The Assault on Womens Sexual and Reproductive Rights

[Soon]

10 Reasons The Rest Of The World Thinks The U.S. Is Nuts

[Kobi]

Originally Posted by HowSoonIsNow

10 Reasons The Rest Of The World Thinks The U.S. Is Nuts

The irony here is how much time, effort and resources we expend trying to convert others to our ways of being and living. We want to be the champion of human rights for the world while we systematically screw our own.

Perhaps the new American motto should be...do as we say, not as we do!

Anyone else wondering what men in power will do to this country when synthetic sperm is invented?

[Novelafemme]

http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/articl...ove-about-your

It's getting crazy around here!

[Soon]

http://wearwhite4womensrights.tumblr.com/

[Kobi]

By Nick Valencia, CNN
updated 6:52 PM EDT, Wed March 28, 2012


(CNN) -- An Oklahoma County judge has overruled a state law requiring women seeking abortions to have an ultrasound of the fetus before the abortion, according to court documents

District Judge Brian Dixon's clerk confirmed the decision Wednesday, saying the judge ruled that the law was "unconstitutional and unenforceable."

The decision overrules an Oklahoma state statute passed in 2010 that would have forced women seeking an abortion to see a sonogram of the fetus and have the fetus described in detail.

Enforcement of the statute was halted in May 2010, shortly after it passed, by a temporary injunction, but Wednesday's ruling makes that injunction permanent and restrains law enforcement from enforcing the act.

It was not clear whether there were instances of the law being enforced in the time between its passage and the imposition of the temporary injunction.

[Kobi]

Moments ago, the Center for Reproductive Rights filed a pre-election challenge to the Oklahoma “personhood” ballot initiative.

The intention of this initiative is to ban all abortions, but it would go much further by:

- Outlawing many forms of birth control—including IUDs, emergency contraception, and even some forms of the Pill.
- Putting doctors and women at risk of criminal prosecution for doing nothing more than engaging in routine OB-GYN care.
- Potentially halting many forms of infertility treatment—including IVF.
- Opening women to potential criminal prosecution for suffering miscarriages.

Six brave women and men have stepped forward as plaintiffs to help us fight this initiative—stand in solidarity with them by sending a letter of support today.


http://org2.democracyinaction.org/o/...tion_KEY=10167

[Kobi]

Famed "fratire" writer Tucker Max attempted to donate half a million dollars to the cash-strapped organization, but was denied. Why? Because sometimes a check isn't just a check.

You’d think that any organization facing financial issues would be thrilled to accept a hefty donation. For Planned Parenthood, for example, a check for $500,000 could go a long way in helping women get access to health care. Except, perhaps, when the name on the check is Tucker Max.

For those who are unfamiliar with Max, he’s the author of the books I Hope They Serve Beer in Hell and Sloppy Seconds: The Tucker Max Leftovers, which chronicle his supposedly real-life escapades of drunken debauchery and sexual conquests. Though the books have earned him a fortune and a huge fan following, they’ve also (unsurprisingly) earned him a reputation as a cad.

But in a recent Forbes profile, Max claimed he had changed his ways and he wasn’t the callous miscreant he once depicted. And what better way to drive home the image of a reformed bad boy than a huge donation to a women’s organization? Tucker could be a hero for a female cause! Well, that’s how Max’s brand strategist Ryan Holiday, who suggested the Planned Parenthood donation, thought such a move would be perceived. (For his part, Max originally came to Holiday looking for a way to relieve a “huge tax burden” and “promote [his] new book at the same time.” Helping women wasn’t mentioned as a top priority.)

Except for one small problem: Planned Parenthood wasn’t up for the deal. After some reported initial excitement and a scheduled meeting with Max, the organization informed him that they wouldn’t be able to take his donation as they were “concerned about the perception of [his] writing.”

Cue the backlash. Holiday took to Forbes once more to slam the organization for turning down the money and ignoring Max’s “good intentions.” And Max, taking umbrage for being refused, wrote on his blog that Planned Parenthood denied him because they “were worried more about other people’s perceptions of the donation than helping women.”

The fact that Max and Holiday can’t recognize why Planned Parenthood would turn down the donation suggests they don’t know much about the organization in the first place. (If, in fact, their “outrage” isn’t a mere publicity stunt.)

First of all, it’s doubtful that Max is doing this solely out of a genuine desire to help women. Again, his strategist has said that the idea originated because Max wanted a tax refund and some good press. There’s nothing wrong with that, of course, but it’s worth mentioning that Max has previously made disparaging remarks about the organization on his Twitter feed (though the tweets have since been deleted). That’s not a deal-breaker, because not every person who’s donated to charity did it purely out of the goodness of their hearts. It’s still suspicious, though, especially when compounded with the fact that, in exchange for his donation, Max wanted a clinic named after him because he found the idea “funny”.

Offensive as that might be, it doesn’t get to the heart of Planned Parenthood’s rejection of the check. Neither does Max’s suggestion that the group refused the money because of what Max calls “elitism” that led them to believe “that a CLOSED clinic is better than one with [Max's] name on it.” It’s quite obvious that Planned Parenthood simply weighed the pros and cons. The organization wasn’t choosing between one closed clinic and a Tucker Max clinic. It was choosing between no clinics and a Tucker Max clinic.

While Holiday writes that the donation would have been a case of “a win-win-win-win situation. Cut a check, keep a clinic open,” it quite obviously wasn’t that simple for the beleaguered organization. As Jill Filipovic points out at Feministe, “There are entire organizations and large numbers of politicians who have made it their mission to destroy Planned Parenthood. PP can’t afford to take unnecessary risks. Unnecessary risks can mean that the organization ceases to exist. That impedes their mission a hell of a lot more than not having an additional $500,000.”

For an organization that is constantly under attack from a right-wing base with a heavy religious following, accepted support from a man whose reputation is so incompatible with both Planned Parenthood and the GOP’s supposed values is nothing if not a political liability. Remember, this is the man who wants his name on a health clinic that provides abortions, among other services, because it would be funny. Associating themselves with Max would have all but guarantee that Planned Parenthood would face political backlash of some sort. It may be sad that an organization dedicated to providing women’s health services has to turn down a hefty donation in order to play political ball, but that’s the type of game that’s currently being played in the U.S.

And while Max seems to be taking this quite personally — he says he’s over the incident which happened last August, though both he and Holiday are only now writing about it — in reality, PP isn’t anti-Tucker. They’re pro-Planned Parenthood, and are making moves in their own self-interest as an organization. You’d think of all people, Tucker Max would at least understand that.

Read more: http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/04/05/...#ixzz1rFE3wb3t

[Kobi]

Dear Doug Morris, CEO of Sony Music Entertainment:

As an activist supporting the NARAL Pro-Choice America Foundation, I would like to register my concerns about the film "October Baby" which is being distributed by Provident Films, a subsidiary of Sony Music Entertainment. I am deeply troubled by the connection between "October Baby" and anti-choice organizations that deceive women. Most importantly, it's disconcerting that your marketing team promotes this film as a coming-of-age story without a political agenda. Moviegoers shouldn't be deceived in this way, especially if proceeds of the film are going to groups that mislead women.

Jon Erwin, the co-writer and producer of "October Baby," told The New York Times that he "didn't see [the movie] as a political issue." However, last fall, the directors held advance screenings of the film to build support for a ballot measure in Mississippi that would have banned abortion and many common forms of birth control. Given this link, it is disingenuous for the filmmaker to claim there is no political motivation related to the movie.

In addition to this political activity, the makers are giving 10 percent of the film's proceeds to a fund benefiting anti-choice "crisis pregnancy centers" (CPCs). Anti-choice groups created CPCs to look like comprehensive health clinics, but many do not provide women with accurate pregnancy-related information. Investigations by NARAL Pro-Choice America's state affiliates have revealed again and again that many CPCs intentionally misinform and mislead women. In fact, some CPCs subject women seeking objective health-care information to lectures and force them to watch anti-abortion films, slide shows, and photographs. Some even refuse to provide information about or referrals for birth control. For example, a CPC in Virginia falsely told a woman that, "Abortion increases your risk of breast cancer by 100%" [Crisis Pregnancy Centers Revealed, NARAL Pro-Choice Virginia Foundation].

It is profoundly concerning that a subsidiary of Sony Music Entertainment would be associated with funding organizations that deliberately mislead women as it markets "October Baby." Moviegoers deserve to know where their ticket money is going and to get the facts about the movie's affiliation with the anti-choice movement.

As you can see, this subject is complex. I urge you to meet with Nancy Keenan, president of the NARAL Pro-Choice America Foundation, to review additional examples of why CPCs are dangerous to women.

--------

To sign the letter of support, visit the NARAL website: http://www.prochoiceamerica.org/index.html

[Okiebug61]

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/04...-memorial-day/

[Kobi]

PHOENIX (Reuters) - Arizona Governor Jan Brewer on Friday signed into law a bill banning abortion providers like Planned Parenthood from receiving money through the state, her office said in a statement.

The Republican-backed Whole Woman's Health Funding Priority Act cuts off funding for family planning and health services delivered by Planned Parenthood clinics and other organizations offering abortions.

"By signing this measure into law I stand with the majority of Americans who oppose the use of taxpayer funds for abortion," Brewer said in a statement.

Arizona joins six other states with similar laws, officials said. But three of those states -- Indiana, Kansas and North Carolina -- are facing legal challenges.

Arizona does not provide tax dollars for abortion, but backers said the law is needed to make sure that no indirect monies are funneled to organizations like Planned Parenthood that provide abortion and other health services. There were no estimates of how much money is involved.

But officials at Planned Parenthood Arizona, the state's largest abortion provider, said the law means that thousands of women in the state may now go without life-saving cancer screenings, birth control and basic health care.

"We are most concerned about the women and men who could be forced to go without health care as a result of this bill," Bryan Howard, Planned Parenthood Arizona's president and CEO, said in a prepared statement.

"We remain committed to providing Arizona communities with the professional, nonjudgmental and confidential health care they have relied on for 78 years," Howard said.

The anti-abortion group Susan B. Anthony List called the bill a "major victory" in its fight to bar funding of abortion providers.

"Abortion-centered businesses like Planned Parenthood do not need or deserve taxpayer dollars," Marilyn Musgrave, vice president of government affairs for the organization, said in a written statement.

While Planned Parenthood suffered a setback in Arizona, it won a temporary battle in court on Friday with Texas. A federal appeals court ruled that the organization could participate in a health program for low-income women in Texas, despite a new state rule there that bans affiliates of abortion providers.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/arizona-ban...032512974.html