Fourteen Senators Are Mad As Hell

Okay, they're not mad as hell; they are Democrats, after all. (And one Independent.) But they're definitely at least mildly displeased with the HHS' absurd decision regarding Plan B and with President Obama's support of that decision, so they have written a letter to HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, requesting a scientific explanation for her decision:

Dear Secretary Sebelius,

We are writing to express our disappointment with your December 7, 2011 decision to block the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) recommendation to make Plan B One-Step available over-the-counter. We feel strongly that FDA regulations should be based on science. We write to you today to ask that you provide us with the rationale for this decision.

As numerous medical societies and patient advocates have argued, improved access to birth control, including emergency contraception, has been proven to reduce unintended pregnancies. Nearly half of all pregnancies that occur in the United States each year are unintended. Keeping Plan B behind the counter makes it harder for all women to obtain a safe and effective product they may need to prevent an unintended pregnancy.

We ask that you share with us your specific rationale and the scientific data you relied on for the decision to overrule the FDA recommendation. On behalf of the millions of women we represent, we want to be assured that this and future decisions affecting women's health will be based on medical and scientific evidence.

The letter is signed by Democratic Senators Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell of Washington, Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley of Oregon, Kirsten Gillibrand (NY), Barbara Boxer (CA), Richard Blumenthal (CT), Daniel Akaka (HA), Carl Levin (MI), John Kerry (MA), Tom Harkin (IA), Al Franken (MN), and Frank Lautenberg (NJ). Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who is an Independent and caucuses with Senate Democrats, was the fourteenth signatory.

Greg Sargent quite rightly notes that the letter "is strongly worded stuff, particularly when directed at a Democratic president. It stops just short of accusing the Obama administration of deliberately ignoring science in making this decision. It also puts the administration in an awkward spot. Either it produces a scientific rationale that's acceptable to these Senators, which will will be extremely difficult at best, or it will face more criticism for failing to justify its policy, reinforcing the sense that this Democratic administration abandoned science and put politics first."

This is the last thing the President needs in an election year—which is something he should have thought of before throwing women and trans men under the bus. Again.

Goddammit, Part Two

[Trigger warning for reference to sexual violence.]

Yesterday I wrote about the Department of Health and Human Services' decision to overrule the Food and Drug Administration's decision to make Plan B available to anyone of any age without a restriction. Some people wondered if HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius was acting on her own or with President Obama's approval, and there was some hope that Obama would direct HHS to back off.

Nope! And not only does the President support Sebelius' shocking move to limit reproductive rights, he is using his daughters to defend his failure to support choice.

"I did not get involved in the process, this was a decision of Kathleen Sebelius," Obama said, referring to the secretary of the Health and Human Services Department.

"I will say this. As the father of two daughters, it makes sense to apply some common sense," Obama said.

Wow.

So rejecting science in favor of anti-choice hokum is now "common sense," and the best thing fathers can do for their daughters is restrict control over their reproduction. Awesome.

You know, I don't want 11-year-old girls having the need for Plan B, because an 11-year-old girl who has the need for Plan B is an 11-year-old girl who was raped. But in the imperfect world in which we live, where 11-year-olds are raped and made pregnant, often by the family members on whom they have to rely to get access to emergency contraception, the only real options are giving access to Plan B to 11-year-olds who need it and leaving those 11-year-olds with one less option.

Whether Plan B is available isn't going to change the facts of the world. It's only going to be yet another example of how we routinely consider tween girls simultaneously old enough to be sexual targets, and too young to be allowed to be sexually empowered.

As Shaker Meganology noted in comments: "The absolute only thing this regulation does is prevent [an assaulted] child from taking control into hir own hands by obtaining Plan B for hirself, if zie wants to."

Quite right.

That is, for the record, not "common sense." It's abandoning the most vulnerable children among us and condemning them to further victimization, because we're too uncomfortable with ugly realities to look them in the eye. Better instead to cover them with a veil of mendacious bullshit masquerading as concern.

"Oh noes, what if they take the medicine wrong?" Anyone who is more concerned about a pregnant child being hurt by contraceptives than they are about that child being raped, pregnant, and forced instead to undergo an abortion or a full-term pregnancy and delivery, is living in a silly, stupid, unserious bubble of self-deceit, and no one should listen to anything they have to say on the subject of reproductive rights ever again.

Reproductive Rights Updates: Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, Alabama, South Dakota

Ohio! There are two issues in Ohio. First, the a senate committee will have the first public hearings (1pm EST) on HB 125, aka the "heartbeat bill".

The Senate Health, Human Services and Aging Committee, which is chaired by Sen. Scott Oelslager, R- North Canton, will hear from the bill’s sponsor, proponents and interested parties today. Typically, opponents also are given a chance to weigh in on legislation, but no other hearing has been scheduled at this point.

Oelslager also chaired a special committee appointed by Senate President Tom Niehaus, R-New Richmond, that has been privately reviewing the legislation, which passed the House in June.

That doesn't sound suspicious at all. Sounds like totally balanced government, right there. Sure.

Now, I came across this by accident in looking up info on the senate hearing mentioned above: SB 201. SB 201 was introduced to a senate finance committee yesterday. So while it's new, it's not that new because it's the companion legislation to HB 298, which I wrote about back in July. The bills are an attempt at a Medicaid work-around to de-fund Planned Parenthood.

***

In Michigan, a senate committee sent two bills to to the senate that prohibit insurance coverage of abortion services:

Health Policy Committee members on Wednesday sent to the full Senate two bills that would require health insurance policies sold on the MiHealth Marketplace website or in insurance markets to not cover abortions unless women buy an additional rider on their policies.

The leader of MI "Right to Life" supports this, of course, because he says: "abortion is a social decision, not health care." Of course you say things like that! Of course you do.

***

In Wisconsin, there will be a hearing next week on SB 306 (AB 371), which is a bill that says women cannot get an abortion via medication unless seeing a doctor in person.

Madison - A hearing is slated for Dec. 13 on a bill that would prevent women from receiving drugs that induce abortions unless a doctor gives them a physical exam and is in the same room when they receive the drugs.

[...]

The legislation would also require doctors to speak with women seeking abortions out of the presence of others to determine whether they were coerced into getting abortions.

Supporters of this are very determined that women should not get a consult via webcam. Supporters of this are very determined to make as many hurdles possible.

***

In Alabama, Sen. Phil Williams (R-Madison) has "pre-filed" a "personhood" bill for the Feb. 2012 session.

Senate Bill 5 looks to legally define humans as persons from the moment of fertilization and implantation. It is similar to Mississippi’s personhood bill, which was defeated 58 percent to 42 percent on Nov. 8.

Williams’ attempt to pass comparable legislation earlier in the year was killed by a voice vote on the Senate floor.

In an interview with Mobile news station WKRG on Nov. 9, Williams said he believes personhood legislation is important to Alabamians.

“Number one, I think that this is a matter of state’s rights, that we can do this,” Williams said. “I think that this is something that Alabamians would want.”

Intro'ing a bullshit bill that's similar to another that was shot down earlier this year totally doesn't sound like a colossal waste of time at all!

***

In South Dakota, a federal appeals court has agreed to rehear arguments about doctors being forced to tell patients that they'll have a higher risk of wanting to commit suicide if they have an abortion.

he South Dakota Attorney General's office says a federal appeals court has agreed to rehear a case dealing with a 2005 South Dakota abortion law.

[...]

South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley says the full 11-member court will rehear arguments related to the suicide advisory in January.

The suicide bit? A lie (.pdf).

Goddammit

Plan B ruling: FDA says it wanted to ease restrictions, was overruled by Obama administration:

In a rare public split within the federal government, the Health and Human Services Department overruled a decision by the Food and Drug Administration to make [Plan B, aka the morning-after pill] available to anyone of any age without a restriction.

In a statement, FDA Administrator Margaret Hamburg said she had decided the medication could be used safely by [people] of all age. But she added that Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius had rejected the move.

"I agree ... there is adequate and reasonable, well-supported, and science-based evidence that Plan B One-Step is safe and effective and should be approved for nonprescription use for all [people] of child-bearing potential," Hamburg said.

"However, this morning I received a memorandum from the Secretary of Health and Human Services invoking her authority under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to execute its provisions and stating that she does not agree with the Agency's decision to allow the marketing of Plan B One-Step nonprescription for all [people] of child-bearing potential," she said.

The surprising decision is a stunning blow to some doctors, health advocates, family-planning activists, members of Congress and others to help women prevent unwanted pregnancies.

There is literally nothing I can say that I haven't already said dozens of times before. This is yet another incredible disappointment.

Kansas Update

Way back in July I posted about how Kansas hired Koch-bros. affiliated attorneys to defend itself in cases regarding its attacks on clinics and its de-funding of Planned Parenthood. At the time I noted:

Huh. I had no idea the state of Kansas had so much money laying around! Planned Parenthood, by the way, is being represented by pro-bono attorneys.

Yesterday the Kansas City Star reported on just how much money the state has paid (so far!):

After about six months, the state has tallied $392,520 in legal bills stemming from attempts to restrict abortion that were pushed during the legislative session earlier this year.

The state spent $237,834 on private lawyers defending efforts to strip Planned Parenthood of federal family planning funds. It has laid out $94,380 defending new rules for abortion clinics.

And it has amassed $60,306 in legal bills over a new law that bars insurance companies from providing elective abortion coverage as part of their comprehensive plans.

[...]

Two firms are handling the lawsuits for the state.

Foulston Siefkin is representing the state in the Planned Parenthood case. The firm charges up to $300 an hour for litigation work and $115 an hour for paralegal services.

The law firm of former University of Kansas Law School Dean Steve McAllister — Thompson, Ramsdell & Qualseth — is representing the state in lawsuits challenging the new abortion clinic rules and the insurance restrictions.

McAllister’s firm charges up to $275 for litigation and $75 an hour for paralegal work.

The state's Attorney General, Derek Schmidt, said they had to hire people since his office is overburdened.

So, earlier this year, while the state passed bullshit legislation that was guraranteed to be challenged in court, the state was also working on a budget. Here's a bit how that went:

Friday’s cuts include:

--A $50.2 million reduction in general state aid to education, which will require legislative action in order to coordinate that change with expected increases in health and human services caseloads.

--$2.3 million reductions each in Board of Regents system operating budgets and Social and Rehabilitation Services mental health care managed services.

--A $1.3 million reduction in State Finance Council funds dedicated to assuring Kansas government salaries are competitive with the private sector.

--A total $374,000 in reduced debt service costs and lowered operating budgets for the Kansas Court of Tax Appeals, the Kansas Attorney General’s office, the Kansas Art Commission and the Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks.

And:

Republican leaders asserted that tax increases will be necessary in the budget, but the House budget did not include a tax increase.[35] Instead, the House budget lessened funds for public education by not replacing $172 million in federal stimulus dollars.

So how is that working out? Pretty much how you might think:

Quietly, without fanfare, the 39-year-old emergency center for Johnson County youth in crisis at TLC closed in September.

In December, the 17-year-old old transitional program for disturbed Johnson County kids from teens up to 18 at TLC will also close.

The elimination of both programs is a result of statewide budget cuts.

[...]

In the meantime, Marillac, the other facility in the county that deals with youth in need of acute care, is facing severe cutbacks in its own programs. It, too, is trying to deal with major budget cuts.

Both TLC and Marillac exist for youth with severe psychiatric needs who have been referred to them by the Johnson County Mental Health Center.

And:

Topeka — State budget cuts to public schools have resulted in fewer teachers and more crowded classrooms, according to statistics reported Friday by the Kansas Department of Education.

The total number of teacher positions statewide in the current school year is 34,075.

That is a drop of 256 from last year and 1,363 since the 2008-09 school year total of 35,438.

Meanwhile, student enrollment has increased from 473,097 in 2008-09 to 482,798 in the current school year. That is an increase of 9,701 students. During that time, the Lawrence school district grew from 11,007 students to 11,613 students, an increase of 606 students.

The elimination of teacher positions coincides with cuts to school funding.

But, hey, Kansas has plenty of money (nearly $400K for six months of work!) to spend hiring attorneys to defend anti-abortion legislation. Obviously that money couldn't be useful anywhere else in the state. Priorities!

Neat!

Sarah Posner: Both Sides Expect Obama to Side with Bishops on Contraception Coverage

Pro-choice advocates... say they expect imminent action from the Obama Administration to broaden the exemption [from birth control coverage for employer-sponsored insurance plans] beyond churches and other houses of worship. That action could come as early as tomorrow.

That's just super.

Pushing "Personhood"

The defeat in Mississippi hasn't deterred the PersonhoodUSA people. As I mentioned before, they have plans for every state and they're working to get on ballots across the country:

Personhood USA, the Colorado-based anti-abortion group that led the Mississippi initiative, is working to get the measure on 2012 ballots in California, Florida, Montana, Nevada, Ohio and Oregon, among other states. Similar voter initiatives in Colorado failed in 2008 and 2010.

However, the "personhood" issue isn't just coming that way. It's also being considered by legislators.

Alabama State Sen. Phil Williams, a Republican, is pushing legislation for a similar constitutional amendment. In June, Williams pre-filed a personhood bill to be considered during the 2012 session, according to the Senate's website. The bill seeks to define persons "to include all humans from moment of fertilization and implantation into the womb." Earlier versions of the Alabama bill failed to advance.

And:

ATLANTA — Two Georgia lawmakers are considering Legislation similar to the "personhood" referendum rejected by voters in Mississippi last week.

Sen. Barry Loudermilk, R-Cassville, and Rep. Rick Crawford, D-Cedartown, have both supported similar Legislation previously declaring that life begins at fertilization and seeks to ban abortion. Loudermilk says he is looking at re-introducing the bill with modified language omitting references to fertilization and cloning — words that proved problematic in the failed Mississippi ballot issue.

There was "personhood" legislation intro'd into the US House in January, HR 374 "Life At Conception Act", but it is stalled in committee.

Now, the Personhood USA people are holding a press conference today to announce their new strategy of bothering people who are grocery shopping in Colorado (and, if it works, everywhere else):

The group will hold a news conference today on the west steps of the state Capitol to unveil the renewed effort. [...]

Organizers said Saturday they are banking on broad grassroots support, with volunteers circulating petitions at grocery stores, and a new game plan.

They've also re-written their legislation:

The new version of the measure "will protect every child, no matter their size, level of development, gender, age or race," said Jennifer Mason, spokeswoman for Personhood USA.

New language "will explain again that every human being is a person from their earliest moments," Mason said. "And it will include some extra information that hopefully will prohibit lies of our opponents. . . . It will be a departure from what we've done before."

Extra information, eh? I guess we shall see later today what the latest effort in extreme bullshittery looks like.

This new angle of attack against women being recognized as rights-bearing persons is not letting up. They may not win on the ballots but that's not the whole point for them, either. It's about conversation (as one of the GA legislators said). It's about trying to change the conversation and having it insidiously seep into collective thinking that "fertilized eggs are people" (and that "women are actual people with rights" are lies) so that eventually, maybe, they will get to win via ballots or legislation.

Perry and "Personhood"

So this happened yesterday:

Question off camera: Um, I'd like to clarify whether you agree or disagree with Mitt Romney regarding the personhood amendment?

Perry: Let, let me tell you what I believe in. I'm pro-life. Been pro-life all my life. Uh. (pause) As the governor of Texas I don't know if there's, uh, anyone who has been engaged more issues that have been, uh, protective of life. Uhm. And parental consent, parental notification, this last session of legislature we passed a law that, uh, says if a female is to receive an abortion she, ah, has to have a sonogram before that procedure can occur. Uhm, I happen to...to believe in putting justices on the Supreme Court that are pro-life. And....Roe versus Wade would, ah, be found to be unconstitutional, it would go back to the states. Until! There would be a constitutional amendment to the United States that would clearly defend life and that life would be from the time of conception until death. I would support that. Uh, and....(pause)...that a pro-life amendment in a constitutional way is the way that this issue is finally addressed. So, uh, I have always been very consistent, uh, on the issue of life and will continue to be in the, ah, men and women who I would ask to serve on the United States Supreme Court would be strict constructionists and they would find nothing in the United States constitution dealing with the issues of, ah, abortion. That would go back to the states and the state could decide those issues up until the time there would be a United States constitution to protect life, which I would be supportive of.

Barf.

Reproductive Rights Updates

Back in July I had posted about how the NC legislature overrode Gov. Perdue's veto of various abortion-related restrictions, one of which being a mandatory ultrasound law. A day before it was to become law, Judge Catherine C. Eagles put a temporary ban on the law:

In her opinion, Catherine C. Eagles, a judge with the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, said the plaintiffs proved that their claims probably would be successful.

"Having demonstrated that the [law] likely poses a direct threat to their fundamental constitutional rights, the plaintiffs also have established that they would be irreparably harmed. Furthermore, it is in the public interest for statutes that likely violate fundamental constitutional rights to be enjoined from being enforced," she said.

****

I don't even know what to say about this: Radical Anti-Choice Group Puts Out "All Points Bulletin" to "Track" Pregnant Woman. From Andy's post:

This is an All Points Bulletin – an APB! – issued by radical Wisconsin anti-choice group Vigil for Life to track down a pregnant woman seeking services at Planned Parenthood. Yes, you read that correctly.

The young woman came to Madison but by the time she arrived Planned Parenthood was closed. Unfortunately, Vigil for Life is setting up a crisis pregnancy center right across the street from the Planned Parenthood Clinic and was there to feed this young woman anti-choice propaganda. However, the young woman slipped away before the Vigil For Life volunteers got her name.

You should read the whole thing, though it is incredibly disturbing.

****

In Missouri, a Planned Parenthood clinic is closing and merging with another:

COLUMBIA — The Jefferson City office of Planned Parenthood will close Nov. 30.

The services provided by the center, which was open on Tuesday and Thursday, will now be provided by the Columbia office on Providence Road, said Michelle Trupiano, spokeswoman for Planned Parenthood of Kansas and mid-Missouri.

[...]

Jefferson City residents who cannot travel to Columbia for care can go to the Cole County Health Department to find another provider, Trupiano said.

"We don't believe there will be any women who will not be able to access services," she said.

Services offered at Planned Parenthood include cancer screenings, birth control, prevention and treatment of STDs, pap tests, sexual health education and counseling.

The consolidation will allow the Columbia center to extend its hours and schedule more appointments, Trupiano said.

"(Patients) will possibly be able to get in sooner," she said. "It will benefit them for the fact that when they call, they can get an appointment the same day."

Abortion services are still not able to be provided at the Columbia clinic because the doctor who provided them was recently called up to active duty and they have not yet found someone else.

An Observation

All day, I've been waiting to hear how the "people" for whom Mississippi 26 had been written—fertilized eggs—reacted to the news that the cruel voters of Mississippi had denied them their personhood.

I'm still waiting. I'm thinking that might be because they're not actually people.

Mississippi Personhood Amendment Is Defeated

What truly excellent news:

A constitutional amendment that would have defined a fertilized egg as a person failed on the ballot in Mississippi on Tuesday, dealing the so-called "personhood" movement another blow.

Mississippi would have become the first state to define a fertilized egg as a person, a measure which was aimed at outlawing abortion in the state but, opponents contended, would have led to all kinds of unintended consequences.

In the end, those concerns won out in a strongly anti-abortion state. The amendment trailed 59 percent to 41 percent with more than half of precincts reporting.

Phew.

In less good news, Mississippi's Initiative 27, which will require photo IDs to vote and will thus disenfranchise voters, passed. For the potential effects of photo ID laws, see here.

Indiana also led the way in photo ID voting laws (of course we did), and, unfortunately, the Supreme Court has already upheld the constitutionality of such laws after it was challenged in Indiana.

FYI

White House: There's no sign of E.T. or UFO cover-up. Just so's you know. [Via Andy.]

The White House has responded to two petitions asking the U.S. government to acknowledge formally that aliens have visited Earth and to disclose any intentional withholding of government interactions with extraterrestrial beings.

"The U.S. government has no evidence that any life exists outside our planet, or that an extraterrestrial presence has contacted or engaged any member of the human race," Phil Larson from the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy reported on the WhiteHouse.gov website. "In addition, there is no credible information to suggest that any evidence is being hidden from the public's eye."

The petition calling on the government to disclose any knowledge of or communication with extraterrestrial beings was signed by 5,387 people, and 12,078 signed the request for a formal acknowledgement from the White House that extraterrestrials have been engaging the human race.

That new "online engagement feature" is going great, then.

I'm glad that our Democratic president's administration is taking time to respond to the concerns of 17,465 people (a generous figure, considering it presumes no crossover signatures) about alien contact, but continues to diligently maintain its silence on the all-out legislative assault on the reproductive rights and bodily autonomy of 52% of the population. Cool. Neat priorities!

[Related Reading: Alien Skull Found on White House Lawn.]

Mississippi

As you may know, today is election day in the United States. There are some ballot issues that have gained national attention, like Ohio's anti-union measure, Issue 2 (Vote no, Ohioans! Vote no!). And there's Mississippi's "personhood" issue, Prop. 26. Both Liss and I have written on the personhood nonsense previously (here and here and here and here, for example). Generally, a group called Personhood USA is out to amend constitutions everywhere to give full-person rights to fertilized eggs. In Mississippi, they have gained enough momentum to get Prop 26 on the ballot to do just that.

Mississippi voters are, apparently according to polling, nearly evenly split on the issue.

According to Public Policy Polling, Initiative 26, the so-called "Personhood" amendment in Mississippi, is currently tied, with 45 percent of voters supporting the measure and 44 percent of voters opposed to it.

That leaves over 10 percent of Mississippi residents unsure of how they will vote, and they could swing the election in either direction.

In the end, it could just come down to who shows up at the polls.

If you're in Mississippi, please go vote!

In my Twitter feed this morning I noticed that NPR reported that Mississippi is the state with the most people who rely on SNAP (nutrition assistance).

The state of Mississippi has the highest percentage of its population — 24 percent — on food stamps of any state in the country.

Now, people who have abortions do so for different reasons, given everyone has individual circumstances that lead to their decision. However, generally speaking, there is a significant commonality (emphasis mine):

• About 61% of abortions are obtained by women who have one or more children.

• Forty-two percent of women obtaining abortions have incomes below 100% of the federal poverty level ($10,830 for a single woman with no children).

• Twenty-seven percent of women obtaining abortions have incomes between 100–199% of the federal poverty level.*

• The reasons women give for having an abortion underscore their understanding of the responsibilities of parenthood and family life. Three-fourths of women cite concern for or responsibility to other individuals; three-fourths say they cannot afford a child; three-fourths say that having a baby would interfere with work, school or the ability to care for dependents; and half say they do not want to be a single parent or are having problems with their husband or partner.

Sometimes people just cannot afford a(nother) child. Period. How the pregnancy occurred is irrelevant (for those who may be inclined to argue only some circumstances are worthy). And, as NPR points out, Mississippi in particular has a lot of people who already need assistance--how is the state going to help these people who they will force to give birth to more children if Prop 26 passes? I'm sure the voters who approve of Prop 26 will totally be on board with paying a tax increase to be able to support a needed increase in the social safety net. Totally. Or not.

The problem with most of these people who support bullshit initiatives like Prop 26 is that they don't fucking THINK. They parade around with blinders on and fingers in their ears yelling about "BAAAAABIES!" and yet don't actually follow any logical process to look at everything else about life beyond a fetus going from conception to birth--like eating (or any of the other questions I raised in my post here or that there will be consequences like this). The rest of the people who support things like Prop 26 have thought it out and generally don't care: "Hey, eat some bootstraps kid--guess your mom should have kept her legs shut!". Bootstrap chastity belts for everyone!

It's not going to stop. Personhood USA's goal is to amend all state constitutions. MoJo has a map of where they're going and how 2012 is shaping up. I am not going to link to Personhood USA but they also have state-by-state listings on their site, if you're so inclined to wade into that cesspool.

As I said before: to Personhood USA and those who support it, I look forward to seeing you be the first one in line (if your measures pass) at the government's new Mandatory Organ Donation & Harvesting Office. After all, everyone should be forced by the government to donate their organs to "give life" to a person who needs said organ(s) to live, right?

Quote of the Day

"I believe life begins at conception. Unfortunately, this personhood amendment doesn't say that. It says life begins at fertilization, or cloning, or the functional equivalent thereof. That ambiguity is striking a lot of pro-life people here as concerning. And I'm talking about people that are very, outspokenly pro-life. ... I am concerned about some of the ramifications on in vitro fertilization and [ectopic] pregnancies where pregnancies [occur] outside the uterus and [in] the fallopian tubes. That concerns me, I have to just say it."—Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour (R-Eallyrightwing), on the proposed amendment to the state constitution being put to voters next week, which would redefine a person as "every human being from the moment of fertilization, cloning, or the functional equivalent thereof."

How extreme is this bit of anti-choice maneuvering...? So extreme even HALEY BARBOUR is concerned about its extremism. Yiiiiiiiiiikes.

If Only Women Could Think for Themselves...!

Then we wouldn't need laws like this:

One of the nation's most restrictive abortion laws went into effect Wednesday in North Carolina after a federal judge temporarily halted the law's most controversial requirement — that a woman getting an abortion must first view a narrated ultrasound image of the fetus.

U.S. District Court Judge Catherine Eagles ordered a preliminary injunction late Tuesday, ruling that the ultrasound requirement likely violates patients' First Amendment rights.

She upheld other sections of the law, including a 24-hour waiting period to provide information on abortion risks and alternatives.

Because adult women are actually ninny-brained infants who need forcible help making decisions about their own bodies, and not autonomous rational actors who have already made a considered choice for themselves to terminate before they make an appointment for the actual medical procedure.

Well, at least the mandated ultrasound portion has been blocked, and the ACLU is on the case.

The American Civil Liberties Union and four pro-choice groups contended in a lawsuit filed last month that requiring women to view ultrasound images and providing an opportunity to hear the fetal heartbeat promotes government-mandated ideology. Proponents of the law, passed by the Republican-controlled Legislature in July over the veto of Democratic Gov. Beverly Perdue, say the requirement would promote childbirth and protect women from emotional trauma.

...Eagles said the provision is "likely to harm the psychological health of the very group the state purports to protect."

Indeed.

Again I will note—as I do each time one of these mandated ultrasound bills is being debated with the inevitable justification that its supporters are just trying to Very Helpfully "provide women with more information"—that if an altruistic helpfulness were the authentic motivation, then women would be offered a choice as to whether they want to get the ultrasound.

But, of course, these paternalistic scolds are not offering anything kind or decent; they are merely demanding the legal right to try to shame women into not getting abortions, because they believe, wrongly, that women seeking abortions are in denial about being pregnant, or detached from their natural desire to mother, or some other nonsense, and if only they see a picture of the BABY! they will change their fickle and delicate minds.

Being forced to view an ultrasound does not, however, change the reality for a pregnant woman—and there are few minds less persuadable than the mind of a woman who does not want to be pregnant. Which is why even straight-up criminalizing abortion doesn't stop women from getting them.

Forcing a pregnant person to look at an ultrasound will not change the circumstances that made her seek an abortion: If you don't want a child, if you can't afford a child, if you had a contraceptive failure, if you were raped, if you just lost your job, if you found out the fetus will die as soon as it's born, if you're pregnant by someone who became abusive, if you've been diagnosed with a life threatening illness, or a non-life threatening but life-changing illness or disability, if your existing child has become ill, if your spouse has become ill, if your parent has become ill, if your psychiatric medication is incompatible with pregnancy, if you lost your health insurance, if…if…if a million other variables, if any of a million reasons why women seek abortions, looking at an ultrasound will not matter.

The Ultrasound Gang just can't conceive that there are women who make the measured, rational, self-interested decision to terminate a pregnancy. "But there's a BABY in there!" they insist, and they don't understand that there are millions of women who will reply, with or without regret, "Yes, I know. That's the problem."