Posts Tagged ‘ Abortion rights ’

This is not that

May 20th, 2014 10:05 am | By

Dear oh dear – if you’re going to disagree, disagree with the actual claim, not a different one. That applies to sub-claims as well as the chief claim.

Someone called Rand Paul Fanbase (not a promising start, I know) on Twitter:

Rand Paul Fanbase @LibertyNerd

@OpheliaBenson not only supports abortion “rights” but says there’s nothing bad about abortion. Humanism=hedonism.

What I actually wrote in the piece:

We don’t have to be helpless before a failure of contraception, because there is a fix. That’s not tragic.

Of course, that’s not to say that abortion is never sorrowful. It’s to say that it’s not inherently and always sorrowful and that it shouldn’t be made so by

Read the rest

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



A police officer, not a doctor, by her bed

Apr 29th, 2014 5:03 pm | By

In El Salvador, a nightmare I can’t even read about without quaking with fury.

Cristina Quintanilla was 18 years old in October 2004 when, seven months pregnant with her second child, she collapsed in pain on the floor of her family home. “I felt like I was choking, like I couldn’t breathe,” she says, shaking at the memory.

Quintanilla, who lives in San Miguel, El Salvador, fell unconscious and, bleeding heavily, was taken to hospital by her mother. When she woke up, dizzy from blood loss and anaesthetic, and having lost her child, she says she was startled to find a police officer, not a doctor, by her bed.

Because she’s a woman and she had a miscarriage, so OBVIOUSLY … Read the rest

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



What would the neighbors say?

Apr 19th, 2014 4:41 pm | By

One from the Center for Reproductive Rights:

A Dallas hospital has chosen to discriminate against two good doctors rather than protect women’s health.

Two weeks ago, the hospital revoked the doctors’ admitting privileges, specifically because—and they said as much—they provide abortion services.

That’s illegal, and we are fighting against the hospital’s decision in court.

Here’s what the hospital told them:

“[Your] practice of performing [abortions] is disruptive….[and] creates significant exposure and damages to [our] reputation within the community.”

What on earth? “Disruptive”? What is this, kindergarten? And how does it damage the hospital’s reputation, unless the hospital cares only about its reputation among Catholic priests and other anti-abortion fanatics. I don’t think hospitals are supposed to make … Read the rest

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



She did not have enough money to travel north

Mar 30th, 2014 3:02 pm | By

So let’s check in with the ACLU on the subject of religious interference with access to birth control. There’s Texas for instance…

Yesterday a federal appeals court upheld a Texas law that has left large parts of the state without an abortion provider. Women who already are struggling to pay rent and put food on the table for their families must now travel hundreds of miles to obtain abortion care. For many, the obstacles will be too burdensome to overcome.

For example, one woman in the Rio Grande Valley who showed up to her appointment the day the law took effect was devastated to learn that she could not have an abortion in her area. She was happily married with

Read the rest

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



Nowhere to hide

Mar 19th, 2014 3:16 pm | By

Catherine Briggs of LifeSiteNews (yes, the anti-abortion site) seems to have missed the point of a certain fundraising campaign by a wide margin.

In the world of social media, instant news has become a way of life.  Thanks to Twitter and the diffusion of information at less than a moment’s speed, the DC Abortion Fund’s latest outrage has nowhere to hide.

In a move that can only be described as tasteless and sickening, the DC Abortion Fund has offered a gift of a coat-hanger pendant to anyone who signs up to donate $10 a month or more to their organization.

Far from being a disgusting joke, the DCAF is serious about this reward for their loyal donors.  The organization’s motto

Read the rest

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



Actual people with personalities, characters, wishes

Mar 14th, 2014 9:57 am | By

A striking thing that Gilliel said in a comment on Greta’s post Having a Reasonable Debate About Abortion yesterday:

And here’s another thing that’s been driving my blood pressure up and I will bold the beginning so that people

READ THIS:

I have been pregnant three times which resulted in two kids. My first pregnancy turned Wahoonie-shaped around week ten and I needed an abortion (which is never counted as an abortion-abortion, but as a reasonable medical intervention because reasons. Probably because I suffered enough since I actually wanted to be pregnant very much). I had two wonderful kids afterwards.

To act as if the death of that embryo was somewhat comparable to one of my children, actual people

Read the rest

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



A chance to air their nostalgia

Mar 12th, 2014 9:37 am | By

Emily Bazelon at Slate takes a look at some of the more…eccentric far-right arguments in the Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood briefs against the Obamacare rule that employers must provide contraception coverage as part of their health care plans.

Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood, the companies whose suits the Supreme Court will hear later this month, have been careful to frame their objections narrowly. They’re not refusing to pay for all birth control. They just don’t want to fund “items” like the morning-after pill and the IUD, which they say effectively cause abortion by preventing a fertilized embryo from implanting in the uterus. Many scientists say that’s not true. But the companies are trying to take a limited, reasonable-minds-may-differ

Read the rest

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



A woman’s request for abortion cannot be treated as a lottery

Mar 11th, 2014 2:36 pm | By

In better news, however – on March 7 the Council of Europe’s Committee of Social Rights ruled that conscientious objection cannot stand in the way of women receiving the reproductive healthcare services guaranteed by Italian law.

The milestone decision on conscientious objection and abortion delivered by the Council of Europe’s Committee of Social Rights is welcomed by the International Planned Parenthood Federation European Network (IPPF EN). IPPF EN lodged a collective complaint[1] against Italy which stated that the weak regulation of health personnel’s conscientious objection violates the right to health protection. IPPF EN is pleased to announce that the claim has been successful – and in time for Saturday 8th March, which is International Women’s Day.

The Committee’s decision

Read the rest

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



Abandoned by all medical staff

Mar 11th, 2014 2:30 pm | By

Why is it a problem when medical personnel are allowed to refuse to perform abortions because of their “sincere religious beliefs”? Well one reason – though only one – is cases like one that happened in Rome in October 2010.

Valentina Magnanti was forced to abort her dead foetus in a toilet in Rome’s Sandro Pertini hospital, abandoned by all medical staff and with only her husband to assist her. This is what can happen when medical staff are allowed to follow their “consciences” and refuse to participate in abortions.

She has a rare genetically transmitted disease, but she couldn’t get tested early in her pregnancy because of a horrible law passed by the Berlusconi government in 2004. She … Read the rest

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



Fighting for something we thought we had won

Feb 1st, 2014 4:14 pm | By

Thousands of people got together in Madrid today to voice their opposition to government plans to take away abortion rights.

Under pressure from the Catholic Church, Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy’s conservative government announced on December 20 it would roll back a 2010 law that allows women to opt freely for abortion in the first 14 weeks of pregnancy.

The new law — yet to pass parliament, where the ruling People’s Party enjoys an absolute majority — would allow abortion only in cases of rape or a threat to the physical or psychological health of the mother.

Other than that, laydeez, tough shit – you’re stuck with it unless god sends you a miscarriage. No whining. It doesn’t matter if … Read the rest

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



Weekends and holidays are not “days”

Jan 6th, 2014 11:21 am | By

The NY Times reports, to the surprise of no one who has been paying attention, that all these new anti-abortion measures passed by states have made abortion much harder to get. Well they would, wouldn’t they.

A three-year surge in anti-abortion measures in more than half the states has altered the landscape for abortion access, with supporters and opponents agreeing that the new restrictions are shutting some clinics, threatening others and making it far more difficult in many regions to obtain the procedure.

Right. That was the idea, wasn’t it.

The new laws range from the seemingly petty to the profound. South Dakota said that weekends and holidays could not count as part of the existing 72-hour waiting period,

Read the rest

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



Your life is not your own

Dec 20th, 2013 3:14 pm | By

Spain has passed a new anti-abortion law to replace current legislation permitting the procedure without restrictions until the 14th week.

Justice minister Alberto Ruiz-Gallardón said on Friday that abortion will only be allowed in the case of rape or when there is a serious mental or physical health risk to the mother. Accredited fetal deformities that would endanger a child’s life if born will also be accepted.

He said 16- and 17-year-olds will once again have to obtain permission from their parents to have an abortion.

Gallardon’s ruling Popular party has always sided heavily with the Catholic church on moral and social issues.

With the Catholic church, and against women and people in general who want to be able … Read the rest

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



Doctors in such circumstances

Dec 9th, 2013 9:48 am | By

There’s the New York Times editorial on the Michigan case for instance. That takes it for granted.

The suit was brought on behalf of a Michigan woman, Tamesha Means, who says she was subjected to substandard care at a Catholic hospital — the only hospital in her county — after her water broke at 18 weeks of pregnancy. Doctors in such circumstances typically induce labor or surgically remove the fetus to reduce the woman’s chances of infection. But according to the complaint, doctors acting in accordance with the bishops’ directives did not inform Ms. Means that her fetus had virtually no chance of surviving or that terminating her pregnancy was the safest treatment option.

But the summary of the HIQA Read the rest

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



Don’t look behind the curtain

Dec 9th, 2013 9:06 am | By

I’ve been arguing with someone on Atheist Ireland’s Facebook page, on a thread I started with a post about the ACLU/Means lawsuit against the bishops. My arguee has been claiming Savita Halappanavar’s death had nothing to do with abortion, and I’ve been saying it did too so. Her latest reply pointed out that “that was not a finding of the HIQA report or the Coroner’s report.” I hadn’t heard of the HIQA report, that I recall, so I looked it up. It came out on October 7th.

I skimmed the executive summary [pdf], and read the parts that addressed the medical treatment of SH. My arguee is right, assuming the summary accurately reflects the full report: it doesn’t spell out … Read the rest

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)



No you may not decide for you

Feb 2nd, 2013 10:40 am | By

The anti-abortion phalanx in Ireland is shouting louder than ever, according to the BBC.

The groups taking part – Youth Defence, Pro Life Ireland and the Catholic organisation, the Iona Institute – testify to the polemical nature of the debate here.

“Keep Your Promise!” they shout – a direct reference to a 2011 election pledge by the main party in Ireland’s coalition not to legislate for abortion.

Nice pledge – a “promise” to keep women enslaved by the physical fact that it’s possible to become pregnant without consent.

Nope, sorry, laydeez, tough shit. God gave you the equipment to become pregnant so if you do become pregnant you don’t get to complain that you didn’t mean to, that you … Read the rest

(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)