On the slippery slope of not caring about a women's health. Ob-Gyn speaks about Stupak.

[madfloridian]

There was a discussion in the Washington Post a couple of days ago about the Stupak amendment. One of the comments there by an Ob-Gyn really caught my attention.

Ignoring the health of the mother is nothing new, in fact many Democrats voted on a late term abortion ban in 2003 that only considered the mother's life, NOT her health. More on that below.

From the Washington Post:

Abortion and health-care reform: Explaining Stupak, what's next and more

Rochester, NY: I am an obstetrician/gynecologist, and the Stupak amendment worries me. Its premise is that abortion can be easily separated from the rest of health care. But I have a hard time accepting that this country wants to hurt pregnant woman.

This amendment would inflict special punishment on those who are ready to become mothers but whose pregnancies are making their medical conditions worse. A lot of damage can be done before a woman reaches the life-threatening stage when the Stupak amendment would relent and allow payment for abortion.

Because of their health problems, these women must have their abortions in the hospital, racking up thousands of dollars in bills that destroy their families' finances.

Is it true that the Stupak amendment would prohibit an insurance company in the exchange from covering my patient's abortion if her health is in danger or if the fetus is malformed?

Lori Montgomery: That is the fear, yes. Right now the language is the same as the Hyde amendment -- no abortion except in the case of rape, incest or to "save the life of the mother." I'm guessing that last category is open to wide interpretation, however.

We really are on a slippery slope now, and it is scary.

It is as though the House Democrats decided Friday that the health of a woman is beside the point, and made it even harder for a woman to get the medical care that should be between her and her doctor.

I never expected this to happen when the Democrats got a majority. Looking back, I guess I should not be surprised.

Banning late term abortion..2003

Please note that in all of it...a woman could only get an abortion if she were about to die. Even then there had to be a panel somewhere deciding or the doctor could go to jail for up to two years.

Harold Ford

Voted YES on banning partial-birth abortion except to save mother’s life.
Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003: Vote to pass a bill banning a medical procedure, which is commonly known as "partial-birth" abortion. The procedure would be allowed only in cases in which a women's life is in danger, not for cases where a women's health is in danger. Those who performed this procedure, would face fines and up to two years in prison, the women to whom this procedure is performed on are not held criminally liable.
Reference: Bill sponsored by Santorum, R-PA; Bill S.3 ; vote number 2003-530 on Oct 2, 2003

Tom Carper:

Voted YES on banning partial birth abortions except for maternal life.
S. 3 As Amended; Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003. Vote to pass a bill banning a medical procedure, which is commonly known as "partial-birth" abortion. Those who performed this procedure would then face fines and up to two years in prison, the women to whom this procedure is performed on are not held criminally liable. This bill would make the exception for cases in which a women's life is in danger, not for cases where a women's health is in danger.

Also voting for the so-called "partial birth abortion" ban were other Democrats. The bill did not allow for a woman's health to be considered. Just a life or death situation.

In the Senate:

John Breaux, Harry Byrd, Kent Conrad, Tom Daschle, Byron Dorgan, Fritz Hollings, Tim Johnson, Mary Landrieu, Patrick Leahy, Blanche Lincoln, Miller (GA), Ben Nelson, Pryor AK, Harry Reid.

Not voting.
John Edwards, John Kerry, Joe Biden.

I remember when anti-choice Tom Daschle told a group of young people that at least he did not think a woman or doctor should go to jail.

How did we get to the point that being a nice guy means you think a woman shouldn't go to jail if she gets an abortion before she dies?

Maybe we are going to become a pro-life nation like El Salvador.

In this new movement toward criminalization, El Salvador is in the vanguard. The array of exceptions that tend to exist even in countries where abortion is circumscribed — rape, incest, fetal malformation, life of the mother — don't apply in El Salvador. They were rejected in the late 1990's, in a period after the country's long civil war ended. The country's penal system was revamped and its constitution was amended. Abortion is now absolutely forbidden in every possible circumstance. No exceptions.

There are other countries in the world that, like El Salvador, completely ban abortion, including Malta, Chile and Colombia. El Salvador, however, has not only a total ban on abortion but also an active law-enforcement apparatus — the police, investigators, medical spies, forensic vagina inspectors and a special division of the prosecutor's office responsible for Crimes Against Minors and Women, a unit charged with capturing, trying and incarcerating an unusual kind of criminal.

It goes deeper than abortion, that is just the surface issue.

It is about power. The power of men over women. The power of the church over a country.

[asjr]

1. The power that is gained by men and

women who go to D.C. to serve in our government is surely being pumped up to the point these people start to believe they can do no wrong. They don't go there to serve America. They get a taste of being special and they change into cardboard figures. Figures who preach to us; figures that love the sound of their voices. I am well past child-bearing age but it angers me so much to learn that women's health is in the hands of these people. Trying to play God is no prerequisite to serving our country.

[madfloridian]

5. Their priorities seem to change once they are there in Congress.

I agree.

[Hello_Kitty]

2. Thank you thank you thank you!

I noticed the absence of women's health and fetal deformity right away in the bill. People need to understand that there will be real life horrible consequences to this.

[madfloridian]

8. I think that many at DU feel they must defend the amendment...

I think it is an ingrained response to a topic that the right wing has won over the years.

I think all of the reproductive rights of women will have to be lost before they start fighting back like was done before Roe.

In part it is a defense mechanism aimed to deflect criticism from congress and Obama.

In part it is personal, I think.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

3. I wish I could rec this 100,000,000 times!!!

This is SO important.

A lot of damage can be done before a woman reaches the life-threatening stage when the Stupak amendment would relent and allow payment for abortion.


btw, yay Rochester... I'd guess she's associated with the U of R. Famous med school there.


:scared: :cry:

In this new movement toward criminalization, El Salvador is in the vanguard. The array of exceptions that tend to exist even in countries where abortion is circumscribed — rape, incest, fetal malformation, life of the mother — don't apply in El Salvador. They were rejected in the late 1990's, in a period after the country's long civil war ended. The country's penal system was revamped and its constitution was amended. Abortion is now absolutely forbidden in every possible circumstance. No exceptions.

There are other countries in the world that, like El Salvador, completely ban abortion, including Malta, Chile and Colombia. El Salvador, however, has not only a total ban on abortion but also an active law-enforcement apparatus — the police, investigators, medical spies, forensic vagina inspectors and a special division of the prosecutor's office responsible for Crimes Against Minors and Women, a unit charged with capturing, trying and incarcerating an unusual kind of criminal.

:scared: :cry:

[madfloridian]

4. Thanks. It just got at least 2 unrecs...guess some think women's health

is not important.

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[madfloridian]

10. self delete

[madfloridian]

6. Remember McCain and the "air quotes" about women's health and abortion?

I do. We were alarmed last year about it, but now 64 Democrats vote for an amendment that has no exception for the health of a woman. Does that mean they agreed with McCain?

http://crooksandliars.com/nicole-belle/final-debate-mccain-mocks-womens-heal

Video at the link.

"Clearly, in all his debate prep, no one thought to coach McCain not to go to the third rail of the abortion issue. Boy, was that an oversight. Because not only did McCain go there, he jumped right on to it.

In trying to paint Obama as being for the great Republican bugaboo of late term abortions (because, you know, there are so many women running around and deciding after being pregnant for six or more months that being pregnant is no longer convenient for them), Obama replied that he didn't vote for the late term abortion ban because it had no provision for the health or life of the mother. And that's when McCain proved how heartless and clueless he is:

Again…just again, an example of the eloquence of Senator Obama, health (indicates air quotes) of the mother. You know that’s been stretched by the pro-abortion movement to mean almost anything.

Really? Not a legitimate concern? "

[nadinbrzezinski]

9. This will ONLY CHANGE when there is a political push-back

and these people PAY A POLITICAL PRICE. Seems to me most people are not willing to fight.

Now I will admit it, the Stupak on first glance looked like Hyde... so yes it is that much more worst.

But this will not change direction UNTIL WOMEN take to the streets again and vote these morons out REGARDLESS OF PARTY.


THere is this theory of squeaky wheel gets the oil... and the Pricks have been VERY NOISY...

[madfloridian]

14. I am too old for an abortion, but I hate to see this accepted by younger women

so easily.

Maybe as someone else said, they will have to have the right taken away before they notice.

[nadinbrzezinski]

18. It is not just abortion

women and men are pretty silent... and will not do a thing until they have to fight.

[pleah]

25. Exactly! IT IS NOT JUST ABORTION. N/T

[juno jones]

11. K&R!

Thank you for keeping us updated on this.

[seafan]

12. And, once again, we remain on the defensive when the right-wing code language is *adopted* ...

to describe a medical procedure that is properly known as "late term abortion".



Until we take back control over our language from these creeps, we will continue beating our heads against the wall.


The GOP didn't hire Frank Luntz merely to look pretty.



You are right, madfloridian. This goes much, much further than the forced-birthers' vile rhetoric against women's reproductive rights. It is about ultimate power and control over women, who are more than half the world's population.

[madfloridian]

13. And there is not much pushback this time.

As our own party assigns women their role under the bus, in back of the bus, whatever term you want.

64 Democrats voted to say that women are to be treated as inferior and not deserving of the right to determine their health care...a right afforded to others.

[chimpymustgo]

15. I'm stunned. Just stunned. Will we see "colored" water fountains soon? Or just shit

for women - and gays.

[truedelphi]

16. At the tender age of twenty I almost died because I was

hemorrhaging from a miscarriage and then a young resident couldn't determine one way or antoher if I had inflicted an abortion on myself or was suffering from natural causes.

If he admitted me to the hospital whose ER I was at, and it turned out I had attempted self abortion, then he and his hospital could lose thier license.

So I was sent home to die.

The Stupak amendment seems to head us in that direction. Poor young college students will not fare as well as the wives of professionals.

I find this amendment, and Congress' support for it, very scary indeed.

[madfloridian]

17. Your story is so tragic.

There are going to be more, I fear. While the men in suits debate whether a women's life is stake or whether it is "merely" her health....she could die.

It is a very bad situation that this amendment passed.

[prolesunited]

21. I'm not familiar with this

"If he admitted me to the hospital whose ER I was at, and it turned out I had attempted self abortion, then he and his hospital could lose thier license."

What would be the basis for that? What year was this?

I'm sorry for your loss and glad you're OK.

[NoUsername]

34. So sorry for your experience.

That's so awful that you had to go through that. Gees, how the HELL could they send you home to die when you were hemorrhaging like that? Un-friggin-real. Glad you survived, though you should never have been subjected to the lack of care you received on top of the emotional trama of enduring a miscarriage. It pains me to even think of what you went through.

And no need to worry about how the "wives of professionals" and rich bastards in general will fare under this bill. You see, rich people don't have abortions. They have what are called D&C's. In doing it that way, they can have a nice, legit medical procedure carried out in a nice, clean hospital complete with a private suite for their recovery. Plus that way they can avoid having to go past the pesky abortion protesters at the abortion clinics because hey, the rich shouldn't have to be subjected to those kind of things, even though they probably support them by donating to their cause.

Unfortunately, congressional support of this amendment doesn't surprise me in the least. The government is merely continuing its shift to the right. There has been little to no slowing down of that shift since the Dems took over. The passage of the Stupak amendment is just another step in that direction. Our so-called "representatives" in DC have but one objective and that is to comply with whatever their corporate masters tell them to do. Their so-called "constituents" never even enter into the picture. Yet another reason why this country needs an actual second party. Being ruled by the Corporate party is getting real old.

[saracat]

19. Thank you Again madflo. I have been so saddened and angerd by those

on DU who see little importance to the Stupak Amendment and only care about a "win" for the team and Obama. I feel women are being told they are worthless and have no power and some women are supporting this.

[madfloridian]

20. I really did not expect it to happen.

At least I did not expect 64 Democrats to vote for such a bill.

[saracat]

23. Neither did I which is why the cavalier attitude some have displayed about

the possible passage from conference dismays me. I am horrified.

[BrklynLiberal]

22. Very very very scary.

[varelse]

24. K&R

It is about power. The power of men over women. The power of the church over a country.

Truth.

[madfloridian]

26. DeGette: Stupak Agenda Is Much Wider Restrictions On Abortion

From TPM:

DeGette: Stupak Agenda Is Much Wider Restrictions On Abortion

As co-chair of the Congressional Pro-Choice Caucus, Rep. Diana DeGette (D-CO) is leading the fight in the House to strip the Stupak amendment, which would forbid millions of women from buying comprehensive insurance policies that cover abortion, from the final health care bill. And she takes issue with Stupak's interpretation of the events leading up to the vote that completely changed the stakes of reform debate.

"Basically Congressman Stupak moved the goalposts, and I think it really took Speaker and other people by surprise," DeGette told me in an exclusive interview. She says, after his abortion amendments went down in the House Energy and Commerce Committee (a panel on which she also sits), he demanded he get another crack at it when the Rules Committee set the contours of the floor debate.

"After we defeated him in committee," she said, "he said that he wanted to have an amendment in order on the floor... and that if he didn't have his amendment made in order then he had 40 people to vote against the rule."

'The rule' is a matter of arcane House procedure, but basically it defines the floor debate. Importantly, though, an amendment that's tacked on to the rule becomes incorporated in the underlying bill (in this case, the House health care bill), and Stupak wanted to add an abortion amendment into the bill on the evening before it passed in historic fashion. Apparently, though, his numbers were off. Pelosi had the votes to pass the rule without his changes.

"The Speaker said to Bart, we have the votes to pass the rule, so we're going to pass the rule without your amendment," DeGette told me.

"Then Bart said, if you don't give me the amendment in the rule, we're going to kill the bill."

More:

"Congressman Stupak keeps saying this just puts Hyde into the health care bill," DeGette says. "But in fact it goes much, much further than that. This would be the biggest restriciton on women's right to choose in my career.... It shows a complete lack of understanding of what's happening when somebody has an abortion. Either these pregnancies are unplanned, or they're planned pregnancies that have gone horribly wrong."

[RainDog]

27. it's like Randall Terry getting to decide health care policy

that's the blue dog way. women's health care designed by misogynistic idiots.

[madfloridian]

47. That is not too far from the truth.

And that is scary.

[dmr]

28. I never saw this coming.

Truly, I did not. It wasn't until Sunday that the anger fully hit me; and it wasn't until Monday that I was able to talk about it.

My reproductive years are over. I have nothing to worry about. Yet, having lost a friend from a botched backroom abortion, and another who nearly died from bleeding & infection, those awful days has left a scar seared in my heart and mind that I want no one else to experience.

I've always been thankful that if there should ever come a time that I or someone I care about needed this service, it was legally and safely available.

Pregnancy is an intensely personal moment in a girl/woman's life. While she may gain advice from others, the moment must ultimately be between her and her physician - for whatever the reason(s)!

I had a discussion with my 20 year old (liberal) son this past Monday, and to my dismay, he agreed that he didn't want his tax dollars paying for someone's 'mistake'. He left me momentarily speechless! He went on to say that anyone can come up with the few hundred dollars if they had to. Just like that. Easy as pie! Just sell something! That's all.

He was reluctant to hear my words. He only saw the pregnancy as a mishap, and he didn't want to pay for it. And he thought I was over-reacting.

I needed to calm down. I was angry at him, and I was hurt. How could my son, the liberal champion, be so cold-hearted and cruel? We had some heated exchanges - very, very unusual for us.

I realized he was just ignorant, falling for the bullshit that has been used as talking points throughout the years. That, despite my influence, he is still a product of a post-Reagan world of materialism.

He and I have talked about this throughout the week. He told me my reaction to him rattled him so badly he couldn't sleep. He wanted to know why. Was I exaggerating or what?

Earlier today he asked me if I knew MadFloridian & if I ever looked at her journal. Yes, of course, she's a favorite of mine.

"Mom" he said, "I couldn't believe you called me an ignorant man, but I get it now. I get what you meant that things are not always as they seem. Thank the mad lady in Florida."

I thank you too Mad. And I thank my son who was intellectually curious enough to do the research.

You never know whose life you touch here, MF. You touched ours, and I thank you.

[madfloridian]

29. That is so moving.

And thank you. When you think about it.... the right wing version of not wanting to pay for someone else is just about all young people have heard.

Why is that? Because our party who should be standing up for women's rights does not go on the air and talk about it at all. A few women, maybe, like Boxer and DeGette.

It's hard to blame them when they have never heard our side of the story.

Thanks for sharing.

[Digit]

30. I have told my own story before on DU

I was 5 months pregnant when my baby died inside of me. It may seem odd, but I "knew" the instant my baby died as I felt a "connection" break. Even now I can't explain it.

I went to the doctor and asked him to check. My husband and I both were very concerned. The ultrasound could not pick up any heartbeat so I was told to go home and take it easy.

A few weeks later, another ultrasound...again no heartbeat, no movement. A pregnancy test was given and came up negative. My doctor was one of those rapid pro-lifers but I did not know the difference at the time.

He allowed this dead fetus to stay inside of me when I finally decided to get my old gynecologist involved. He noted on the ultrasound that my uterus was shrinking, there was no heartbeat, no hormones associated with pregnancy and determined the fetus had died. He softened the blow by telling me that sometimes this can happen if the baby is just not viable. Nature taking it's course made sense although it did make me sad.

My OB did not want to do anything, "just in case", and probably would have allowed me to die from sepsis. Only these days do I realize how he jeopardized my life.

It was at the insistence of my gynecologist that I was finally admitted into the hospital. The first thing that happened was my old OB came in and inserted a pitocin suppository to induce labor. OMG the pain! I had so far carried the dead fetus for 1 1/2 months by then.

I can tell you my OB would not have done anything without my gynecologist stepping in.
They finally did a D&C and I was told it had adhered to the walls of my uterus and was too macerated to tell me the sex. (I had asked)

So, if my own OB did NOT believe it was life threatening to the mother (me) to carry a dead baby for 1 1/2 months, I fear for any other woman out there under the Stupak Amendment.

This was 1978 so I am over it, and I do have a healthy grown up daughter nowadays.

So my point is, my OB would not have done anything and under the Stupak Amendment, I possibly would have died because he would have waited too long. For what?

[madfloridian]

31. People simply do not understand. Your story should make people take notice...

that things like that can still happen even though abortion was legal then and now. The conscience clause permits doctors to practice their religious beliefs on patients.

That is two tragic stories in this thread, and people need to start paying attention.

[Digit]

33. Yes, I am not of childbearing age anymore, but I care about my fellow women

Women need to be in charge of their own bodies...period.
A doctor like the one I had would be positively dangerous with the backing of the Stupak Amendment.
Thank God I was able to get my old gynecologist in on the decision.

Remove choice and there WILL be deaths.

[defendandprotect]

51. That story says MALPRACTICE to me . . . certainly!!

But, while you've recognized the dangerous position your "pro-life" OB put you in,

I wonder if he ever came to terms with the reality that he was moving towards killing

a live human being -- YOU?

These "god" freaks are scary people --

[rebecca_herman]

32. This makes me sick :(

I remember an editorial I read a while back by a woman who had a late term abortion, she had difficulty finding a doctor to do it and getting insurance to pay for it, she did have the procedure in the end but had to travel pay for it herself. She had no living children, desperately wanted to become a mother, and the fetus she was carrying had 100% lethal deformities and would have died immediately at birth. As a result of the fetus's terribly malformed condition there was something wrong with the placenta and how it was attached, and her doctors felt that if she carried to term (about 4 more months) it would only get worse and she would likely have to have a hysterectomy and never be able to try again for a healthy baby. It's already difficult to get a procedure covered in those circumstances and it sickens me that it could become even more difficult.

[morillon]

35. I wanted the bill to pass, BUT...

I want this piece of shit stripped out before it becomes law. And if any of those shitheads who voted for it have primary challengers in the 2010 elections, I am sending a donation to each and every one of them. I can't believe people in my party voted this way.

[LaydeeBug]

36. Oh, but come ON, pre existing conditions might be covered, so stop being hysterical.

It's "fine" to make poor women who can't afford reproductive care have unwanted babies, because some OTHER person who can't afford THEIR particular pre existing condition WILL be covered, and we just can't expect everything. :sarcasm:

Why don't you support the President? :eyes:

[iamjoy]

37. I HAD Made My Peace With It

I had made my piece with the public option not covering elective abortion. I mean, I wasn't happy about it, but I thought if it helped health care reform pass, well, maybe it had to be accepted. After all, the Hyde Amendment has been around for years banning federal funding of abortions, so I didn't see how it was different. There are about a million or so elective abortions a year, but 44 million who have no health insurance at all. The way I saw it, if a woman didn't have health insurance, she couldn't afford an elective abortion anyway so she wouldn't be any worse off than she is now. I didn't think "elective" procedures needed to be covered anyway.

But having read a little more about the Stupak amendment and thinking of the consequences, that really concerns me. Of course, some say the Stupak amendment only restricts those who receive subsidies and people paying for it themselves can still have it covered. The insurance companies may or may not offer separate policies to those who can pay for it themselves, but I'm not sure we really want that as it could well lead to the government subsidized policies being less rich than the private ones in ways that have nothing to do with abortion.

If it really were just about not covering "elective" procedures, it would be one thing. I'm starting to think there's more going on than that, though.

I still grapple with the dilemma - if a woman of child bearing age has no insurance, isn't she still better off with this bill even with that horrible amendment than she is without health insurance reform?

[bonnieS]

38. Lobby Senators in DC December 2

NOW is holding a Mobilization Lobby Day Wednesday Dec 2 against the Stupak Amendment or anything like it. Keep checking their website (National Organization for Women) for details. Be prepared to tell your Senators what you think. Alerts to come out shortly. Sign up.

It will feel good to get out and away from the computer and face the enemy.

[madfloridian]

40. Thanks, I think I will sign up.

:hi:

[cornermouse]

39. kick back to the top of the list

[ChadwickHenryWard]

41. And it's all happening under the Democrats.

We should expect this kind of bullshit from the Republicans, but with strong majorities in both houses, and a strongly liberal President, this should not be happening. That's what's truly disturbing. We are continuing to lose ground to religious conservatives, even with liberals in charge.

[mnhtnbb]

42. Pregnancy carries risks; that cannot be said loudly enough or often enough.

I know from experience. My daughter was stillborn at 22 weeks, 20 years ago. Despite having a pro-life OB, he did the right thing by inducing labor and a D&C after she was stillborn. She still had a heartbeat
when he induced labor (my membranes had ruptured) and he knew she wasn't viable, but he didn't risk maternal infection by leaving her inside of me. He induced an abortion. A year later with another pregnancy at 17 weeks when I was about to repeat the experience of losing my daughter, I was put on bedrest--after having a circlage--and stayed there until 36 weeks. My healthy second son
was born two weeks later.

Pregnancies go wrong. All kinds of things can happen which require immediate medical attention
for the health of the mother.

The Stupak amendment puts the health of women in jeopardy for no reason other than to satisfy
the misogynism of the Catholic Church and their right wing evangelical friends. It's wrong
and I hope it disappears from a final bill.

[Gman]

43. "Is it true that the Stupak amendment would prohibit an insurance company

...in the exchange from covering my patient's abortion if her health is in danger or if the fetus is malformed?"

"That is the fear, yes."

So we're guessing and assuming.

[femrap]

44. Daschle was Obama's

long time mentor.

I remember during the last Dem primary, I chose HRC for one reason and one reason only:

She would be less likely to throw women and children under the bus as Obama would.

Young women better get out there and FIGHT. It's your fight now. All the young women who supported Obama better give him a earful.

[Hidden Stillness]

45. On This Slide for a Long, Long Time...

There is a wonderful line at the end of the movie "Judgement at Nuremberg," of the judge played by Spencer Tracy answering the claim by the German citizen played by Marlene Dietrich, that as the Nazis built up concentration camps and persecuted Jews, they "didn't know" that it was going on, how bad it was, that it was getting worse, dismissing that with a great line that was, like, (can't remember exact wording), "As soon as they pronounced 'guilty' the first person you knew to be innocent," then it was that bad; and you always knew. This is not on the level of the genocide, of course, but is getting scary now; it is also not even slightly new. You might say that as soon as they voted for the Hyde abomination during the 1970s, which first killed funding for a service for women that was legal, it started. As soon as they believed and supported the abuser Clarence Thomas and not the obviously truthful Anita Hill, it started.

There was a thread on DU about Howard Dean, very angry, called "Well, Dr. Dean, you don't know me," by Tansy Gold, quoting Dean: "I think we need to talk about abortion differently. Republicans have painted us into a corner where they have forced us to defend abortion. I don't know anybody who's for abortion." The date of the OP: April 18, 2005! There were many replies, on a long thread, of people saying, yes, they did support abortion, and were outraged at the sabotaging phrasing. This has been a problem for a long time, getting worse and worse. "Fuck the Missing White Bitch" threads on DU, women should stop being divisive, you think you bitches even know what oppression is, etc.; vicious attacks on DU if you dare to tell males that yes, we think you are bigoted against us.

On the larger scale, the "D"LC running the Democratic Party, under Emanuel, Schumer, and others, have been purging progressives, populists, middle class people, and others out of financially-supported Congressional campaigns, undercutting them, and replacing them with males from the big-business corporate world, and anti-choice extremists. "You have to vote for them! What are you going to do--help elect Republicans?" they taunt.

Most males do not support and follow great women, whether Barbara Boxer or Marcy Kaptur, and I have read or heard countless wonderful, incendiary statements by both, that have gone competely unnoticed because they were said by women. There is flare-up after flare-up of excitement, though, when males say things I heard earlier said by women, ignored.

I have long thought of Obama as a "D"LC phony, and first became angry and suspicious during the campaign, when Obama already never referred to "dear Mom," except as a kind of slighting, cold way, (after her use as a "had to fight with insurance" prop had ended), but was associated with one woman-hating male preacher after another, right up to the Inaugural. Like many people, I also felt something ugly was being first revealed then, too.

No equal pay, no safety at abortion clinics, no issues women care about and have fought for for years, now this--and the same mealy-mouthed, Bill-Clinton-like stabbing-in-the-back, all while grinning for the cameras of the male media. Remember, Waxman "the liberal," also supported the watered-down language for rape (until it was protested by Lois Capps, Diana DeGette and other Democratic women), and the abortion-cutting "moral objection" to medical care amendment, and voted for that, at the bill's markup a few months ago. Repr. John Dingell, replaced by the "liberal" Waxman as head of the Committee, had no problems--and was against both.

[DonCoquixote]

46. As someone who cheered the Health care bill

I am shocked that there has not been a big, loud shout that demands that the antiabortion stuff get RIPPED OUT! It's not just the idea of whether or not this will or won't get pulled out, THE DAMAGE IS DONE! The Churches and their Corporate Backers know they scored points, and they need to be handed a series of painful defeats to restore the balance, and yes, this is true even if A) the stupak crap is ripped out of the bill and B) In penance, Congress ensures Abortion is made as easy as getting a Tattoo. It is not about a win here and there, it s about the big picture, and if you hand the right wing enough little victories, they will roll them up into one big one.

[secondwind]

48. In Dominican Republic, the Catholic Church finally got what it wanted. No abortions. period.

If you are 12 yrs old in Dominican Republic, and you get raped, you MUST have the child.

If your father rapes you, and you get pregnant, you must give birth to your brother/sister.

If you are poor, have been having children since you are 15 yrs. old, and you cannot afford birth control, be prepared to continue to make babies.

WHERE IS THE JUSTICE? Oh, and in Dominican Republic, Viagra is sold over the counter...............!!!!



:puke:

[defendandprotect]

50. Disgusting . . . !!! Catholic Church war on women continues on and on . . .

A male-supremacist organization, for their own benefit --

[defendandprotect]

49. Partial-truth abortion is another GOP fake which must be overturned . . .

Meanwhile, we have had decades of religious fanatics coming into Congress --

Congress, it seems, is often praying, attending services, or congregating together

in homo-social housing ----

What they all seem to have in common is a desire to control reproduction and especially

the female body!!

But, that also suggests to me that they're really not very well balanced on other issues --

If you don't understand the need for abortion, you understand little --

And, if you think that there is some "god" in the sky who is pro-war, or pro-letting women

die due to a need for an abortion, or pro-intolerance of homosexuals --

or any other human being they may have created, then you are really unbalanced -- !!

We have to get these "god" freaks out of Congress --

[cleverusername]

52. The 64

Here are the 64 Democrats who sold women out:

http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2009/11/07/who-voted-take-away-your-basic-rights-tonight-the-64-dems-who-voted-yes-stupak

12 of them are woman, which proves that you don't have to be a man to drink the patriarchal kool aid.

[niyad]

53. can't rec, but will kick. that anybody who professes to be a dem utters one word in defense of this

monstrous invasion of women's privacy makes me sick. I don't care what justifications they are using, they are basically saying that women are just not that important. I expect this from the repukes. from people who are supposed to be dems, it is unacceptable, and totally despicable.

it is indeed all about power over women and their disgustingly fertile bodies--and it is beyond sickening that, in the 21st century, we are even having to have such a discussion.

[northernlights]

54. woman are only valued for their value as ovens

beyond that, we have no value in our society.

I write from direct experience. It has never mattered, whether I had insurance or paid cash, I've been treated like shit by all but 2 doctors. One doctor, in the emergency room when in my 20s following a bad accident, was very compassionate and kind, ran the necessary tests. The second was a combined MD and Ayurvedic doctor on the payroll of the Majarishi Mahesh Yogi at his posh celebrity health center when it was in Lancaster, Mass, was extremely kind and ran the necessary tests -- and didn't cost any more than a "regular" doctor.

Every other doctor has treated me like a piece of meat, yelled at me, in 2 cases physically abused me, etc. Male and female, didn't matter. And of course, with health insurance, I wasn't worth a $10/CBC and my life was ultimately saved by my dentist who could see by looking at me how ill I was, from my teeth x-rays figured what the problem was, and put me on antibiotics straight away.

It has not gotten any better now that I'm over 50 -- we have no value to society whatsoever, other than what can be stolen. I'm done with Murka.

[aero56]

55. Men on abortion

Frankly, I have never thought men should have any say as to what a woman does with her own body. Period. They need to stay out of the abortion issue. Unless and until these men are available to care for any malformed baby, or a baby born to a deceased mom, then they need to shut up.