desertvixen: (thimble pricks)
The House passed this BS. 

251 Representatives think that women should have no rights over their bodies.  236 of them were Republicans.

My personal Representative voted against it, thankfully.  Not that it will matter in the long term.

To be honest, I don't see Obama signing this one.  But it's possible they could override that.

And procedures aside, it's the fact that 251 Representatives of our government think women should not be allowed to make the most personal, intimate, life-impacting decision they CAN make - even if saying NO to abortion would literally kill her.

251 Representatives think women's lives ultimately have no real value.

WTF?

DV
desertvixen: (thimble pricks)

From Huffington Post
 
WASHINGTON -- The House is scheduled to vote this week on a new bill that would allow federally-funded hospitals that oppose abortions to refuse to perform the procedure, even in cases where a woman would die without it.
 
Under current law, every hospital that receives Medicare or Medicaid money is legally required to provide emergency care to any patient in need, regardless of his or her financial situation. If a hospital is unable to provide what the patient needs -- including a life-saving abortion -- it has to transfer the patient to a hospital that can.
 
Under H.R. 358, dubbed the "Protect Life Act" and sponsored by Rep. Joe Pitts (R-Pa.), hospitals that don't want to provide abortions could refuse to do so, even for a pregnant woman with a life-threatening complication that requires a doctor terminate her pregnancy. This provision would apply to the more than 600 Catholic hospitals governed by the Catholic Health Association, which are regulated by bishops and prohibited from performing abortions.
 
The Diocese of Phoenix sharply condemned the hospital's decision to abort the baby, saying in a statement that the mother's life should never take precedence over the baby's.
 
In addition to changing the rules for hospitals, H.R. 358 would deny federal funding to any health care plan that includes abortion coverage, something that might cause insurance providers to stop covering abortions.
 
"We will bring to the floor a bill to ensure that no taxpayer dollars flow to health care plans that cover abortion and no health care worker has to participate in abortions against their will," he said.
 
The Hyde amendment, which has been in place for 30 years, already bans taxpayer dollars from being spent on abortions and allows anti-abortion doctors to opt out of performing them.

 
"This is just a demolition derby for women's health care," said Dawn Laguens, executive vice president for communications at Planned Parenthood. "To first say, 'We won't even treat you if you show up needing a life-saving abortion,' and then to eliminate health insurance that might have saved your family from bankruptcy is a real one-two gut punch to women in these tough economic times."
 
*** *** ***

I was trying to post this yesterday, and kept getting the Scary Goat Error Picture.  They're going to vote on it today. 

Please contact your reps and let them know this is not acceptable.  Especially since this is going to affect women who are already in a hellish circumstance, and make it that much worse.  This cannot happen.
 
This is also one of the reasons I see myself never going back to the Catholic Church.  To stand there and say that my life means nothing when it's stacked against a potential new life is horrifying.  When the mother dies, there's a good chance the potential new lie is going to die also.  Why add to tragedy?  Why take a mother away from children who are already born?  Why make a woman's life count for nothing?
 
I'm sorry, but if I ever have to face this situation (which I really hope will be never), I'm going to choose my life, and the chance that I could have another child.  I'm going to choose my five-year old daughter, who needs her mother.  I'm going to choose my partner, my parents, my family.
 
And this bill would take that most basic choice away.
 
Don't stand by and think it won't happen...because at the rate things are going, it very well could.
 
DV   
desertvixen: (Initial D)
Got this from [livejournal.com profile] dunmurderin, but also seen at Free Jinger.  Spread the word.

Originally posted by [livejournal.com profile] twbasketcase at Mississippi Personhood Amendment
Originally posted by [livejournal.com profile] gabrielleabelle at Mississippi Personhood Amendment

Okay, so I don't usually do this, but this is an issue near and dear to me and this is getting very little no attention in the mainstream media.

Mississippi is voting on November 8th on whether to pass Amendment 26, the "Personhood Amendment". This amendment would grant fertilized eggs and fetuses personhood status.

Putting aside the contentious issue of abortion, this would effectively outlaw birth control and criminalize women who have miscarriages. This is not a good thing.

Jackson Women's Health Organization is the only place women can get abortions in the entire state, and they are trying to launch a grassroots movement against this amendment. This doesn't just apply to Mississippi, though, as Personhood USA, the group that introduced this amendment, is trying to introduce identical amendments in all 50 states.

What's more, in Mississippi, this amendment is expected to pass. It even has Mississippi Democrats, including the Attorney General, Jim Hood, backing it.

The reason I'm posting this here is because I made a meager donation to the Jackson Women's Health Organization this morning, and I received a personal email back hours later - on a Sunday - thanking me and noting that I'm one of the first "outside" people to contribute.

So if you sometimes pass on political action because you figure that enough other people will do something to make a difference, make an exception on this one. My RSS reader is near silent on this amendment. I only found out about it through a feminist blog. The mainstream media is not reporting on it.

If there is ever a time to donate or send a letter in protest, this would be it.

What to do?

- Read up on it. Wake Up, Mississippi is the home of the grassroots effort to fight this amendment. Daily Kos also has a thorough story on it.

- If you can afford it, you can donate at the site's link.

- You can contact the Democratic National Committee to see why more of our representatives aren't speaking out against this.

- Like this Facebook page to help spread awareness.


desertvixen: woman reading a book (reading)

Days 1-25 )
Day 26 – A book that changed your opinion about something - So this one was challenging, because most of the non-fiction stuff I read is not intended to change my opinion.  I decided to go with How The Pro-Choice Movement Saved America by Cristina Page - not because it changed my mind, necessarily, but helped me to understand the opposition to the pro-choice movement a little better.  It's a little out of date (2004) but there still seem to be plenty of viable points in it.

Day 27 – The most surprising plot twist or ending - I'm really horrible at remembering this stuff.  I already talked a little in my review about Mission of Honor and how Weber turned the plot on its head, as well as the ending of LMB's Cryoburn, but both of those are under spoiler, so I'm not going with them.  I decided to go with a classic example, The Murder of Roger Ackroyd by Agatha Christie.  I know it's been done since, but the narrator-is-the-murderer was pretty shocking the first time around.  As she pointed out, she never had him lie, but the idea that we might not be able to trust the person telling the story (especially if you're used to reading Poirots that feature Hastings) was pretty well executed, IMO.


Days 28-30 )
desertvixen: (Blog For Choice 2010)

Blog For Choice Day 2010

This year's topic:  In honor of Dr. George Tiller, who often wore a button that simply read, "Trust Women," this year's Blog for Choice Day question is: What does Trust Women mean to you?


TRUST WOMEN

Like all buttons or bumper stickers, it has to be short and snappy.  “Trust Women to know what’s best for their own personal reproductive lives because not all women are the same” may be more accurate, but you could never fit that on a button.

Blog For Choice 2010 is in tribute to Dr. George Tiller, a doctor who provided abortion services to women.  Dr. Tiller had such a commitment to trusting women that he was killed for it.  Dr. Tiller was not just an abortion provider, but one who specialized in late-term abortions, and his death has left a significant absence.

Trust Women.   The issue of reproductive choice is influenced by trust in women’s judgment.  The government regulating such issues as whether a woman can obtain an abortion, what obstacles she must overcome to obtain the abortion, in some cases, even the method of abortion, and availability of birth control come down at some level to not trusting women to make the decision that is best for them.  Instead of letting women decide what they feel is best for their reproductive lives, the government feels it must make the decision for us – a government which is largely run by men.  Women bear the majority of the burden from decisions about reproductive choice, yet we aren’t trusted to make those decisions alone.

Trust Women to know what is best for their situation if they become pregnant.  Pregnancy, and the decisions associated with it, is a major influence on women’s lives.  Whether planned or unplanned, whether the woman decides to carry to term or to terminate the pregnancy, whether the decision is taken away from them by events, pregnancy is probably the major influence in many women’s lives.  Once a woman has children, every decision in her life has to be considered in light of “What does this mean for my children?”  Sometimes, it means making the best of a group of bad decisions.

I am a single mother.  I wasn’t when I became a mother, but obviously circumstances in my life changed.  I am also a soldier, which means my decisions are somewhat limited by my career.  One of the decisions that I made was to stay in the Army, because the solid paycheck and benefits have to balance out things like being deployed for a year while YOUR parents care for your child.  My daughter is a wonderful blessing, and I love being a mother, but that is MY choice. 

Reproductive choice is often framed as being “pro-abortion”, but it is about so much more.  It is about the entire spectrum of reproductive decisions – whether to have children or not, how many children you have, the spacing of their births, whether to discontinue a pregnancy because there are medical issues, whether to give a child up for adoption and how to handle that, what type of birth control, whether or not a woman desires to be sterilized.  The list of decisions that decision affects is endless.

So let’s try trusting women to make their own decisions in this area, and let’s try to give them the information and tools they need to make those decisions.  Let’s educate young women about their bodies and their options when it comes to preventing pregnancy, other than to not have sex.  Let’s make birth control more available and less costly, so that there are less pregnancies that are unwanted.  Let’s stop judging so many decisions that women make about reproduction, because as pretty much any adult woman in the United States knows, everyone seems to feel like they have a say in your reproduction.  If you’re married and don’t have children, everyone wants to know when you’re going to have them.  After you have a child, then people want to know when you’re going to have another one.  Then around four, people start asking when you’re going to stop having them.  How many women were cornered when they were pregnant by someone who felt they had the right to either frighten you with their labor horror story or to judge you for something you were eating/drinking/breathing?  I know it happened to me.

Trust me to decide what is best for my body and my life, and respect those decisions. 

Trust my friends who have chosen to be childfree, and respect their decision.

Trust my friends who have children to decide what size their family should be, and respect their decision, no matter what size you think makes a family “too big”.

Trust women, even when you disagree with their decision.  It may be right for them, even if you don’t agree with it, or understand it. 

Trust women.  Support reproductive choice.

DV
desertvixen: (Initial D)

 The news article is related to the shooting of Dr. Tiller, a doctor who performed late-term abortions.  It's under a cut for anyone wanting to avoid the politics.
Scott Roeder's Defense )



DV

desertvixen: (brightness)

Another doctor who provided women with reproductive health care, to include abortions, has been killed.

Instead of shooting this one in his own kitchen, they shot him while he was at church. 

Dr. George Tiller, one of three late-term abortion providers - a doctor who did not let being shot once before deter him from providing women with quality health care - is gone.

Those who know me, know that I am pro-choice.  I believe that women should make the choices about what happens in their bodies, in their reproductive lives.

I am pro-choice, because as a friend says, pregnancy is for volunteers.  It is a life-changing, body-changing process - the nine months of pregnancy, the labor and delivery, and the rest of your life.  It can, in fact, kill you.  A friend and former colleague recently experienced this - after the main artery in her uterus ruptured during her premature labor, she required an emergency hysterectomy and quite a lot of blood. 

She almost died in March. 

She chose to become pregnant, and it almost killed her.  She is not the only one.

A woman who is having a late-term abortion is likely doing so because something has gone wrong in a wanted pregnancy.  It is probably the most painful decision she has ever made.

And there are those who would take women's right to make that decision because they feel we can't be trusted, or we're too emotional.

I have already donated to Planned Parenthood, and plan to donate to another organization that supports this fight.  In Dr. Tiller's death, let there be some benefit to the cause that he believed in enough to risk his life.

Some links from friends with more eloquence than I:

[livejournal.com profile] pecunium on Context
[livejournal.com profile] archangelbeth  on Pregnancy By Volunteers Only
[livejournal.com profile] pecunium on Domestic Terrorism

 DV

desertvixen: (brightness)

 So, now that I've done the topic essay, I'd like to share from some of the previous Blog For Choice efforts:
Blog For Choice, Part II )

DV

desertvixen: (brightness)

The topic for this year's Blog For Choice Day is: What is your top pro-choice hope for President Obama and/or the new Congress?

"The first thing I'd do, as president, is sign the Freedom of Choice Act. That's the first thing that I'd do."

President Barack Obama spoke these words at a speech given to the Planned Parenthood Action Fund in July 2007, during his campaign.

There are many who may feel that the issue of reproductive choice has been somewhat overtaken by events – that there are more important things for our country to worry about.  There are big problems facing us, especially when it comes to the economy.  Many may feel that President Obama needs to worry about these issues first, that Congress needs to worry about these issues first.

They are indeed important issues that stand to affect every aspect of American life.

It doesn’t need to be the first thing he does.

It needs to be on the short list, however.

My top pro-choice hope for this year is for Congress to pass, and President Barack Obama to sign into law both the Freedom of Choice Act and the Prevention First Act.

The Freedom of Choice Act declares that “it is the policy of the United States that every woman has the fundamental right to choose to bear a child; terminate a pregnancy prior to fetal viability; or terminate a pregnancy after viability when necessary to protect her life or her health .”

To me, those are powerful words – words that acknowledge the importance of choice in a woman’s life.  Words that acknowledge the validity of both choices, or rather the whole spectrum of choice.  The choice is not between two extremes, but about so many issues in between.  The choice is not only about whether or not to have children, but about how many children, the spacing between pregnancies, and sometimes, making the hard choice to end a pregnancy.  It is a choice that women should be free to make, according to their own consciences, their own circumstances.  The rest of us should not stand in judgment of a woman who decides to terminate a pregnancy.  The Freedom of Choice Act says to me that the sponsors trust women to act as responsible adults, and to make the choice that is best for them.

“Pro-abortion” is a label that anti-choice advocates like to throw at the pro-choice supporters.  I don’t think anyone is pro-abortion.  No one wants to see more abortions.  How do we get less abortions?  The key to that is less unwanted pregnancies, and the key to that is prevention, and education.

The Prevention First Act will increase funding for family planning and comprehensive sex education that teaches both abstinence and safe sex methods. The Act will also end insurance discrimination against contraception, improve awareness about emergency contraception, and provide compassionate assistance to rape victims.  All of these are definitely causes I can get behind.   Women deserve to have information, they deserve to know their options, for only when women know about their choices can they make the best choice.

If we have time for some more pro-choice activity, we could repeal the global gag rule and repeal the Hyde Amendment.  The repeal of the Hyde Amendment would benefit servicewomen and female military dependents in cases like “Jane Doe”, the plaintiff in this case : http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/219175_abortion07.html?dpfrom=thead 

"Jane Doe" was a 19 year old military wife who sued to make the government pay the $3,000 cost of terminating her pregnancy due to the fact that the fetus – to "Jane Doe", a wanted child – was anencephalic.  The regulations and the Hyde Amendment don’t cover a doomed pregnancy that doesn’t endanger the woman’s physical life, don’t recognize what mental trauma being forced to give birth to a child who will die.  The Hyde Amendment also helps make choice something that only some women can afford – just as only some women could afford safe abortions in the days before Roe v. Wade, the women whose families could send them to other countries.

Let’s be honest.  Making abortion illegal does not stop women from having abortions.  It just stops women from having safe abortions.  It forces abortion underground, forces women to do things that aren’t safe or smart.  There are some among the anti-choice movement who no doubt believe these women get what they deserve, who feel that the sluts should have kept their legs shut, that they played the game and now have to live with the punishing consequences.  I know that they do not speak for all those who are opposed to abortion, but they unfortunately have the loudest voices.  The shouts and hatred that come from those protesting outside a Planned Parenthood clinic drown out the reasonable voices calling for reducing unwanted pregnancy, calling for us to find a middle ground where we can accomplish something positive, something more than namecalling.

For me, supporting choice is not an abstract.  I have been, as a teenager and a young woman, a Planned Parenthood customer and supporter.  I will always remember my first pelvic exam because I will always remember the Planned Parenthood doctor who performed it.  She was calm and informative, making sure that I knew what she was doing and why.  She, and other clinic workers, took the time to ensure that I had information about the contraceptive choices available.

My support of choice is not abstract for another reason – the threat to a woman’s right to choose does not just affect me.  It also affects my daughter.  We are not fighting for our right alone, but for those of the women who will come after us, and the girls they are now.  I’m looking at her picture as I write this, hopeful that the right to choose will not be endangered as she becomes a woman and must face these choices.  Let’s give her – and all our daughters – the chance to have as much knowledge as possible, to understand how their bodies work, to have the information they need to be safe when they do decide to become sexually active, whether it’s at sixteen, eighteen, twenty-one, or after.   Let's make contraception a health issue, not a moral issue.  Let's empower girls and women by giving them the information they deserve.

My daughter deserves it – all our daughters deserve it.

DV

desertvixen: (feminine intuition)

 K, we all know that Colorado Springs is home to Dr. Dobson, and our friends at Focus on the Family.

 This is really on the whacked out side to me: Teen Fights For Personhood Amendment

 Seven years after the attacks that left Americans stunned, Coloradans may be voting on a proposal that Kristi Burton, a 20-year-old deeply religious home-schooled woman, thinks will change the world: an abortion ban.

Dubbed the Personhood Amendment, her proposal is simple in its succinctness: It states that the state constitution should be amended to define a person as including any human being from the moment of fertilization.

The implications of that statement, though, are certain to make Colorado a national battleground on the abortion issue - it could outlaw abortions and some birth control.

You know, I get that people don't believe in abortion, for various reasons.  Other people believe that a woman's right to control her body is more important.  I think we all know which side I come down on.

 But seriously - until it implants in your uterus, it doesn't matter whether the egg gets fertilized or not.  If it doesn't implant, pregnancy does not happen.  A baby does not result. 

 To me, the answer is simple - if you don't believe in abortions, don't have one.  Don't take away other women's rights to choose to do what they feel is right for their lives.

 DV
desertvixen: (schroedingers cat)

  So, they're actually having a civil discussion in [community profile] catholicism  about abortion, and voting for pro-choice politicians, and Communion.

 And I can't contribute.  Because I can't discuss things calmly with someone who thinks it's okay to criminalize abortion for the people providing it, but not (yet) for the woman.  Someone who wishes the pro-life movement would organize more.  Someone who grants they can see having an argument for allowing abortion in the case of the mother's life being mortally in danger, but isn't convinced.

 I am pro-choice.  Even if I don't think I would ever be in a position where abortion is an option I was willing to consider, I cannot take the option away from other women.  

 Also, when men want to argue that a woman's right to have an abortion when her life is in danger is a MAYBE, I just want to scream.  So, I'm supposed to leave my child motherless if my next pregnancy goes badly?  I don't think so.  Or how about we force women who are pregnant with children that cannot survive to go full-term?  

I do give thought, on the occasion, to whether I would be better off leaving the Church, or staying and disagreeing.  Things like this make me lean more towards it.

 I am pro-choice.

 A woman's body belongs to her, and no one else.

 If we really want to reduce abortions, we need to support contraception.  And comprehensive education.

 Not everyone in this world is Catholic - not even all Catholics support the Church's position on birth control/abortion.

 It is still a skill that doctors need to have.  There will still be ectopic pregnancies, and molar pregnancies, and times when a woman's life is endangered.

 Not to mention the fact that outlawing abortion does not stop it, it just pushes it underground.

 DV
desertvixen: (schroedingers cat)

 http://www.fstdt.com/fundies/comments.aspx?q=37482

My guess, just off-hand, would be ZERO. I don't think there are any American-Christian terrorists. [ we'll exclude President Bush for the sake of brevity].
But the only Americans who have been caught and detained as terrorists seem to have switched over to another, ah, religion [if bombing and killing innocent people can be called a 'religion'].
Funny thing is, I Posted a similar Question about a month ago using another nationality and religion [maybe like Arab-Islamic. maybe] and got Reported and my Account "Suspended" within an hour.
I'm wondering if there is a double-standard here?
Anyway, what was the question?

The actual post has been deleted from Y! Answers, but sadly, this person does not appear to be joking.

Not sure why he's referring to Bush in the question, because it doesn't seem to fit his mindset.

 And I'm sure this person does not consider the numerous acts of violence against doctors and clinics who provide abortions (often along with many other services for women) to be terrorism.  There are many of us who would disagree.

 Between 1977-2005, crimes committed by abortion protestors include:

 7 murders
 17 attempted murders
 52 bombings
 180 arsons
 1,211 acts of vandalism
 1,341 trespasses
 100 acid attacks
 655 anthrax threats
 375 death threats
 3 kidnappings
 480 cases of stalking

 (US and Canada, 1977-2005, numbers compiled by the Feminist Majority Foundation)

 The murders include James Barrett, a retired AF colonel who was acting as an escort for Dr. John Britton, also murdered, and Dr. Barnett Slepian, shot dead in his own kitchen with his children in the house.

 Sounds pretty terrorist to me.

 Even leaving all this aside, how can this idiot forget Timothy McVeigh?  You know, clean-cut soldier guy who blew up the Alfred P. Murrah federal building in Oklahoma City, 13 years ago next week?  Biggest terrorist act on US soil until September 11, 2001?

 Again, one of my arguments for free speech: so that we know where these people are.

 DV
desertvixen: (feminine intuition)
Blog for Choice Day

I vote pro-choice.
I refuse to vote for someone who does not support choice.
Why? Why is this one issue so important to me?

It is because I firmly believe that if women do not have the right to control what happens in our own bodies, then none of the other rights we have really matter.

Women deserve to have a full range of reproductive choices, whether they choose to have no children, one, two, or ten.

Women deserve to not have our medical issues – medical issues that do not physically affect men – made into political footballs.
Contraception should be a health issue, not a moral issue.
Contraception should not be a political football.
Emergency contraception (Plan B) should not be a political football.
Women’s rights to control what happens in their bodies should not be a political football. Comprehensive sex education should not be a political football.

Pregnancy and motherhood have only strengthened my commitment to choice. I have a beautiful, wonderful daughter who is the joy of my life, of my husband’s life. I know that part of this is because we were able to choose to have her at a time when our lives were in good shape to have a child. We were able to decide to postpone having another child until again, our lives were in good shape.

My daughter, likewise, has strengthened my commitment to choice. I want her to have the same choices, the same options, that I was able to have, and I will not allow those who would dismantle a woman’s right to abortion if needed, would dismantle a woman’s right to birth control, would dismantle a woman’s right to make choices that have immense effects on her life.

For me, being pro-choice encompasses both sides of choice – the choice to have children, as well as the choice not to. The choice to space one’s children, or to delay children until one is established in life, or to never have children, for whatever reason she decides.

We need to trust women to make the choices that are right for them.

Of course, in order to be able to make good choices, women need to have information about what their choices are. We need to start by supporting comprehensive, fact-based sex education in all schools. Abstinence-only sex ed is doing our young people a great disservice. They need the truth, they need facts – they don’t need scare tactics. I have no objection to abstinence being taught as a part of comprehensive sex ed, because it is effective, and it does have good points. But it should not be the end-all be-all of sex ed.

After we make sure women have the information, we need to work to ensure access. Planned Parenthood provides a needed service, providing women’s health services – exams, contraception, providing information – often to women who don’t have a better option. I was one of those women as a teenager, and the only reason I’m not still one of those women is because I joined the Army, and Uncle Sam buys my contraception. Planned Parenthood is not the only provider, but it is the best known.

Pharmacists who feel it’s against their morals to fill prescriptions for birth control or emergency contraception – they need to find another job.

This is the 35th anniversary of Roe. Women do have a choice, but we must continue to defend our right to choice against those who would chip away at it, or remove it completely.

There is a growing part of the pro-life movement that is not so much pro-life as it is pro-punishing women for enjoying sex. If you are truly pro-life, then wouldn’t you support things that made abortion less necessary? If you are truly pro-life, then wouldn’t you support universal health care for children, universal prenatal care for mothers? I know there are people like this who are part of the movement, and I hope that your voices grow louder.

Women deserve to have a choice.

DV
desertvixen: (abortion)
It's Blog for Choice Day. I don't have one of the nifty icons or links, because I didn't get a chance to email for one.

Bottom Line:

1. Abortion needs to remain legal.
2. Contraception and sex education need to be much more widespread.
3. Choice encompasses both the choice to not have a child and the choice to have a child.

For more, click the link:
Read more... )

DV
desertvixen: (DF)
http://www.forbes.com/business/businesstech/feeds/ap/2006/02/28/ap2559931.html

President Bush, asked about the South Dakota measure in an interview with ABC News' Elizabeth Vargas, said Tuesday he hadn't "paid attention to that, to this particular issue you're talking about" but "I am not going to prejudge how the Supreme Court is going to judge a particular issue."
However, he said, "My position has always been three exceptions: rape, incests and the life of the mother." Asked if he would include the broader category of health of the mother, Bush said: "No. I said life of the mother, and health is a very vague term, but my position has been clear on that ever since I started running for office."


I know some of the discussion about the bills in South Dakota and Mississippi have included women wondering about how the distinction between a woman's life and a woman's health. I guess now we know (I hadn't seen this particular quote previously) what the President thinks.

As a woman, I'm scared, very scared. Considering that GWB thought they should keep Terry Schiavo alive as well, I guess anything up to just short of a woman hemorraging to death in the middle of delivering a baby won't count as endangering the woman's life.

So would he support forcing a woman to continue a doomed pregnancy? (Anacephaly comes to mind.) Forcing a woman to carry a child that has no chance of life - which by the way, you're now financially responsible for. Personally, I think it would either make me crazy or drive me to doing something harmful to myself.

Call me selfish, but I'm one of those people who doesn't want to live if I'm not *alive*. The quality of life is a big factor, and I think some people are starting to blur that one out.

I'm pro-choice, because it affords women the right, the basic right, to make decisions about their lives. Our reproductive life impacts on every single area of our lives, and we should be able to control it.

I think we should have access to abortion, if needed, without having to jump through flaming hoops. I think we should have access to birth control, at an affordable cost, and access to a method that works for us. I think we should be able to walk into any pharmacy and have our prescriptions filled, without worrying about if the pharmacist is "okay" with it. (BTW, if they're so concerned about our sex lives, stop selling Viagra while you're at it.) And I think we should have the right to these choices without being hounded and harrassed and disrespected.

DV

Profile

desertvixen: (Default)
desertvixen

August 2017

S M T W T F S
  12 345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Aug. 21st, 2017 06:32 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios