kauricat: (war)
Oh goody. They are planning to build a Pro-Life monument in Wichita, KS, which will "include an exact replica of the Wailing Wall in Jerusalem and memorial gardens. . .It also would include 60 crosses memorializing the estimated 60 million abortions that have been performed since abortion was legalized."

You're going to replicate The Wailing Wall? AND THEN PUT A BUNCH OF CROSSES THERE?

kauricat: (war)
Freedom of speech does not guarantee you the right to threaten someone without impunity. I don't care if you think your letter was "divinely inspired" and you feel that being punished for your threats "violates [your] freedom of speech and religion."

STOP BURNING PLACES DOWN THAT YOU DON'T LIKE! "Women With A Vision (WWAV) was co-founded by a collective of Black women in 1991 as a response to the non-existence of HIV prevention resources for those women who were the most at risk: poor women, sex workers, women with substance abuse issues, and transgender women." And someone decided to try to burn it down.
kauricat: (war)
Yay Oklahoma! At Integris Canadian Valley hospital, they not only refused to provide emergency contraception, they also would not examine the victim.

Thank goodness she had the support of her mother and they were able to find another hospital that did an exam and treated the victim.

The embedding does not seem to be working, so here's a link: http://www.news9.com/category/116601/video-page?autoStart=true&topVideoCatNo=default&clipId=7346472
kauricat: (war)
It's not enough to steal patient information anymore. No, it's apparently time to just burn them all down.

Two fires broke out in Atlanta OB/Gyn offices recently.

A third fire was set in New Orleans.

Because having doctors' offices where women can get prenatal care is just unnecessary. Anyone who works with pregnant women is obviously an abortionist, and their place of business should be torched.

I hope they catch whomever is doing this and that they go away for a long time. This is unacceptable behavior.
kauricat: (war)
You know, I was kind of joking for a while that the women's right to vote might be repealed, that we might end up somewhere like the society in "Native Tongue." Then I found out that my own Secretary of State had pushed through a bill that purports to be about proving your identity when voting, but which actually has a provision within it that forces new voters to present not just an ID like a driver's license, but to provide a birth certificate. And those who have a different last name now than the name they were born with (married women, mostly), will have to go to their election office and fill out an affidavit or something. Just because of a name change; because she got married and decided to take her husband's last name.

So that was kind of shocking, because it seemed like a provision that would primarily affect women and their ability to vote. But then with it only applying to brand new Kansas voters, it should affect relatively few women's registrations. I was relatively mollified when I learned that not EVERYONE in Kansas who had changed their name would need to reregister under the new standards.

Finding out that a couple of Kansas women (outspoken women) had checked on their voter registration and found that their registrations had been suspended (Why? Unknown at this time) or had expired kind of threw me. Usually "expiration" is due to not responding to a "change of address" query or due to not voting in a few elections. The women in question might meet those qualifications, but they seem pretty politically active, so I am still suspicious.

And now, this. I am currently watching the video of his sermon (which is linked at the end of that article), and so far everything they wrote that he said, he did actually say. I am more than stunned. Here is a man who has enough of a following that he has been on Fox News, and whatever you might think of that network, they do pull in some pretty significant people. And he's saying women should not be able to vote. That it was a mistake.

You know, years ago (it was 2005) when Cherie Priest wrote her famous post against men who would deny women greater access to birth control in the name of reducing unwanted pregnancies, I thought "What?" I will admit, at that time I thought she was a little overboard with her language. I thought her post was funny, and had truth in it, but that it just wasn't that big a deal.

And now look where we are.

So I am unwilling to just take men like Jesse Lee Peterson with a grain of salt, and assume they are outliers or anything of that sort. This is how it starts. If one person gets brave enough to say it, pretty soon other people who secretly believe it will feel safe to come forward and try to make it a reality.

I realize that I am seeing these things because I am looking for them, but for God's sake, A MAN STOOD UP IN FRONT OF PEOPLE, ON CAMERA, AND SAID WOMEN SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN GIVEN THE VOTE, AND HE DID THIS IN 2012.

To quote a sign from our Topeka rally, "If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention."
kauricat: (war)
Okay. Here are the parts that bother me the most. There is a lot of tax code in there that I'm having trouble keeping straight, but I think they have also included an exception to any abortion-related services, making them non-tax-deductible under medical expenses. I'm not sure how that works for women who suffer a miscarriage and then have to have D&C.

Anyway, I'm not sure about that part, so I have not included it. If I can parse it, I'll update later.

"Section 2:

(d) no health care services provided by any state agency, or any employee of a state agency while acting within the scope of such employee's employment, shall include abortion. Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to prevent a physician enrolled in a residency program and employed by the university of Kansas medical center from receiving experience with induced abortions{,} conducted at facilities other than those owned, leased or operated by the university of Kansas hospital authority or any other state entity.{: Provided however, that} for purposes of this act {subsection} only, such physicians shall be considered as acting outside the scope of their {such physician's} official employment in such actions. This provision regarding physicians enrolled in a residency program shall remain in effect through June 30, 2013."

Does this mean that after June 30th, 2013, that residents will no longer be able to receive experience with induced abortions at alternate facilities? I think it does, because of this article where Lance Kinzer (someone who makes me almost literally ill) derides KU Med Center for reneging on their compromise.

"New Sec. 8. 

(a) No school district, employee or volunteer thereof, or educational service provider contracting with such school district shall provide abortion services. No school district shall permit any person or entity to offer, sponsor or otherwise furnish in any manner any course materials or instruction relating to human sexuality or sexually transmitted diseases if such person or entity is an abortion services provider."

I think this means that if Planned Parenthood wants to give out free birth control at high schools, they’ll be barred from doing so. This is admittedly not huge on my list of issues, but then again, teens are using better birth control now, which is resulting in lower pregnancy rates, so maybe we should do what we can to keep that happening.

"New Sec. 9. 

(a) No civil action may be commenced in any court for a claim of wrongful life or wrongful birth, and no damages may be recovered in any civil action for any physical condition of a minor that existed at the time of such minor's birth if the damages sought arise out of a claim that a person's action, or omission, contributed to such minor's mother not obtaining an abortion."

Here’s the part where the doctor doesn’t have to tell the pregnant woman what is going on with her pregnancy, and she cannot sue later for being lied to. Also, consider that an OB could use this excuse if they made a mistake. "But I thought if I told her that she'd get an abortion!" "Oh, okay then, totally not malpractice."

"Section 11

(c) As used in this section, "unborn child" means a living individual organism of the species homo sapiens, in utero, at any stage of gestation from fertilization to birth."

Helllloooooo Personhood

"Section 12

(h)(i) "Pregnant" or "pregnancy" means that female reproductive condition of having an unborn child in the mother's body."

Combined with the fertilization piece in Section 11, I believe this means you are considered to be pregnant from the moment the egg gets fertilized. This is the part that may have the effect of criminalizing the birth control pill, the patch, IUDs, vaginal rings, and the morning after pill. Probably other things, but I'm not really up on my contraception methods.

"Section 13

(1) Except in the case of a medical emergency, prior to performing or inducing, or attempting to perform or induce an abortion upon a woman, the physician shall determine the gestational age of the unborn child according to accepted obstetrical and neonatal practice and standards applied by physicians in the same or similar circumstances."

They don’t spell it out, but if you’re in the very early stages of pregnancy, this is where they bring in the ultrasound wand.

"Section 14
(3) a description of risks related to the proposed abortion method, including risk of premature birth in future pregnancies, risk of breast cancer and risks to the woman's reproductive health and alternatives to the abortion that a reasonable patient would consider material to the decision of whether or not to undergo the abortion;"

The risk of breast cancer studies were flawed and debunked. There is no link. They are legislating a lie and hoping it will scare women into doing The Right Thing. Arrrg.
kauricat: (war)
So there is this thing you can do in the legislature that I just learned about. It's known as a "Gut and Go," and the way it works is you take a bill that already passed the other house of congress, you cut all of the contents of that bill out, you paste in a completely new bill, and then you send it back as amended for the other house of congress to give an up or down vote.

In this way, the Kansas House of Representatives inserted House Bill 2598 into Senate Bill 313 and passed it. Now the Senate has to say "Sure, those changes are okay with us," and then it's going to be a law because Governor Brownback has said he'll sign any pro-life legislation that comes to his desk.

I have spent a lot of time reformatting the damned thing so I can make sense of it, and now I'm going to read through it a couple of times and write to the Senators, pointing out the worst parts of the bill.

I'll probably be posting those pieces here, too, since the last time I did that it came in really handy, more than once.

Also, it rained here again, so it's a good thing we got the darned yard mowed.
kauricat: (war)
This is an extremely inappropriate for work video.


kauricat: (Default)


RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sep. 26th, 2017 03:49 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios