Video: When Abortion was Illegal- The Untold Stories

by Nomad

Why the Anti-Abortion Dream of Evangelicals Will Be a Nightmare for Young Women

by Nomad

With the confirmation of arch-conservative Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court, one of the long prayed-for dreams of the evangelical movement will very likely be attained: the overturning of 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling.

A Visit to PPLA: Planned Parenthood Does More Than You Ever Knew

 by Leadfoot

Because of the volunteer work we have done promoting the Power Pom, Bella and I were recently invited to tour Planned Parenthood Los Angeles (PPLA).

For some reason, it never occurred to me just how eye-opening this experience would be for a 14-year-old. However, the questions she asked during the tour opened my eyes to just how much of her innocence is left, and how important it is to discuss women’s health issues with our daughters, as early as possible. It has been 6 days since the tour, and she still hasn’t stopped talking about it. Below is a re-telling of our experience.

Film Friday- Sarah’s Uncertain Path

by Nomad

Filmmakers Andrew Droz Palermo and his cousin Tracy Droz Tragos produced this 2014 vignette called Sarah’s Uncertain Path, documenting a low-income family in western Missouri.

We are introduced to Sarah, a pregnant Midwestern teen, who is struggling to beat the odds in a tragic family tradition.

Irrespective of Circumstances: Pro-Life Rubio Thinks Abortion Shouldn't be an Option for Rape Victims

by Nomad

GOP establishment might be banking on Marco Rubio but his total-restriction views on abortions actually represent a mere 19% of the American people.  

No Exceptions Marco

Last year a Gallup poll suggested that a narrow majority of Americans (51%) felt that abortion should remain legal under certain circumstances. Twenty-nine percent, however, said that abortion should be legal under all circumstances. 

The lowest percentage of the respondents (19%) said that abortion should be illegal under any and all circumstance. Ordinarily, this absolute limit refers to conditions where the mother's life is in danger or pregnancy following a rape or incest. 

That absolutist restrictive poition has always been the extremes of the pro-life movement. In fact, the SCOTUS' Roe vs. Wade decision originated from a rape case. (The ruling, however, did not revolve around that particular circumstance.)

On Sunday, the GOP establishment's latest hope, Marco Rubio revealed that, if elected- he would only very reluctantly sign a anti-abortion bill that provided an exception for rape and incest cases. 

His position pits the candidate against a full 81% of the American electorate.

Ohio Draft Law Would Mandate Women to Pay for "Respectful" But Costly Fetus Disposal

by Nomad

Yet another attempt to create a legislative obstacle for   women trying to obtain a legal, safe and private abortion in Ohio.   

When it comes to the war on women and their reproductive rights, the pro-life opposition appears willing to stop at nothing, no matter how outrageous. 

Politically, it doesn't seem to make much sense. A Gallup poll from earlier this year found that 50 percent of Americans now call themselves pro-choice, including 54 percent of women and 46 percent of men. On the other hand, only 44 percent of respondents labeled themselves pro-life, the lowest response in more than five years.

That doesn't seem to make much difference to Ohio legislators, Republicans State Rep. Kyle Koehler, Sen. Joe Uecker, and Rep. Robert McColley. They have introduced a bill requiring women who have had abortions to complete an official form provided by the Ohio Department of Health.

This form would force women to indicate how they wish the fetus to be disposed of, that is, whether they would prefer to cremation or burial.

Clinics would be required to perform the designated method then could require the women treated to pay the cost, according to a Ohio Public Radio report.

There are just so many things wrong with the proposed legislation. For one thing, it is doubtful whether it would ever be considered constitutional. 

That's because the key factor in the landmark 1972 Roe v. Wade SCOTUS decision was its infringement by the state on the woman's right to privacy. Such an infringement was warranted only if there was some kind of credible justification for state interference in that right to individual privacy.

History and Texas Anti-Abortion Laws Show How Futile and Dangerous Conservative Efforts Are

by Nomad

A new study in Texas about self-induced abortions underscores that truth that conservatives have long denied. Making something illegal won't make it go away and could have unintended consequences.

Republican leaders in Texas are jubilant about their attempts to close down Planned Parenthood clinics  in their state. When deciding to cut off Medicaid funding for the organization, Governor Greg Abbott led the charge even to the point of breaking federal law. The rush is on now to close down to remaining abortion clinics in operation. 

Planned Parenthood, as most people know, is not solely an abortion provider. It also provides valuable reproductive health care services for women. Inevitably, there will sooner or later be consequences for half-baked policy.

But then this is Texas where, when it comes to conservative bombast, there are no holds barred.Conservative crazy comes at a two-for-one price there. Republican president candidate Canadian-cum-Texan Ted Cruz called Planned Parenthood "an ongoing criminal enterprise."

JEB! couldn't understand why it was necessary to spend half a billion dollars for women's health issues at all. Apparently nobody has explained to JEB (the "smart" Bush) that women make up 50.8% of the population and 43.5 million of those women have children. These mothers gave birth to 95.8 million children. Somebody forgot to inform JEB that the health of women naturally has an impact of the children they have.)

Rep. Steve Stockman not long ago contributed his excuse for cleverness with a bumper sticker campaign which linked two seemingly unrelated issues close to the hearts of Texas right-wingers: Guns and fetuses.

The stickers read: 

If babies had guns, they wouldn't be aborted. 

This was matched with pro-choice signs that read: 

If my vagina could fire bullets, you wouldn't regulate it.

Who could possibly argue with logic like that?

Planned Parenthood Files Lawsuit Against Arkansas for Blocking Healthcare for Poor Women

by Nomad

In an attempt to abolish abortion on a state by state basis, governors of a few states have cut Medicaid contracts with Planned Parenthood, a non-profit organization which provides reproductive health and maternal and child health services.. The problem is the action is, say lawyers for organization, illegal and they plan to sue.

Check out this reprinted article from Medical Daily.

Planned Parenthood Is Suing The State Of   Arkansas

Planned Parenthood filed a lawsuit with the American Civil Liberties Union that alleges Governor Asa Hutchinson (R-Ark) “acted illegally” when he moved to terminate Medicaid contracts with the organization last month, The Hill reported. “Governor Hutchinson has no business telling women in Arkansas where they can and cannot go for cancer screenings, birth control, HIV tests…

Unintended Pregnancies, Contraception and The High Cost of Right Wing Ignorance

 by Nomad

The Republican Congress may be hell-bent on restricting abortive services for women but in the end, all of their misguided efforts are going to end up. in real terms, costing the nation a lot more.

The Washington Post recently reported on the taxpayer costs  of blindly following Republican policies when it comes to women's health and sex education.  

According to a new analysis released by the Guttmacher Institute, unintended  pregnancies cost American taxpayers $21 billion each year.

That averages out to a cost of about $366 per every woman of childbearing age in the U.S. Overall, more than half of U.S. pregnancies are unintended, and roughly 1-in-20 American women of reproductive age have an unplanned pregnancy each year.

A full 68 percent of the million unplanned births are paid for by public insurance programs like Medicaid.  

These costs cover prenatal care, labor, delivery post-partum care and infant care for the first year. All those medical costs can quickly add up to something in the range of $21,000 per child. 

How many of those children end up in foster homes- costing the state even more- or are raised in households requiring government assistance is yet another problem without a solution. 

A Southern Problem

And there is a real North-South divide between the states when it comes to unplanned births. 

The lowest rates could be found in New England and the West, while the highest rates of unplanned pregnancy were found in Southern States. More than half of all births in Mississippi (56%) were unplanned.

Texas Draft Law Forces Legally-Dead Pregnant Women to Deliver Unwanted Babies

by Nomad

One Texas legislator seems determined to stop at nothing to protect the life of the unborn. Even if it means keeping a clinically-dead mother alive long enough for the baby to be born. 

Fort Worth boasts one of the most conservative legislators that Texas has produced. Republican Rep. Matt Krause is the son of a Tyler, Texas pastor for- I kid you not- at Green Acres Baptist Church. 

Before entering politics, Krause was a intern and then Texas director of Liberty Counsel which is a non-profit legal and educational organization that, according to its mission statement, is committed to “restoring the culture one case at a time by defending the sanctity of human life, the traditional family, and religious liberties.”

His background therefore undoubtedly played a part in his decision to draft legislation that would open up a lot of complicated questions about patient and family rights versus the rights of the unborn. 

Taboo You: How Islamic Pakistan is the Christian Right Wing's Dream for America

by Nomad

When it comes to the reproductive rights of women, the ultra-conservative Christian Far Right in the US and the Islamic theocratic republic of Pakistan have a lot more in common than they are willing to admit.

In an ideal world, every baby born should be a wanted child, not stigmatized for being born from a mother out of wedlock and not a burden to parents too poor to feed their family.

Yet, in this day and age, it is still not an unattainable goal for most of humanity. Although we already have all of the resources we need, such as cheap, easy to use contraceptives, and the means for their distribution , we as a species continue to over-populate the planet.
To understand the reasons, we need to take a closer look at Pakistan.

Pakistan: The Land of Taboos

Pakistan is one nation where the population growth rate is high; it is in fact higher than average growth rate of all other South Asian countries. With over 180 million people, Pakistan is the sixth most populous country in the world, .  

But why should a country be so crowded and so poverty-stricken and yet unable to do anything about it? For that you need to look at the majority-Muslim Pakistan's ultra-conservative social policies. Especially when it comes to attitudes to sexuality and women's rights.   

Abortion and LIFE: What Life was Like Before Roe v. Wade

by Nomad

On Feb 27, 1970, LIFE magazine featured an article on the subject of abortion. What's interesting about the article is that it gives us a snapshot of what life was like for women before abortion became legal. 

The Revolution in Paradise

In 1970, after a little over ten years as a state, Hawaii started a revolution. It became the first state to legalize abortions at the request of the woman. A short time later, New York soon followed, allowing abortions up to the 24th week of the pregnancy. 

Prior to that time, Colorado, California, Oregon and North Carolina had abortion laws that allowed for the procedure only in cases of rape, incest "or in which the pregnancy would lead to a permanent physical disability of the woman." (Presumably, that would include a lethal risk to the mother.)

At a time when, as a LIFE magazine article in that year points out, 20 out of every 100,000 American women died of complications. One of those women, Geraldine "Gerri" Santoro, became a symbol for the pro-choice movement. (A graphic police photo of her body "naked, kneeling, collapsed upon the floor, with a bloody towel between her legs" after a self-administered abortion was published in 1973 and outraged a nation against the abortion laws.)

LIFE magazine article also gives other interesting information about abortion before the reforms. For example, most women who sought abortions were, contrary to conventional wisdom, married. Although the Catholic Church strictly forbade the procedure, more than 20% of the women who had abortions were Roman Catholic. Religious prohibitions did not seem to discourage the procedure. It only made it a shameful and more dangerous act.

Compared to today, the Church back then apparently had a different take on the abortion law. Boston's Archbishop Richard Cushing, was quoted as saying: 

Catholics do not need the support of civil law to be faithful to there religious convictions and they do not seek to impose their moral views on other members of society."

Given the controversy that followed, led by Christians and anti-abortion groups, that's a breathtaking statement.

Betty Friedan: True Personhood Means Self-Control Over One's Body

by Nomad

Today marks the anniversary of the death of one of the leaders of the feminism movement, Betty Friedan. 

On this date, eight years ago, Betty Friedan died. It was also her 85th birthday. The name may not be familiar to many young women today. That's a shame. 

Friedan's Legacy
Her 1963 book,  The Feminine Mystique, is considered to be the catalyst for the American feminism movement of that decade. It remains one of the most powerful works of popular non-fiction written in America. 

In 1966, Friedan founded and was elected the first president of the National Organization for Women (NOW), which aimed to bring women "into the mainstream of American society now [in] fully equal partnership with men." 

New Mexico House Bill 206: When Abortion after Rape or Incest is Tampering with Evidence

by Nomad

Looks like one legislator in New Mexico got caught trying to pull a fast one on voters when it comes to abortion. 
Draft legislation in the New Mexico State Congress would  have made the bodies of every woman pregnant from rape or incest a crime scene. According to House Bill 206, any woman attempting to terminate the pregnancy would be charged with the third-degree felony of “tampering with evidence.”

The bill would have made a crime of “procuring or facilitating an abortion, or compelling or coercing another to obtain an abortion, of a fetus that is the result of criminal sexual penetration or incest with the intent to destroy evidence of the crime.” 

When news of the bill made headlines, the embarrassed sponsor of the bill found herself in the middle of a political storm.

Furious Backpedaling in Santa Fe
When details of the bill were made public, Republican Rep. Cathrynn N. Brown of Carlsbad, the sponsor of the bill, told reporters that:

“House Bill 206 was never intended to punish or criminalize rape victims. Its intent is solely to deter rape and cases of incest. The rapist — not the victim — would be charged with tampering of evidence.”

(Brown fails to mention that the original version of her draft did not include any provision that victims could not be charged. That addition and revision apparently came after the public outcry. To see the original version, click here: )

In the face of a public backlash, Brown was forced to add important clarifications ( From “ Whoever commits tampering with evidence shall be punished as follows:...” suddenly became “In no circumstance shall the mother of the fetus be charged.”)
But, since the bill doesn't define "procuring or facilitating"or "compelling or coercing" a 
careful re-reading also shows that anybody who encourages a woman to get an abortion after these crimes could be charged. Perpetrators of rape and incest are not exclusively specified.

The Church, Abortion and A Wrongful Death Lawsuit against a Catholic Hospital

Every now and then (but more and more) you find a news story that forces your brain to do double back flips. Here's one I found, courtesy of Digital Journal:

Catholic hospital says 'a fetus is not a person'

A Catholic hospital embroiled in a lawsuit involving the death of twin fetuses is arguing that they should not be held responsible for the death of the unborn children because "a fetus is not a person".

(Click on the headline above to read the complete article. It's worth your time.) 

That such a thing can happen in the first place in any hospital in this day and age is, in itself, shocking and it's tragic. To lose your wife and your unborn twins in one moment? It's hard to imagine that kind of pain. The Denver Post gives us more details:

Jeremy Stodghill filed a wrongful-death lawsuit in District Court in Fremont County after his 31-year-old wife, Lori, seven months pregnant with twin boys, died of a blockage of the main artery of the lung at St. Thomas More Hospital in Cañon City on New Year's Day 2006.

Stodghill's lawyer argued that her obstetrician, Pelham Staples, never made it to the hospital — even though on call for emergencies — and there was no attempt by any medical personnel to save the Stodghills' sons by cesarian section. The unborn children died in the womb.

However, listen to the defense from the lawyer for the lead defendant in the case is Catholic Health Initiatives (CHI), operator of St. Thomas More hospital.The article quotes Jason Langley, attorney for CHI:

"[The court] should not overturn the long-standing rule in Colorado that the term ‘person,’ as is used in the Wrongful Death Act, encompasses only individuals born alive. Colorado state courts define ‘person’ under the Act to include only those born alive. Therefore Plaintiffs cannot maintain wrongful death claims based on two unborn fetuses."

In fact, from a legal point of view, Langely was quite right. In cases of wrongful death,, the courts, as a rule, do not award special rights to the unborn. (For the complicated reasons for this policy, follow the link.) One source observes: 

Opponents of the fetal wrongful death action add the argument that wrongful death statutes allow recovery only for the death of a "person," and that a fetus is not a person."

Nevertheless in the criminal courts, Colorado (as well as 38 other states) do have increased the criminal penalties for crimes involving pregnant women. They are called "fetal homicide laws." So the courts do give special limited considerations to death of the unborn fetuses. Apparently just not for wrongful death cases. 

In any case, from a moral and ethical view, I wonder how in the name of God the lawyer persuaded his defendants that his approach was suitable? 
That must have been some hard sell. 

The Line It Is Drawn: A Look Back at October 1963

by Nomad

Of the many critical moments in American history, the year 1963 stands out as one of the most climactic.

Yet there were so many things going on and so many stories being told just before that awful moment that were lost in the shadow that fell over the nation after the assassination.

The year 1963 was a momentous one for the fight against discrimination and events were moving quickly. By that year, many leaders in the civil rights movement had begun to question the sincerity of President Kennedy’s commitment to racial equality.

A Great Change is at Hand

In terms of social unrest, it had been a very hot summer. In June, the president had been forced to take a bold step, to federalize the Alabama National Guard when George Wallace, the segregationist governor of the state, refused to allow two black students to attend the state university in Tuscaloosa. Peaceful protests throughout the south had been met with police brutality which, in turn, ignited violence and rioting in many cities. 

Mitt Romney's Latest Headache: Rep.Todd Akin’s Rape/Abortion Remarks

by Nomad
Just when you may have thought the Republican party couldn’t get any more ignorant and hypocritical, in one fell swoop, a remark by the Tea Party nominee in the Senate race for the state of Missouri has demonstrated that the party has untapped reserves of both.

On a recent St. Louis TV program Rep. Todd Akins was asked about women’s reproductive health issues, and whether his anti-abortion stand included an exemption for rape. He replied that it did not. Why? Because in those cases, he claimed, a woman’s body will somehow know to end the pregnancy itself. “If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.”

There was immediate outrage by women’s groups, which is a fairly predictable result whenever a politician- especially a male one- is foolish enough to put the words “legitimate” and “rape” together in the same sentence. (It's also an effective way to isolate yourself at a cocktail party, I might add.)  

Apologists for the Congressman- where they could be found- shrugged off the remarks as just a poor choice of words and (c'mon guys!) an artificial controversy. 

Pro-Life Supporters Should be Thinking Twice about Voting for Romney

by Nomad

The handlers of Mitt Romney, the presumptive Republican nominee in this year's election, have always had a serious conundrum when it came to the topic of abortion. While running for governor in 1994, his pro-choice stand was about as unequivocal as any liberal politician can be. Only he wasn't liberal. It was a transparent strategy to rob his opponent Edward Kennedy of his left wing support. (Romney is nothing if not ambitious.)

During the debate with Kennedy, Romney got up-close and personal with the audience, revealing how a relative had died as a result of a backstreet abortion. Kennedy’s reaction was bemusement with a touch of amusement. He replied that Romney’s position kept changing. Was he pro-choice or was his pro-life and finally labeled Romney “the multiple-choice candidate.”

Romney, clearly irked, demanded a chance to respond. This topic was one, he said, that he would never be changing his position on. This was rock solid. He was without any question and forever pro-choice.
Then, a funny thing happened on the way to the White House. He became pro-life.
Just like that. 

Spinning it like a potter’s wheel, Romney fobbed the contradiction off as an “evolving” opinion. (A concept most of the conservatives apparently don't put much faith in.)
With the cowardly mainstream media in tow in this presidential election, the Republican conservative elite somehow managed to deflect and to distract. The pro-life faction of the conservative right wing were assured that all was in order; that despite his heart-felt statements back in 1994, he was really (no, REALLY!) against abortion. This Romney is not the same as THAT Romney.

Stericycle- Money over Principle?

Then there came the Stericycle problem.