Gilead is Real - The War on Women and Abortion Part 3

[front hugs > duggs]

7 hours ago, 47of74 said:

People are having to consider abortion restrictions when picking a school 

 

Also for women's professional sports teams- I know the NWSL (Women's professional soccer league in the US) said that players can't be force-traded to cities in states that have strict legislation. What an awful thing to have to think about.

[SassyPants]

The GOP blew its collective wad on that partisan SCOTUS decision, and now Lindsay is going to the next logical (if you’re insane) step to keep their voting base engaged- Have they run the numbers, including both Republican and Independent women voters? Did they learn nothing from the voters in Kansas?

Why in God’s name would any neurotypical person think the government or legal system should have a say in anyone’s reproductive, medical decisions? We stopped caring about the mental ill years ago. I’m thinking if this could ever physically affect a man, there is no way in hades we’d ever be talking about it.

[Ozlsn]

This is insane.

From the article it's basically an abusive ex-partner using this as a means of control.

"But Villegas and his lawyer can already claim a kind of victory: They successfully convinced the judge that Villegas should be allowed to argue his ex-wife’s embryo, whom they call “Baby Villegas” in legal documents, is a person for the purposes of the wrongful death lawsuit. If the case goes to trial, and if a jury ultimately finds in favor of the plaintiffs, it will be the first time that an aborted embryo has triumphed in a wrongful death lawsuit, ushering in a new legal threat not just for doctors, but for anyone who can become pregnant."

..

"For years, advocates have warned of the consequences fetal personhood laws could have for pregnant women, including the potential to rebrand any behavior that might pose a risk to a pregnancy as child endangerment. As anyone who has been pregnant knows, the list of activities that constitute a “risk” during pregnancy is virtually endless and can include pursuits as anodyne as consuming soft cheeses or sushi. (In many cases, admonitions around “risky” pregnancy behavior aren’t even grounded in science, but are instead based on the absence of scientific evidence, since the very idea of performing a study to quantify the risk would pose a risk of its own.) Under the legal theory that a fetus is a person with rights, even simply crossing the street can open a pregnant person up to legal liability: In one case, a court allowed a woman who was hit by a car while seven months pregnant to be sued by her future child for negligence because she failed to use “a designated crosswalk.”"

..

"Her absolute clarity of mind around her decision underscores the ways in which elevating an embryo’s rights instantly strips a woman of her own. The woman had a vision of her future that is incompatible with her ex-husband’s vision of her embryo’s future. Now, he’s asking the court to disregard hers entirely."

[Ozlsn]

Well it's coming thick and fast today.

 

Spoiler

 

What the actual?

[GreyhoundFan]

"I don’t want your god in charge of my health care"

Quote

Let’s say a patient is considering a tubal ligation after a planned Caesarean section because she doesn’t want to get pregnant again. Here are some factors that pertain to that decision: her vision of her reproductive future, her doctor’s advice, state regulations, the recommendations of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the latest scientific research.

Here are some factors that, for most patients, do not pertain: “God’s purposes,” “God’s will,” “the truth that life is a precious gift from God.”

But if our hypothetical patient happens to be in a Catholic hospital, those factors — precisely those words — will be controlling the decision, whether or not she or her doctor believes in God’s plan. It’s plainly spelled out in the ethical directives of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops: “Direct sterilization of either men or women, whether permanent or temporary, is not permitted in a Catholic health care institution.” She won’t get the operation no matter how medically safe and legal it is, no matter what she wants.

Clearly, she should have picked a different hospital. But with the expansion of Catholic health systems all over the country, that might not be an option. A 2020 report by Community Catalyst, a nonprofit health advocacy group, found that four of the 10 largest health systems in the country were Catholic. The Catholic Health Association says that Catholic facilities now account for more than 1 in 7 U.S. hospital patients.

That number is likely to grow, as Catholic health systems expand by merging with or acquiring secular hospitals and networks. This consolidation is happening near me, in the Albany, N.Y., area. As the Times Union recently reported, one of our large health systems, St. Peter’s Health Partners, part of a Catholic network, has begun merging with the secular Ellis Medicine, which will ultimately put “God’s will” in charge of Ellis Hospital and the Bellevue Woman’s Center, which provides pregnancy and maternity care.

That would mean no tubal ligations for contraceptive purposes. It would also mean no abortions, vasectomies, IUDs or in vitro fertilization. It would most likely constrain choices in end-of-life care and end gender-affirming care.

A patient deciding where to have her C-section — even if she still had a choice of hospitals — might not even know this. Why would she assume that a nonprofit hospital, buoyed by large infusions of state and federal funds, could legally withhold health care from its patients?

But that’s exactly what happens when the church has the ultimate say in medical decisions. Not just at hospitals, either: Urgent care centers and physicians’ practices that are part of a Catholic network might well refuse to prescribe birth control, or to provide abortion services or counseling.

New York State has taken pains to protect reproductive rights, beginning with the 2019 Reproductive Health Act, which codified the right to abortion. As state after state passes abortion bans in the wake of Roe v. Wade’s fall, I often think, selfishly, thank goodness I live in New York.

But I still live in the Commonwealth of Religious Deference, where rules can be broken and citizens can be denied basic services as long as someone has decided that’s the way God wants it.

Some lawmakers are pushing back. One recent bill sponsored by New York state Sen. Michelle Hinchey, which has passed the Senate and awaits an Assembly vote, would require that hospitals publish a list of “policy-based exclusions,” detailing the care they will not provide, on their websites. In Oregon, a new law gives state officials the authority to block hospital mergers that would result in restricted health-care access.

But beneath these efforts lies unchallenged the notion that Catholic hospitals are within their rights to deny care. That religious organizations, despite their public funding, do not have to abide by secular standards.

Blue states? Secular country? Doesn’t matter. The most shocking recent evidence that even New Yorkers live in a State of God Knows Best is a devastating New York Times report on the state’s Hasidic schools, which teach Jewish law and tradition but little English or math. In 2019, 99 percent of the thousands of Hasidic boys who took state standardized tests failed. Meanwhile, New York’s yeshivas receive plenty of education funding — “more than $1 billion” in government money over the past four years. Religious leaders systematically denied their students the constitutionally protected opportunity for a “sound basic education,” and political leaders let it happen.

Or at least they did. The New York State Board of Regents recently voted to require private schools to prove they were teaching basic subjects or else risk forfeiting public funding. Whether that rule will be enforced remains to be seen. But it’s a start.

I’d like to see the New York State Department of Health take the same approach to health networks: Prove you are providing patients with all the care that modern medicine has made possible, state law has made feasible and the Affordable Care Act has deemed essential, and you’ll get your tax exemptions and your Medicaid payments.

And if you happen to have a patient who believes contraception contravenes the will of God? She can choose not to get her tubes tied.

 

[GreyhoundFan]

This is insane:

 

[AlmostSavedAtTacoBell]

2 hours ago, GreyhoundFan said:

"I don’t want your god in charge of my health care"

 

In my area, the only Level 1 hospital is a Catholic hospital, so woman with serious complications and/or risks are urged to give birth at that hospital.  It infuriates me that women have to choose between giving themselves and their unborn babies the best chance at coming through alive and having a tubal ligation when it is possible immediately following birth and before closing up after a c-section.  

[zeebaneighba]

We have two major hospital systems in our area, one Catholic and one HCA.  The Catholic system bought a local clinic several years ago and the entire OB/Gyn staff resigned en masse.

I am very grateful the not-Catholic system is in my insurance network AND that they are the Level 1 Trauma hospital for the area.

[GreyhoundFan]

I hope these women inspire others to stand up:

[libgirl2]

On 9/23/2022 at 9:53 PM, Ozlsn said:

Well it's coming thick and fast today.

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

What the actual?

Parts of this country still had slavery back then? Should we reinstate this? I was aghast when I heard this. 

[GreyhoundFan]

This is both disgusting and heartbreaking:

[GreyhoundFan]

I saw this article in the comments on the Whitehouse thread I posted above. It made me physically ill. A good friend has a nine year old daughter and I can't imagine her going through this.

 

[fraurosena]

9 hours ago, GreyhoundFan said:

I hope these women inspire others to stand up:

What?! They’re sitting right next to a man, dressed like that, and he’s calmly sipping his drink instead of turning into a raging sex-monster unable to control the urges their lack of proper attire is supposed to incite?

/s

[GreyhoundFan]

What an eloquent speech:

 

[Coconut Flan]

MacArthur loses his mind over California having freedom of choice.

https://www.gracechurch.org/news/posts/3592

[GreyhoundFan]

[GreyhoundFan]

Brave women in action:

 

[GreyhoundFan]

This is horrible:

[Smash!]

2 hours ago, GreyhoundFan said:

This is horrible:

This is why it‘s so important to delete period tracking apps. 

[AlmostSavedAtTacoBell]

9 hours ago, GreyhoundFan said:

This is horrible:

It’s fucking evil. I wonder how they would have handled someone like me who because of a medical condition had been taking birth control for a few years before I started college continuously so that I did not have periods. I wasn’t sexually actively until several years after I had been taking the pills so it was only for medical treatment but how would they feel about it? My guess is those sick assholes would insist I go off the medication that I very much needed and start having very irregular, extremely painful, debilitating periods that caused me to vomit, pass out, and even end up in the hospital on a frequent basis- not to mention the serious risk of future loss of fertility which was thankfully prevented by taking the medication when and how I did. Fucking sick assholes. 

[Audrey2]

See I wonder how much of this wants to track a cycle for anti-abortion purposes and how much is anti-trans people. I'm leaning toward the anti-trans in sports angle.

The evil side of me thinks if they're doing this to young women then they also need to ask young men when they have their first nocturnal emission, not that it's any of their business either but they seem to think women's periods are.

[AlmostSavedAtTacoBell]

19 minutes ago, Audrey2 said:

The evil side of me thinks if they're doing this to young women then they also need to ask young men when they have their first nocturnal emission, not that it's any of their business either but they seem to think women's periods are.

You are brilliant. I agree it’s not right but I get your point. How about this suggestion- not boys’ first nocturnal emissions but those of sexually active men? They would have to log nocturnal emissions AND masturbations. Lost sperm means lost babies. It’s like a pre-abortion! Or a super early abortion! One could even argue that unlike abortion, which is only mentioned in the Bible when directions for an abortion are given, male masturbation is arguably (and I say arguably because I take it in context and read the sin of Oman as refusing to impregnate his brother’s wife and raise the child as his brother’s child, not masturbation but it is used to justify prohibiting male masturbation whereas we ladies can ring the Devil’s Doorbell all day long) prohibited so logging masturbation for men is far more justified than the period checks. If they want to get invasive, let’s fight back and start with DeSantis. Demand he report every time he chokes the chicken and have him explain why his baby batter is going to waste. The shower drain ain’t got a uterus or an ovum waiting to be fertilized there, Ronnie! 

[GreyhoundFan]

Sadly, you couldn’t make this up:

 

[NotQuiteMotY]

1 hour ago, GreyhoundFan said:

Sadly, you couldn’t make this up:

 

"When they're at their most fertile" and also one of the ages more likely to develop complications. Intrauterine growth restriction, for instance, where a risk factor is being a teenager. But it's dishonest of me to assume facts will get in the way of religious extremism...

[Audrey2]

Translated in the absolute grossest way possible,.

"I want my sweet young thing and if she dies in childbirth then I'll just get another sweet young thing. I totally have Matt Gaetz fantasies.'