Sweeping Anti-Choice Bill & Now Ohio (Merged Topics)

[dramallama]

Mine's Ross McGregor. I remember a few years back when they tried to pass a bill that would have not only made abortion illegal at all points and for all reasons, it would have made it a crime to leave the state or help someone leave the state to get an abortion. I sent him a letter and he sent me some condescending bullshit response that made me see red. I don't think it ever made it to a vote, but I've no doubt that he would have voted for it.

[Childless]

If someone takes it to court right away, a judge can put a stop to the bill while it's being hammered out in the courts.

This concerns me. I don't live in Ohio, but I live in a neighboring state that is probably more red and fucked up than Ohio. It's only a matter of time before our own idiot governor decides to try and emulate Ohio. Thank god I also border a blue state and thank god I have enough money and car to go there and get an abortion if I have to. If all else fails, I'm within driving distance of Canada. I feel really sorry for those who are not in the same financial situation I'm in. They are the ones that will really suffer. They are also the ones that will end up on welfare if they have children they cannot afford. I'm taking bets on how many of the morons that support this bill will start complaining when all of these unwanted children end up on welfare and/or in an already overburdened foster care system.

[teddybear]

Here in Kansas it is even worse at the moment. Our state legislature passed laws requiring stringent regulations for the three remaining clinics that still perform abortions. These new regulations will effectively shut down all three clinics. The way they are doing it really stinks too.

http://www.kansascity.com/2011/06/28/29 ... k=misearch

However, one clinic, a father/daughter doctor team, is filing suit to stop the law from taking effect. In a state like this one, I doubt it will go anywhere.

http://www.kansascity.com/2011/06/28/29 ... k=misearch

Remember, Kansas was the home of the late Dr. George Tiller. I still think Operation Rescue had a hand in his death.

http://motherjones.com/mojo/2009/06/geo ... cue-and-me

[Austin]

I was thinking about this on the way home from work and wondering what could be done if the clock is turned back 38 years. Hopefully, there would still be states where abortion would remain legal, but I imagine it wouldn't be many. If I had a daughter, I'd have her keep her passport up to date.

Women will not stop having abortions no matter what happens. They will just regularly die from the results.

I've heard from women who were helped by Dr. Tiller that he was a very caring person. Everyone on the far right fringe of this issue bears some moral responsibility for his death, IMO.

[Austin]

However, one clinic, a father/daughter doctor team, is filing suit to stop the law from taking effect. In a state like this one, I doubt it will go anywhere.

http://www.kansascity.com/2011/06/28/29 ... k=misearch

What about federal court? What circuit is Kansas in?

This is settled law and there's no way this should be happening. I'm feeling very demoralized by all of this and also thinking during my drive home on this beautiful day, "So much for the land of the free. . ."

[demgirl]

What about federal court? What circuit is Kansas in?

This is settled law and there's no way this should be happening. I'm feeling very demoralized by all of this and also thinking during my drive home on this beautiful day, "So much for the land of the free. . ."

It's the 10th circuit. Fairly conservative - for instance (http://www.now.org/issues/judicial/tymkovich.html). And it would be a federal lawsuit because it's a federal constitutional question. Would start in district court of Kansas, then 10th circuit, then (potentially) the Supreme Court of the US.

[teddybear]

And if it goes to the Supremes now, you can count on Rowe vs Wade being set aside.

[Belle0000]

<~~~Another disgusted central Ohioan.

I think it's not a coincidence that this Anti-Choice bill is being pushed through the same time as Senate Bill 5. For those outside of Ohio, SB5 is the anti-collective bargaining bill for public employees. I'll save my opinions on SB5 for anther time, but SB5 has the attention of a lot of people, and it's very convenient that another controversial bill is being pushed through at the same time.

I am absolutely disgusted. There are too many people in this state that say "oh, abortion is BAD!" and don't read the fine print. Just asked, and my very Republican roommate knew nothing about any of the details of this bill.

ETA: changed "law" to "bill" because there's a difference :)

[muffynbear]

I love how these conservative politicians can try to eliminate a woman's right to choose, yet Viagra is okay? Why is it okay for a man to make a reproductive choice yet a woman's rights are restricted?

[Gizmola]

I love how these conservative politicians can try to eliminate a woman's right to choose, yet Viagra is okay? Why is it okay for a man to make a reproductive choice yet a woman's rights are restricted?

Because most of the people making these decisions are men. And I'm sure they think men are completely capable of making their own reproductive choices. A woman, however, is either a slut who just uses abortion as birth control or an evil, heathen feminist who just hates men. At the heart of all of these bills - TX, OH - is the assumption that women are too stupid to take responsibility for their reproductive choices and that women have abortions because they're evil or stupid. The one in TX (correct me if I'm wrong) is based on the idea that if only a woman understood what abortion was all about she wouldn't have one and therefore we must force women to hear the heartbeat, see a sonogram, listen to the description, etc. Because no self-respecting woman, knowing all the facts, would choose abortion.

As for not having exceptions for rape, incest or the mother's mental health - I'm sure they think that women ask for rape, that incest conceptions are too rare to count and that a woman's mental health is meaningless. If she's too crazy to see a pregnancy to term she's too crazy to go through with an abortion.

With Viagra, however, men are capable of making the decision when to use Viagra. And the mental pain of ED is too great to expect men to just live with it. A woman with an unwanted pregnancy? She needs to learn to keep her legs together.

If you can't tell, I'm a little bit more than mildly disgusted.

[Rowan]

I agree. I saw recent poll results that indicated that if the election was held now instead of last November, Strickland would beat Kasich by something like 40 points. I don't remember the exact number, but it was surprisingly high.

Too bad that the next election won't be for another three-plus years. Kasich and his cronies can (and will) do an awful lot of damage by then.

And it's too bad that people didn't pay attention to SEE that he would be like this before he voted for them. The clues were there, people!

One of my mom's teacher co-workers voted for him because he was going to increase the inclement weather days back to 5 (from 3). Really? You based your entire decision on that and now your job (the school) has lost massive funding with more to be taken away? Dumbass.

ETA - there aren't many times to be proud of my hometown in the suburbs of Youngstown, but this is sure one of them.

[Rosa]

Don't you all remember McCain's air quotes around "health of the mother" when he was campaigning?

He's an asshole but he has a habit of triangulating where the GOP is on issues.

[Nothing2CHere]

:angry-screaming: My representative actually voted FOR two of the bills!!!!! (78 & 79) Evidently my neighborhood isn't as blue as I thought! At least he's not eligible to run for another term.... He better not vote against any future bills that would attempt to help these babies and their mothers, now.

My only hope is that Kaisch has offended so many people with State Bill 5, that even if they support the GOP's measures concerning abortion, that their anger over SB5 wins out.

[Austin]

And it's too bad that people didn't pay attention to SEE that he would be like this before he voted for them. The clues were there, people!

One of my mom's teacher co-workers voted for him because he was going to increase the inclement weather days back to 5 (from 3). Really? You based your entire decision on that and now your job (the school) has lost massive funding with more to be taken away? Dumbass.

ETA - there aren't many times to be proud of my hometown in the suburbs of Youngstown, but this is sure one of them.

I agree that the evidence was there if people were willing to look. It's not like he didn't have a voting record, or that his ties to the extreme right were hidden. But when hard times hit, as they did the entire country, people tend to flail about looking for someting else to latch onto, and I guess Ka-suck was it.

About your mom's teaching colleague: :angry-banghead:

[demgirl]

And if it goes to the Supremes now, you can count on Rowe vs Wade being set aside.

I really doubt it. I don't think they have the votes -- Kennedy has been really steadfast in his moderation on this issue and has voted to uphold the central tenent of Roe v. Wade. I can't see him flipping on the issue at this point. Which makes the numbers : uphold Roe v. Wade: Ginsberg, Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagen & Kennedy versus strike down Roe: Alito, Roberts, Scalia, Thomas

I think the real danger is that Ginsberg or Breyer will die/have to retire during a Republican president's term of office b/c the margin on Roe is razor-thin -- 5 to 4.

[Austin]

I really doubt it. I don't think they have the votes -- Kennedy has been really steadfast in his moderation on this issue and has voted to uphold the central tenent of Roe v. Wade. I can't see him flipping on the issue at this point. Which makes the numbers : uphold Roe v. Wade: Ginsberg, Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagen & Kennedy versus strike down Roe: Alito, Roberts, Scalia, Thomas

I think the real danger is that Ginsberg or Breyer will die/have to retire during a Republican president's term of office b/c the margin on Roe is razor-thin -- 5 to 4.

Is PP vs Casey when Kennedy upheld the central tenet, in your view? Because my details are fuzzy, but I remember that being pretty much a landmark case where the anti-choice people became very discouraged b/c that decision really affirmed Roe v Wade as settled law, so I've placed my limited faith/hope in that to a degree.

My nightmare is one of the older moderate/liberal judges croaking on a republican watch. I love my country, but things would never be the same after that, for women, for minorities, for the disabled, for the environment and everything else. And that's not overstating it in the least, I don't believe.

[Nothing2CHere]

OK, analyzing the voting results a little more, every Democrat voted against 125 (the heart beat bill). However, a lot of them, like my representative, voted FOR 78 and 79. So in other words, they're pro-life, but not "that" crazy. *sigh* Mad props to Gerald Stebelton (R-Lancaster), the only republican who voted NO for all three bills.

Full disclosure: I consider myself pro-life, but as in I support ALL life, the living as well (if not more than) the waiting-to-be-born. In my current life situation, I could never see myself having an abortion. This does not mean, however, that I have a right to make that decision for others, and who's to say that one day I don't end up in a position where I do have to make that choice myself, for whatever reason (so, I guess that technically makes me pro-choice after all). I know that abortions will never stop happening, whether legal or not, and I know that it's none of my business what others choose to do. I don't want to see abortion become illegal, I would like it to become unnecessary (as much as possible) which means funding programs for real sex education, access to birth control, and programs to assist babies and mothers. I know, I'm such a dreamer! These representatives who did vote for any combination of these bills upset me because evidently they DO think they have the right to make these choices for others. So much for less government interference, GOP!

[Austin]

OK, analyzing the voting results a little more, every Democrat voted against 125 (the heart beat bill). However, a lot of them, like my representative, voted FOR 78 and 79. So in other words, they're pro-life, but not "that" crazy. *sigh* Mad props to Gerald Stebelton (R-Lancaster), the only republican who voted NO for all three bills.

Full disclosure: I consider myself pro-life, but as in I support ALL life, the living as well (if not more than) the waiting-to-be-born. In my current life situation, I could never see myself having an abortion. This does not mean, however, that I have a right to make that decision for others, and who's to say that one day I don't end up in a position where I do have to make that choice myself, for whatever reason (so, I guess that technically makes me pro-choice after all). I know that abortions will never stop happening, whether legal or not, and I know that it's none of my business what others choose to do. I don't want to see abortion become illegal, I would like it to become unnecessary (as much as possible) which means funding programs for real sex education, access to birth control, and programs to assist babies and mothers. I know, I'm such a dreamer! These representatives who did vote for any combination of these bills upset me because evidently they DO think they have the right to make these choices for others. So much for less government interference, GOP!

I took a moment to write a note of thanks to Rep. Stebelton.

As far as your disclosure, that probably accurately describes my position. I guess if I had to nail it down, I would consider myself personally pro-life (meaning, for me and my body), but pro-choice politically.

Having said that, as a survivor of sexual assault, I don't know what I would have done in that situation had the unthinkable occurred, which it did not. As you say, none of us knows what position we may find ourselves for whatever reason.

I would consider your position a pro-choice one. JMO

[demgirl]

Is PP vs Casey when Kennedy upheld the central tenet, in your view? Because my details are fuzzy, but I remember that being pretty much a landmark case where the anti-choice people became very discouraged b/c that decision really affirmed Roe v Wade as settled law, so I've placed my limited faith/hope in that to a degree.

Austin -- yeah, Planned Parenthood v. Casey would be the case. We actually discussed it in law school in several different classes and all my my profs agreed that the main point to take from the case was that Kennedy (and at the time O'Connor) reaffirmed Roe v. Wade (which was big news, b/c people thought PP v. Casey was going to go one of two ways -- overturn Roe and make abortion a state, not constitutional issue, or keep abortional a constitutional issue and legal but put it on some other basis than Roe (i.e. something other than the trimester break down of privacy interests). Instead, Kennedy and O'Conner basically affirmed the major holding of Roe that abortions during the first trimester are properly the purview of the mother and her doctor.

I just have a hard time seeing Kennedy walking away from it at this point, because he's been so consistently moderate in the past about his views on things like abortion, gay rights, etc.

[Nothing2CHere]

I took a moment to write a note of thanks to Rep. Stebelton.

That's a good idea. I wrote to my rep basically saying hey, since you voted to make this harder, you better support some programs to help these women and kids, now! I bet Stebelton needs some support now.

I would consider your position a pro-choice one. JMO

I know, but I loathe labels, because once someone hears that you're "pro-life" or "pro-choice" or "democrat" or "republican" or whatever, they usually immediately start making all sorts of assumptions. I only started admitting that yes, I'm a feminist, within the past five years. And even though I lean so far to the left in a lot of matters I'd tip a boat over, I refuse to register for any political party. I also use pro-life like I said above, in the larger sense of I don't just not want to see abortions happen if possible, but I don't want to see soldiers get killed in war, I want shelters for the homeless and food pantries for the hungry and I want universal health care for all, and as much as I don't want to pay to keep a serial killer in jail I really don't think it's right for us to then kill him, either....

My God, I'm such a hippie dippie tree hugger!

[dawn9476]

You know this is an awful bill when even Ohio's Right to Life is weary of it. I saw on last night's Rachel Maddow that Ohio's Right To Lfe doesn't like this bill because they are afraid that the action that is sure to come from courts to strike down this law will jeopardize other laws in the state to curb abortion.

[emmiedahl]

As far as your disclosure, that probably accurately describes my position. I guess if I had to nail it down, I would consider myself personally pro-life (meaning, for me and my body), but pro-choice politically.

Ditto here. I would not personally have an abortion unless I was in a situation where Jewish law demanded it. I don't think so at least. But my religious beliefs are not those of the planet, and it would be insane for me to demand that everyone else obey my religious laws. That's the crazy, crazy thing about dominionism--they don't get that religious law =/= common law and morality.

[teddybear]

I have complex feelings about abortion. I firmly believe it is a tragedy for everyone involved. I think it is probably not a good thing unless it is a last ditch effort where there is no other option. HOWEVER!!! It is not for me to decide whether or not a woman should have an abortion and I am firmly opposed to any legal restrictions against the procedure. That is for a woman and her physician to decide. I am especially horrified by the back door politics (like we have here in Kansas) used to deny a woman the ability to make this decision for herself. And, while this may be a sexist remark to make, I especially think that male activists and politicians have no right to even express a negative opinion on this matter, even less to try to pass legislation forbidding it. I have a feeling that if men were able to get pregnant, abortion would be written into the Constitution.

I also can't help but wonder is this issue is nothing more than a way for men to try and control women. Keep them barefoot and pregnant and down on the farm. Control their wombs and control the world!

[dramallama]

I guess I'll be the odd one out and say I only think abortion is a problem in the sense that it's a tragedy that we don't have better sex ed with universal health care and pregnancy prevention resources, because it's clearly more difficult physically and financially (and for some - emotionally) to get and endure an abortion than it would be to never have an unwanted pregnancy to begin with. Morally, ethically, whatever - I don't have that kind of problem with it. I don't have children and I do not ever want to have children, and I take reasonable steps to prevent pregnancy, but should it happen - the first phone call I'm making after the test is to a clinic. I have no qualms about it. I'm just lucky that I am capable of paying out of pocket for an abortion and have the means to take time off of work to do so or even travel to another state, should it come to that.

Don't be surprised if their next targets, if they get their way on abortion, are the pill/shot/implant and the IUD.

Ohio's "heartbeat bill", while disgusting, actually pisses me off less than what Kansas is trying. Ohio's law will be blocked in court, but the sneaky backdoor way Kansas is going about it? I don't know. If it's successful, I'm sure a bunch of states are going to try to copy it, and fast.

[teddybear]

I can't find anything online yet, but tonight on Rachel Maddow something else was revealed about the new Kansas anti-abortion law. It seems that the records of any woman getting an abortion have to be made available on demand to the licensing agency which is not under the Kansas Board of Healing Arts. I can't imagine this would be legal under HIPPA.