Services in Medicare," (April 30, 2024), https://www.kff.org/medicaer/issue-brief-cverage-of-sexual-and-reproductive-health-services-in-medicare. Medicare covers preventive health care and screening. Medicare Part D (prescription drug coverage) covers many contraceptives, although coverage of IUDs and implants is limited. The Hyde Amendment forbids the use of federal funds for Medicare as well as Medicaid abortions. About 79% of reproductive-age Medicare beneficiaries are "dual eligibles" (covered by Medicaid as well as Medicare). 20% of reproductive-age Medicare beneficiaries are Black, 9% Latinx. 73% of reproductive-age Medicare beneficiaries have incomes of under $20,000 a year.
Henry Hyde was a vile man. While leading the charge to impeach Clinton, he was carrying on an affair with a married woman, and excused it as youthful indiscretion. He was 41 at the time. His amendment needs to turn to dust.
Every one of Bill's accusers went on to have a sex scandal of his own. Ken Starr was the last to be revealed (he had a mistress). And there was that whole refusing to investigate rape charges against his football players at Baylor. You would have thought he would have been quite good at that, but evidently he only investigated democratic politicians.
The sadist republican politicians who would like us to think they're Christians take my breath away. There needs to be a special place in hell for them for the pain and suffering they're causing women and girls.
I've never been a big fan of Harris; her rhetoric always seems a bit contrived to me. But at this time and place I am very grateful that the second in command is an articulate, relatable, WOMAN because abortion is an issue only for those with a capacity to be pregnant (and their allies). Everyone else needs to zip their lips.
Have you heard of: https://www.catholicsforchoice.org/who-we-are/our-case-for-support/pro-choice-catholicism-101/
Apropos religious support for abortion access: I am wrestling with a comment that came through the inter-faith Texas Impact (https://texasimpact.org/our-issues/human-rights/) email today. Someone wrote "I urge everyone to make a statement from the point of view of their faith. For myself, something like, "I am a cradle-to-grave Methodist. While the United Methodist Church's stand is that abortion is a tragedy, our faith tradition centers the woman, her needs, her decisional capacity, and her bodily autonomy. In order to decrease the abortion rate, the Methodist Church advocates for better socioeconomic support for women and children, rather than criminalizing abortion.""
By saying "abortion is a tragedy" and that we should "decrease the abortion rate" we are NOT centering women, and we are stigmatizing normal, common healthcare. I want to push back on this, but not sure if it's worth it. Comments or suggestions?
By calling it a tragedy, the assumption is that the abortion is being done casually as simple birth control. Just state that you are a Christian in the United Methodist Church and why the Church chooses to support women and their freedom to know their healthcare needs and life situations. I’m a Methodist in Red Arizona and my wonderful church lets me collect signatures for Abortion Access legislation on the patio after service.
You are absolutely right. It is healthcare of the reproductive nature, and no one should be shamed or judged for it. Abortion has existed in every society, regardless of prohibitions against it. The only thing they do is hurt vulnerable women with that attitude.
I had one. I even almost posted it. Then I realized that it felt dirty to thank someone for acknowledging the pregnant woman’s humanity. And to realize we are thankful because in general this is not the norm for those opposed to abortion.
I used to think that if prolife people were sincere about what they believed, they would be in favor of birth control and helping women and children. But now I realize that even if they did those things, that it’s not enough.
We are still sinners, but hooray there’s a religion that wants to love us out of our sin instead of punish us. I want better for my daughter.
"Prolife" was a marketing term, made up by those selling their religion. If they were 'prolife' they would not be so excited about war, and executions, and do things to promote education about sex, and reproduction, and promote contraceptives. They work against societal good by thwarting all those things, and don't you dare ask them to pay higher taxes to support all the children they want to force poor women to have (because rich ones can always get an abortion somewhere else.).
'marketing term' - exactly
"In the months before the Supreme Court ruled on Roe v. Wade, the Willkes published How to teach people the pro-life story, a modern-day sales manual on how to effectively market the movement. It was a play-by-play on how the Willkes communicated pro-life arguments so that other speakers might follow their lead. As described in the book, they never showed visuals of embryos less than six weeks old because “the audience may change their minds from their conviction that this is a human life.” They began their lectures with pictures of babies nearing full-term and subsequently moved through the fetal development process in reverse chronological order, asking the audience with each image: is this still a human?"
https://www.printmag.com/political-design/the-semiotics-of-a-movement-how-pro-life-became-a-marketing-campaign/
😡
I agree with you. But it’s hard because you don’t want to alienate those who are trying to argue to keep abortion safe and legal. Maybe try to push back in as gentle way as possible.
You are correct; they are stigmatizing women's healthcare while NOT centering women; it's not your imagination. I don't know if the blowback you may get makes it worthwhile for you. Do they also support robust and accurate sex education and are they proponents for easy access to various forms of contraception? Or, lacking those conditions, is the position to have women go through the travails of pregnancy and relinquish the child for adoption?
Their policy statement actually goes beyond the limited positions of each of the religious faiths in the organization (https://texasimpact.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/8-Page_Abortion.pdf) so I don't want to criticize overly much, but to say "abortion is a tragedy" is SO WRONG. From the linked document:
THE WAY FORWARD FOR TEXAS
Increase funding for family planning
Secure access to birth control
Expand Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act
Provide 12 months postpartum coverage under Medicaid
Limit civil and criminal penalties for abortion by shielding medical providers’ actions
from non-medical evaluation or intervention
Eliminate private causes of action that allow individuals to sue Texans for alleged
activities related to abortion
Affirm privacy and bodily autonomy for all Texans
Repeal civil or criminal penalties for providing non-medical assistance to people
seeking abortions
Maybe I just wanted validation; not sure I am the right person to push back in a way that didn't just make enemies of potential friends.
The policy statement isn't bad. Perhaps you could just point out that the use of "tragedy" is language that might be alienating to some. Abortion is healthcare that some need to access without interference from third parties. There isn't any other healthcare that's subject to approval from outsiders.
Beautifully stated.
This story puts to rest the idea that Catholic hospitals don’t have to follow EMTALA because they don’t take federal money. They do take federal money and should not be allowed to deny women life-saving care. I sure wish we would hear more from this group. They can be an important voice in this debate.
Here’s the story I referenced: https://www.catholicsforchoice.org/resource-library/follow-the-money-the-real-reason-catholic-hospitals-fight-for-exemptions/