Thank you for lifting up abortion and mental health, a topic personally near and dear to my heart! I'm co-founding www.prochoicetherapists.org to address this public health gap! We're the first national directory and membership organization of pro-choice mental health providers in the USA. The directory launches on May 18th!
Ashley! I am so excited to find you! I am speaking at the Maternal Mental Health Now Legal & Ethical Dilemmas in Perinatal MH conference this Friday and just sent you a message on your website- would love to discuss how we can support each others' work- can I Share your website at my presentation? Please message me! biz email is hello@growingwellcounseling.com
I'm heading to the NC legislature today to scream and shout. Last night after 6:30 they snuck a 12-week mess of a ban onto the calendar for 3pm today, hoping no one would notice. It still isn't on the legislature's calendar for today.
Also up: anti-trans law and "pro-family adoption protections."
Today Tricia Cotham, who suddenly turned Republican, gets to show her true colors.
It's very scary because they may be able to lock in their supermajorities for a long time, rendering the governor irrelevant. The problem is they only need 3/5ths and the governor can't veto maps. Democrats have to register and turn out voters and hope for the best, but until they start winning supreme court elections idk.
Oregon legislators spent hours Monday debating House Bill 2002, a polarizing package involving abortion and gender-affirming health care, before ultimately voting it through to the state Senate.
Republicans fought, stalled and objected. But majority Democrats in the Oregon House waited them out, and late Monday ended up passing, by a vote of 36-23, a broad reproductive health care bill.
House Bill 2002 would require Medicaid and private insurers to cover more procedures under the umbrella of gender-affirming care, and would allow minors of any age to get an abortion without needing to notify a parent, among other policies.
It now goes to the Oregon Senate, where Democrats also have a large majority over Republicans.
HB 2002 was crafted by Democrats following the Supreme Court decision last summer overturning Roe vs. Wade and in response to a push by Republican legislators in other states to pass limits on gender-affirming care for youth.
Oregon already has among the most liberal laws in the country with regards to abortion and some of the nation’s strongest legal protections for LGBTQ+ civil liberties.
State law allows for abortions with no restrictions. It also requires state Medicaid and most private medical insurers to cover abortions and some gender-affirming care, including hormone therapy and some surgeries.
Democrats framed the bill as an effort to protect patients’ privacy rights, close gaps in insurance coverage, and increase access to abortion and gender-affirming care in rural parts of the state.
The bill would expand the scope of care Medicaid and private insurance is required to cover in Oregon to include laser hair removal and facial feminization surgery.
Related: From cosmetic to critical: Oregon, other states work to boost trans health coverage
It would also protect health care providers who perform abortions or gender-affirming care from legal repercussions.
“We need to make sure here in Oregon that our law is absolutely clear, so that our providers can provide care in every unique scenario,” said Rep. Rob Nosse, D-Portland, who carried the bill.
Republicans said the omnibus bill does too much, hasn’t received proper scrutiny and would undermine parents’ rights in sensitive medical decisions.
“This is a parental rights issue and a process issue,” said House Minority Leader Vikki Breese-Iverson, R-Prineville. “This is Oregon effectively telling you the government understands the needs of your child better than you do.”
Republicans also argued that there hasn’t been a transparent accounting of the full cost of the bill. In a fiscal impact statement prepared in March, the Oregon Health Authority could not come up with an estimate of how much HB 2002 would cost the state’s Medicaid program, but said it could increase the number of procedures that are covered rather than denied on the basis that they are cosmetic.
Republicans attempted multiple procedural moves to delay the vote, challenging whether the summary of the bill met legal standards for clarity and attempting to refer HB 2002 to other committees for debate. Those moves ultimately failed, with the bill finally going to a vote late Monday night. The bill also addresses the limited number of abortion and gender care providers outside the Willamette Valley, an issue that intensified after Idaho’s abortion bans took effect, closing clinics in Boise that were the closest option for some patients in Eastern Oregon.
HB 2002 would create a pilot project to deploy two mobile health clinics to provide abortion, gender-affirming care, and other reproductive health services in rural areas. And it requires student health centers to provide enrolled students with access to emergency contraception and medication abortion.
Republicans, many of whom represent rural districts, oppose the pilot project. They called it another example of Portlanders trying to dictate policy to rural communities without listening to them.
“These Oregonians do not want more of their taxpayer dollars going to something they fundamentally disagree with,” said Rep. Christine Goodwin, R-Canyonville. “Ask them how they feel about a mobile abortion truck parked in their neighborhoods.”
The bill also targets abortion clinic protesters by making it a crime to block people who are trying to enter a health care facility or by making noise or phone calls that interfere with facility operations.
Some of the most heated and emotional objections from Republicans came over the bill’s language that would give minors under 15 the right to access reproductive health care information and services, including abortion, without needing parental consent.
HB 2002 would also limit the situations in which a medical provider can disclose to a parent that their child has had an abortion or sought other reproductive health care, if the child objects to that disclosure.
In Oregon, state law already allows minors 15 years and up to consent to their own medical care. The state does not have any statutes currently on the books regarding parental notification or consent specifically for abortions.
Republicans have used the hypothetical case of a 10-year-old girl getting an abortion without notifying her parents, which would be legal under HB 2002.
They argued that the bill would undermine parents’ rights in sensitive medical decisions, and could keep parents in the dark in a situation in which their child had been the victim of rape and abuse.
Rep. Lily Morgan, R-Grants Pass, disclosed her history as a survivor of child abuse while urging her colleagues to oppose the bill and indefinitely postpone voting on it.
Morgan said that while she was never personally pressured to get an abortion, she was intimidated by her abuser to remain silent about her experience. She fears the bill will make it easier for a pregnancy of a child under 15 to be hidden from their parents, allowing abuse to continue.
“I was not empowered or equipped to handle the situation on my own,” Morgan said.
Rep. Lisa Reynolds, D-Beaverton, invoked her experience as a pediatrician in defending the limits to parental notification in the bill and in current state law.
Reynolds said the standard of care pediatricians follow is to involve parents in child’s care, except in exceptional circumstances.
“This is only in the infrequent and heartbreaking circumstances when the parents are not the safe adults in that young person’s life,” Reynolds said.
Reynolds also noted that health care providers are mandatory reporters of child abuse.
“If a 10-year-old is pregnant, a horrific act and crime has taken place,” she said. “I would tend to that child and then I would call law enforcement and child welfare.”
While no lawmakers cited it, research suggests that a majority of minors involve their parents in the decision to seek an abortion, whether or not they are legally required to.
Lauren Ralph is an epidemiologist with the University of California, San Francisco, whose research focuses on young people’s access to abortion.
Ralph said a handful of studies, including her own research in Illinois, have looked at the issue of parental notification and found relatively consistent results.
Ralph said in states with no parental notification requirement, about two-thirds of minors seeking abortions voluntarily involve their parents in the decision, most often their moms. Between 80% and 90% involve some adult — a parent, relative, teacher, counselor or member of their religious community, according to Ralph.
In her research, younger minors were much more likely to involve their parents, with over 90% of 14- and 15-year-olds involving a parent in their decision voluntarily, and the percentage falling among 16- and 17-year-olds.
From NYTimes, 9:33pm EST: Judge Allows Abortion Clinics to Remain Open in Utah for Now
"The judge temporarily blocked a new law [that] would have required the procedure be performed in hospitals, and effectively restricted access across the state, clinic operators say."
Excellent news. (I was going to use an exclamation point but it's only a lower court judge so it's not final). I've always perceived Utah to be a bit different among the red states, possibly because its LDS majority population is used to being on the receiving end of discrimination, so there may be a bit more empathy and compassion there than otherwise (and the missionary culture may contribute too). That said, Utah is still a very conservative state even if its brand of conservatism is a bit different. Anyway, we'll take any good news we can get, any favorable court decision anywhere and the arguments contained therein.
Continuing... "On Tuesday, Judge Andrew H. Stone of Utah’s Third Judicial District agreed with Planned Parenthood. In his 22-page ruling, he wrote that the organization had offered evidence suggesting that abortion clinics had been unreasonably singled out, and that the state’s rationale for the new law was “nebulous.”
“There is nothing before the court to indicate that an injunction would be adverse to the public interest,” the judge wrote."
Before this issue required a daily commitment after Dobbs, her substack was called 'All in Her Head' (kind of a reference to gaslighting) and I miss those columns because her voice is just as sharp on every other situation that puts women in a lesser place to men. She reminds me a bit of my mom in that she doesn't suffer fools (and bullshit) gladly (and the vulgar language is like mom too :) And if you already knew that background please excuse my mansplaining!
No, I was not aware of any of that background. I appreciate your brining it up.! I just saw Jessica's name last night for the first time. It was in an article I was reading, I think - something that mentioned her or linked to one of her articles. I subscribe to so many things related to reproductive rights and other political issues that I can't keep track where I read things! Anyway, I delved a little more into Jessica's writing after reading that first article, and I knew I had to read her writing every day going forward. Thank you for being here. We need more men to care - and be informed - about this issue. The mentality that keeps women oppressed keeps many other people in a lesser place in society, as well. Your mom sounds like a hoot, by the way!
She was! She passed away seven years ago from her heart arrhythmia issues. It's nice to feel her presence in other people and situations, if that makes sense. And yes it's always sad when people can't find empathy for others, and only care about things that affect them personally. I suppose hardship is the best way to build empathy, and likewise privilege works against it, which makes it all the more important to challenge privilege. I'm hoping the younger generations of men are better (and also that the younger generations of women demand it!) but it's clear we have a long long way to go. I hope this crisis will shock more people out of complacency.
The ACOG money was probably given for the same reason most political donations are made in this country: protection money. That's the way the system works. Donating money might not help get you your way, but if you HAVEN'T donated money to the winning candidate you can almost certainly count on no help at all. I assume every business or organization of a certain size in this country (as well as every individual of a certain net worth) knows this and fails to comply at their own risk.
Campaigns cost money. The trick with public funding is first, how do you decide who qualifies, how much, etc., and second, voters balk at giving public money to politicians, especially since voters seem to hate campaigning so much. Even though it would seem to be the only way to preserve democracy. Plus, in this country you violate someone's first amendment rights if they can't contribute unlimited funds to a political campaign 🙄. You can see why authoritarianism as an alternative system of government has such appeal.
I don't think any other developed country spends any where near the amount of money in their elections as we do. Campaigns last a couple weeks or months. Here it's years. Our system is a cluster f.
Every Day: you provide the single best roundup of news, legislative shenanigans, judicial rulings — you name it — relating to the anti-abortion debacle in post-Roe America. Bring it!!
I want to know what is happening in this woman's brain that she can do this everyday. Insane the amount of info she puts out in such a comprehensive manner. She's a wizard I swear lol
I had read several of these articles (and re-posted some), but it's a labor of love to put them all in one place for us- so thanks! I live in Kansas and work in Missouri, in Maternal Fetal Medicine, and every one of these bills and legal cases has bearing on my every day life and those of my patients. We ALL need to keep pushing this information out, so people wake up and vote these Regressive extremists out of office!
As a skeptic, I'm excited to hear about the series on the anti-choice movement’s attack on data and science. This ties directly into religious extremism.
Yeah. He says "‘wow, there’s a different way to look at this.’” That was this newsletter's breakdown point for me. They don't see US at all. They shouldn't be in office.
It's like that Indiana lawmaker: " House Rep. John Jacob, an anti-abortion extremist who wanted to remove all exceptions from the bill, including those for rape and incest, declared that an abortion was not a woman’s choice.
“The body inside of the mom’s body is not her body,” Jacob said on Friday. “Let me repeat that: The body inside of the mom’s body is not her body. Not her body, not her choice.”
Until you can figure out how to take the zygote out and incubate it, it is indeed my body, and my choice. And we make informed, important, critical choices.
It thoroughly demonstrates the total lack of logic and magical thinking these people have. They're just floating disembodied fetuses. Women are just totally invisible just by virtue of possessing a uterus that is effectively state property. I keep saying it but it's why we need to stop calling it fetal personhood and call it fetal coverture instead.
It's such an archaic word for people to grasp. But there's no other way to describe it. They're trying to make women constitutionally invisible under coverture of their uteruses since they can't do it under their husbands anymore. Even though that's ultimately the end goal.
😡 Oh how these people HATE biology. Especially the men; this guy needs to be smacked upside the face. They all claim to believe in a god; well, guess what? This god, in Their infinite wisdom (because God would use They/Them pronouns, or She/Her; He/Him would be the LEAST likely) decided to create ALL humans in a WOMAN'S body (even Their own son who is Themself, as Christians profess to believe), completely and utterly dependent on her for their very ability to exist. God knew what They were doing and that They couldn't possibly depend on a man for such an important task, so They entrusted woman to be the gatekeeper of life, knowing that she would use her great powers, and her CHOICE, responsibly. Or do these people know better than God? The men, especially, need to accept the reality of life and sit down and shut up. As for the anti-abortion women, that's a whole different problem...
Yes. Unfortunately the problem with representative democracy is that being representative of your constituents means bringing their same ignorant views to the table. The voters won't fix this until we fix what's wrong with the voters.
I think it was Feuerbach who said God is just a projection. If you're a moron, your god is going to be a moron, too. But these people are morons who think they're geniuses.
Thank you for lifting up abortion and mental health, a topic personally near and dear to my heart! I'm co-founding www.prochoicetherapists.org to address this public health gap! We're the first national directory and membership organization of pro-choice mental health providers in the USA. The directory launches on May 18th!
Ashley! I am so excited to find you! I am speaking at the Maternal Mental Health Now Legal & Ethical Dilemmas in Perinatal MH conference this Friday and just sent you a message on your website- would love to discuss how we can support each others' work- can I Share your website at my presentation? Please message me! biz email is hello@growingwellcounseling.com
As a disabled vet whose had an abortion for reasons of serious mental illness, this is sorely needed. Thank you for this.
Thank you, Jessica!
I'm heading to the NC legislature today to scream and shout. Last night after 6:30 they snuck a 12-week mess of a ban onto the calendar for 3pm today, hoping no one would notice. It still isn't on the legislature's calendar for today.
Also up: anti-trans law and "pro-family adoption protections."
Today Tricia Cotham, who suddenly turned Republican, gets to show her true colors.
This GOP supermajority is a real shitshow.
It's very scary because they may be able to lock in their supermajorities for a long time, rendering the governor irrelevant. The problem is they only need 3/5ths and the governor can't veto maps. Democrats have to register and turn out voters and hope for the best, but until they start winning supreme court elections idk.
That loss in the Supreme Court hurt us even worse than we expected. Very scary indeed.
Yay for Oregon!
By Amelia Templeton (OPB)
May 2, 2023 9:45 a.m.
Oregon legislators spent hours Monday debating House Bill 2002, a polarizing package involving abortion and gender-affirming health care, before ultimately voting it through to the state Senate.
Republicans fought, stalled and objected. But majority Democrats in the Oregon House waited them out, and late Monday ended up passing, by a vote of 36-23, a broad reproductive health care bill.
House Bill 2002 would require Medicaid and private insurers to cover more procedures under the umbrella of gender-affirming care, and would allow minors of any age to get an abortion without needing to notify a parent, among other policies.
It now goes to the Oregon Senate, where Democrats also have a large majority over Republicans.
HB 2002 was crafted by Democrats following the Supreme Court decision last summer overturning Roe vs. Wade and in response to a push by Republican legislators in other states to pass limits on gender-affirming care for youth.
Oregon already has among the most liberal laws in the country with regards to abortion and some of the nation’s strongest legal protections for LGBTQ+ civil liberties.
State law allows for abortions with no restrictions. It also requires state Medicaid and most private medical insurers to cover abortions and some gender-affirming care, including hormone therapy and some surgeries.
Democrats framed the bill as an effort to protect patients’ privacy rights, close gaps in insurance coverage, and increase access to abortion and gender-affirming care in rural parts of the state.
The bill would expand the scope of care Medicaid and private insurance is required to cover in Oregon to include laser hair removal and facial feminization surgery.
Related: From cosmetic to critical: Oregon, other states work to boost trans health coverage
It would also protect health care providers who perform abortions or gender-affirming care from legal repercussions.
“We need to make sure here in Oregon that our law is absolutely clear, so that our providers can provide care in every unique scenario,” said Rep. Rob Nosse, D-Portland, who carried the bill.
Republicans said the omnibus bill does too much, hasn’t received proper scrutiny and would undermine parents’ rights in sensitive medical decisions.
“This is a parental rights issue and a process issue,” said House Minority Leader Vikki Breese-Iverson, R-Prineville. “This is Oregon effectively telling you the government understands the needs of your child better than you do.”
Republicans also argued that there hasn’t been a transparent accounting of the full cost of the bill. In a fiscal impact statement prepared in March, the Oregon Health Authority could not come up with an estimate of how much HB 2002 would cost the state’s Medicaid program, but said it could increase the number of procedures that are covered rather than denied on the basis that they are cosmetic.
Republicans attempted multiple procedural moves to delay the vote, challenging whether the summary of the bill met legal standards for clarity and attempting to refer HB 2002 to other committees for debate. Those moves ultimately failed, with the bill finally going to a vote late Monday night. The bill also addresses the limited number of abortion and gender care providers outside the Willamette Valley, an issue that intensified after Idaho’s abortion bans took effect, closing clinics in Boise that were the closest option for some patients in Eastern Oregon.
HB 2002 would create a pilot project to deploy two mobile health clinics to provide abortion, gender-affirming care, and other reproductive health services in rural areas. And it requires student health centers to provide enrolled students with access to emergency contraception and medication abortion.
Republicans, many of whom represent rural districts, oppose the pilot project. They called it another example of Portlanders trying to dictate policy to rural communities without listening to them.
“These Oregonians do not want more of their taxpayer dollars going to something they fundamentally disagree with,” said Rep. Christine Goodwin, R-Canyonville. “Ask them how they feel about a mobile abortion truck parked in their neighborhoods.”
The bill also targets abortion clinic protesters by making it a crime to block people who are trying to enter a health care facility or by making noise or phone calls that interfere with facility operations.
Some of the most heated and emotional objections from Republicans came over the bill’s language that would give minors under 15 the right to access reproductive health care information and services, including abortion, without needing parental consent.
HB 2002 would also limit the situations in which a medical provider can disclose to a parent that their child has had an abortion or sought other reproductive health care, if the child objects to that disclosure.
In Oregon, state law already allows minors 15 years and up to consent to their own medical care. The state does not have any statutes currently on the books regarding parental notification or consent specifically for abortions.
Republicans have used the hypothetical case of a 10-year-old girl getting an abortion without notifying her parents, which would be legal under HB 2002.
They argued that the bill would undermine parents’ rights in sensitive medical decisions, and could keep parents in the dark in a situation in which their child had been the victim of rape and abuse.
Rep. Lily Morgan, R-Grants Pass, disclosed her history as a survivor of child abuse while urging her colleagues to oppose the bill and indefinitely postpone voting on it.
Morgan said that while she was never personally pressured to get an abortion, she was intimidated by her abuser to remain silent about her experience. She fears the bill will make it easier for a pregnancy of a child under 15 to be hidden from their parents, allowing abuse to continue.
“I was not empowered or equipped to handle the situation on my own,” Morgan said.
Rep. Lisa Reynolds, D-Beaverton, invoked her experience as a pediatrician in defending the limits to parental notification in the bill and in current state law.
Reynolds said the standard of care pediatricians follow is to involve parents in child’s care, except in exceptional circumstances.
“This is only in the infrequent and heartbreaking circumstances when the parents are not the safe adults in that young person’s life,” Reynolds said.
Reynolds also noted that health care providers are mandatory reporters of child abuse.
“If a 10-year-old is pregnant, a horrific act and crime has taken place,” she said. “I would tend to that child and then I would call law enforcement and child welfare.”
While no lawmakers cited it, research suggests that a majority of minors involve their parents in the decision to seek an abortion, whether or not they are legally required to.
Lauren Ralph is an epidemiologist with the University of California, San Francisco, whose research focuses on young people’s access to abortion.
Ralph said a handful of studies, including her own research in Illinois, have looked at the issue of parental notification and found relatively consistent results.
Ralph said in states with no parental notification requirement, about two-thirds of minors seeking abortions voluntarily involve their parents in the decision, most often their moms. Between 80% and 90% involve some adult — a parent, relative, teacher, counselor or member of their religious community, according to Ralph.
In her research, younger minors were much more likely to involve their parents, with over 90% of 14- and 15-year-olds involving a parent in their decision voluntarily, and the percentage falling among 16- and 17-year-olds.
From NYTimes, 9:33pm EST: Judge Allows Abortion Clinics to Remain Open in Utah for Now
"The judge temporarily blocked a new law [that] would have required the procedure be performed in hospitals, and effectively restricted access across the state, clinic operators say."
Excellent news. (I was going to use an exclamation point but it's only a lower court judge so it's not final). I've always perceived Utah to be a bit different among the red states, possibly because its LDS majority population is used to being on the receiving end of discrimination, so there may be a bit more empathy and compassion there than otherwise (and the missionary culture may contribute too). That said, Utah is still a very conservative state even if its brand of conservatism is a bit different. Anyway, we'll take any good news we can get, any favorable court decision anywhere and the arguments contained therein.
Continuing... "On Tuesday, Judge Andrew H. Stone of Utah’s Third Judicial District agreed with Planned Parenthood. In his 22-page ruling, he wrote that the organization had offered evidence suggesting that abortion clinics had been unreasonably singled out, and that the state’s rationale for the new law was “nebulous.”
“There is nothing before the court to indicate that an injunction would be adverse to the public interest,” the judge wrote."
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/02/us/utah-abortion-clinics.html
Good to see you cited in the Congressional Amicus Brief to the federal Fifth District Court on the mifepristone case. Kudos!
Thank you, Jessica Valenti, for what you are doing. So glad I just discovered you and subscribed. You are the voice I have been looking for.
Welcome! Conversations get wild here so join in!
I am all in !!
Before this issue required a daily commitment after Dobbs, her substack was called 'All in Her Head' (kind of a reference to gaslighting) and I miss those columns because her voice is just as sharp on every other situation that puts women in a lesser place to men. She reminds me a bit of my mom in that she doesn't suffer fools (and bullshit) gladly (and the vulgar language is like mom too :) And if you already knew that background please excuse my mansplaining!
No, I was not aware of any of that background. I appreciate your brining it up.! I just saw Jessica's name last night for the first time. It was in an article I was reading, I think - something that mentioned her or linked to one of her articles. I subscribe to so many things related to reproductive rights and other political issues that I can't keep track where I read things! Anyway, I delved a little more into Jessica's writing after reading that first article, and I knew I had to read her writing every day going forward. Thank you for being here. We need more men to care - and be informed - about this issue. The mentality that keeps women oppressed keeps many other people in a lesser place in society, as well. Your mom sounds like a hoot, by the way!
She was! She passed away seven years ago from her heart arrhythmia issues. It's nice to feel her presence in other people and situations, if that makes sense. And yes it's always sad when people can't find empathy for others, and only care about things that affect them personally. I suppose hardship is the best way to build empathy, and likewise privilege works against it, which makes it all the more important to challenge privilege. I'm hoping the younger generations of men are better (and also that the younger generations of women demand it!) but it's clear we have a long long way to go. I hope this crisis will shock more people out of complacency.
I share your hopes. Too bad, though, that it has to come to this. And I am sorry for the loss of your mom.
The more, the merrier.
The ACOG money was probably given for the same reason most political donations are made in this country: protection money. That's the way the system works. Donating money might not help get you your way, but if you HAVEN'T donated money to the winning candidate you can almost certainly count on no help at all. I assume every business or organization of a certain size in this country (as well as every individual of a certain net worth) knows this and fails to comply at their own risk.
Agreed. It's a really messed up system that money should be involved at all in our political process. It's what got us here.
Campaigns cost money. The trick with public funding is first, how do you decide who qualifies, how much, etc., and second, voters balk at giving public money to politicians, especially since voters seem to hate campaigning so much. Even though it would seem to be the only way to preserve democracy. Plus, in this country you violate someone's first amendment rights if they can't contribute unlimited funds to a political campaign 🙄. You can see why authoritarianism as an alternative system of government has such appeal.
I don't think any other developed country spends any where near the amount of money in their elections as we do. Campaigns last a couple weeks or months. Here it's years. Our system is a cluster f.
Thank you so much for everything you do Jessica ❤️❤️❤️❤️
Our descent to Gilead-status continues.
Every Day: you provide the single best roundup of news, legislative shenanigans, judicial rulings — you name it — relating to the anti-abortion debacle in post-Roe America. Bring it!!
I want to know what is happening in this woman's brain that she can do this everyday. Insane the amount of info she puts out in such a comprehensive manner. She's a wizard I swear lol
I had read several of these articles (and re-posted some), but it's a labor of love to put them all in one place for us- so thanks! I live in Kansas and work in Missouri, in Maternal Fetal Medicine, and every one of these bills and legal cases has bearing on my every day life and those of my patients. We ALL need to keep pushing this information out, so people wake up and vote these Regressive extremists out of office!
Love the mug!
Thank you, Ms. Valenti, for all your efforts. Keep on fighting!
As a skeptic, I'm excited to hear about the series on the anti-choice movement’s attack on data and science. This ties directly into religious extremism.
Yeah. He says "‘wow, there’s a different way to look at this.’” That was this newsletter's breakdown point for me. They don't see US at all. They shouldn't be in office.
It's like that Indiana lawmaker: " House Rep. John Jacob, an anti-abortion extremist who wanted to remove all exceptions from the bill, including those for rape and incest, declared that an abortion was not a woman’s choice.
“The body inside of the mom’s body is not her body,” Jacob said on Friday. “Let me repeat that: The body inside of the mom’s body is not her body. Not her body, not her choice.”
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/stefficao/indiana-abortion-ban-republican-lawmakers
Until you can figure out how to take the zygote out and incubate it, it is indeed my body, and my choice. And we make informed, important, critical choices.
It thoroughly demonstrates the total lack of logic and magical thinking these people have. They're just floating disembodied fetuses. Women are just totally invisible just by virtue of possessing a uterus that is effectively state property. I keep saying it but it's why we need to stop calling it fetal personhood and call it fetal coverture instead.
It is finally hitting me -- what you mean by "fetal coverture." Yes. Agree.
It's such an archaic word for people to grasp. But there's no other way to describe it. They're trying to make women constitutionally invisible under coverture of their uteruses since they can't do it under their husbands anymore. Even though that's ultimately the end goal.
😡 Oh how these people HATE biology. Especially the men; this guy needs to be smacked upside the face. They all claim to believe in a god; well, guess what? This god, in Their infinite wisdom (because God would use They/Them pronouns, or She/Her; He/Him would be the LEAST likely) decided to create ALL humans in a WOMAN'S body (even Their own son who is Themself, as Christians profess to believe), completely and utterly dependent on her for their very ability to exist. God knew what They were doing and that They couldn't possibly depend on a man for such an important task, so They entrusted woman to be the gatekeeper of life, knowing that she would use her great powers, and her CHOICE, responsibly. Or do these people know better than God? The men, especially, need to accept the reality of life and sit down and shut up. As for the anti-abortion women, that's a whole different problem...
I use They for God, too. The look these conservatives give me is hilarious.
Yes. Unfortunately the problem with representative democracy is that being representative of your constituents means bringing their same ignorant views to the table. The voters won't fix this until we fix what's wrong with the voters.
100% !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It is bizarre how unbelievably uneducated these people are and are in charge of making laws over women's bodies at all!
These same people are making the laws about everything else too.
Oh course they would. They think they literally speak for God.
Yeah, who knew god was such a moron?
I think it was Feuerbach who said God is just a projection. If you're a moron, your god is going to be a moron, too. But these people are morons who think they're geniuses.
Yeah I don't mind so much morons who know they're morons. But they're the rarer type.