RSS Feed for This PostCurrent Article

How Obama Sold Women Out

img-author-photo-amy-siskind_103408670700Reprinted from TheDailyBeast.com with the express permission of Amy Siskind, founder of The New Agenda, an organization dedicated to improving the lives of women and girls.



BS Top - Siskind Obama Women
Jose Luis Magana / AP Photo

The health-care abortion mess is just the latest example of how Barack Obama took women’s votes—then let the country’s majority constituency down.

We knew it would end eventually. Just like a Hollywood romance, great love affairs just don’t seem to stand the test of time. As the Obama administration began, we were gleefully informed by a leading lady feminist that President Obama was Christmas and Hannukah and New Years all rolled into one when it came to women’s issues. Turns out, it’s a bit more like April Fools.

For the millions of women who voted for Obama on his promise to protect their reproductive rights, this past weekend’s whipsaw on abortion funding is just the latest example of a president who frankly could care less about women beyond their votes. Ladies, we were sold a political brand name that touted diversity. But we were delivered a president with a woman problem. Now it’s time to do something about it.

He appointed fewer women into his cabinet than President Bill Clinton. He surrounded himself with czars, more than 90% of whom are male. He appointed Larry Summers, of “girls are inferior in math and science” fame, to a key economic post. And he played basketball with men and men only.

Women’s love affair with Obama started in 2007. Some loved the idea of him—while not questioning his ideas. So when some women leaders heard the candidate say things like “sweetie” or “you’re likable enough,” or saw Obama’s speechwriter Jon Favreau groping the breast of a cardboard cutout of Hillary Clinton on Facebook (no comment), these leaders ignored the signs of subtle misogyny. The National Organization for Women (under its former leader) endorsed its first all-male ticket. And NARAL endorsed Obama over Sen. Clinton, even though she had a proven track record on reproductive rights. In January 2009, Ms. Magazine’s cover featured a now-infamous image of Obama in a superman pose sporting a t-shirt that reads: This is What a Feminist Looks Like.

With these women leaders behind him, President Obama felt he could be himself. He appointed fewer women into his cabinet than President Bill Clinton. He surrounded himself with czars, more than 90% of whom are male. He appointed Larry Summers, of “girls are inferior in math and science” fame, to a key economic post. He played basketball, golfed and fished with men and men only. He had beers with Skip Gates, but ignored it when Rihanna was almost strangled to death. And so on.

The love affair started to fade with Obama’s off-handed response during an MSNBC interview questioning his all-male outings: “I think this is bunk.” That remark gave women a reason to take a closer look at the inner workings of Obama and his ideas. And just as Betty Friedan described the subtlety of sexism as “the problem that has no name,” “bunk” revealed that the boys club was still alive and well at the White House.

Peter Beinart: Why Democrats Were Smart to Bail on Abortion

Dana Goldstein: How Abortion Splits the Reform Coalition

Paul Begala: Forget BipartisanshipAnd then came the Stupak Amendment. There were signs that Obama was agnostic on choice, but this sealed the deal. Analyst Taylor Marsh sums it up most eloquently: “It was Pres. Obama who opened the door to sell us out when he decided to put the Hyde Amendment in the budget, something Bill Clinton never did. But Mr. Obama didn’t stop there. During the stimulus fight, at the first sign of displeasure, our president personally asked that contraceptives be taken out. Now the president seems ready to finish the job, with Democrats in the House helping him do it.”

But did women let this pass? Not this time. The sleeping giant—America’s majority constituency—is awakening. Note how few men are speaking out about the fact that a major issue for women was thrown under the bus to get a deal done: That women were not valued. It is the women leaders doing the talking and the typing.

Women’s organization such as Emily’s List, NOW, Planned Parenthood and The New Agenda spoke out—each with its own message and solutions—loud and clear. Women on Capitol Hill, led by vocal heroines like Rep. Diana DeGette of Colorado and Rep. Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut, built a coalition unwilling to sign a bill including the Stupak Amendment. Passionate women advocates such as Phyllis Chesler and Jane Hamsher among countless others penned their displeasure.

  • steel magnolia

    And we could have had Hillary.

  • alibe

    Anyone who supported 0bama should not be surprised at his rebuke of women’s rights. 0bama never let an opportunity pass to dis women. Sweetie, 99 problems and a bitch ain’t one of them, flicking Hillary off his shoulders, wiping dog doo off his shoes as if it was Hillary. Just a few memories that continue to tick me off.

  • lorac

    Exactly. The signs were there from the beginning. And he didn’t just steal women’s votes by pretending he was a feminist – he stole them when he told lies about Hillary and Bill. (And that’s not even mentioning the literal theft at caucuses and the RBC meeting.) But actually, I think it’s more about his narcissism than his lack of feminism.

    I have to go wash the Taylor Marsh germs off my screen…uuuggghhh….

  • FLDemFem

    How much do you want to bet that Viagra is still fully covered??

    Anyone who thought that Obama would keep his promises hasn’t been paying attention to his career. He says what he thinks people want to hear to get their votes and then does as he pleases. And as the other posters have said, the signs were there during the campaign that he didn’t think women were worthy of any consideration, other than being used to get elected. Remember what Rev. Wright said after Obama tossed him under the bus? “He is doing what he has to do to get elected. He is a politician. That’s what they do.” That is a paraphrase, not an actual quote..too late to look it up. But that’s the sense of what he said, and he knew Obama for 20 years.

  • Nobama4me

    Well, Planned Parenthood reaction was: they are going to get the big guns out,their strongest weapon, the White House in the person of the POTUS.They are writing their letter as we speak. I am not kidding: it would be hilariuous if it were not so delusional. Those dimwits and their members think POTUS had nothing to do with the Stupid/Sepsis Amendment and he will be their knight in shining armor coming to the rescue of the damsels in distress.What a bunch of maroons!!!

  • ImaLindatoo

    I’m beginning to think all male Democrats have a problem with women. Their history doesn’t bode well. They speak of women, except their fellow Senators or Reps (in public anyhow) with no respect, demeaning & belittling words and behavior. The picture is now clear. Remember how they so disliked Hillary, then moved on to Palin and now Bachman. Any woman of power scares there balls inward.

    Yet, I can’t help but want to laugh at these groups that didn’t pay attention to reality and jumped on Obama’s smokey hope wagon for a ride. They deserve to be the laughing stock with no credibility that they find themselves now.

  • Prime Obot

    Um, didn’t Obama just publicly announce yesterday that the Stupak amendment will be removed from the final bill in committee?

  • graywolf

    Jeez…….how DUMB are you people?
    You voted for a goddamn BUMPER STICKER; and now you expect the bumper sticker to really be “hope and change.”
    Pretty much anyone under 45 is a self-centered, naive baby…with all the attendant emotional development of a self-centered, naive baby.
    Did I just describe a large number of Obamabots?
    Yes I did.
    Live with it.
    You wanted it….you got it.

  • Prime Obot

    How many Democratic Congresswomen are there, compared with how many Republican Congresswomen?

  • http://thenewagenda.net/ Amy Siskind

    Um – NO!

    Read the piece and click on the link on the word “equivocate” and you’ll see what he said.

  • http://thenewagenda.net/ Amy Siskind

    Hillary would NEVER (I repeat NEVER) have let the Hyde Amendment let alone this be part of the bill.

    Good job Nancy Keenan at NARAL – good thought endorsing Obama over Clinton!

  • ImaLindatoo

    lol WHAT? I guess what I said flew over your head or you wouldn’t have even tried to mix the argument.

  • sandi78

    None of this is a surpeise for all the reasons already mentioned, but it’s somewhat stunning to watch it happen.

  • sandi78

    None of this is a surprise for all the reasons already mentioned, but it’s somewhat stunning to watch it happen.

  • sandi78

    Sorry,I don’t know how that happened.

  • Scout

    Wasn’t that endorsement outrageous? When I mentioned it to friends–nothing. Just like when I mentioned his tour with the ex-gay McClurkin, or his never showing up at a Pride parade, or his near constant “present” vote. All ignored because of the rapture of Obama. What a sham.

    You are right. No-one needs a crystal ball to know that Hillary would never have supported the Stupak ammendment. She would have had a health bill that was not a major give away to the insurance industry, too.

    Thank you for a good post and for the work you do. Keep it up!

  • Scout

    Me, too. I could not believe my intelligent friends voted for such an obvious misogynist.

  • Scout

    And even if he did, he has proven many times over that his word means nothing. Politics as usual. He’s the Lying King.

  • TeakWoodKite

    How many Democratic Congresswomen are there?

    PBot Google won’t tell me , it keeps coming back with “did you mean ‘Democratic Congressmen’? (go figure, PM317)

    but “How Many Members of Congress are Women”, returns your favorite resource as ;

    How many women Members are there in the U.S. Congress today?
    In the House there are 74 female Representatives. The Senate has 16 females. These are the highest numbers of women Members in the history of the Congress.

    Of the 16 female Senators, 11 are Democrats and 5 are Republicans. Of the 74 female Representatives, 53 are Democrats and 21 are Republicans

    .

    So this one of the problems I saw as I watched the debate all Saturday. I cited a report from Capitol daily reporter on C-Span saying that Pelosi was the one to broker this deal after 16 democrats balked after being threatened by the ArchBishops. Nancy Pelosi SOLD OUT the women of this country to pass a health monster out of the House. Period. BO, he is indifferent. He doesn’t care as long as it has his name on it. oops!
    So get it out the door and punt it over to the Senate where Boxer is saying they can stuff this DEMOCRATIC amendment down Nancy’s throat.
    Must be a few people pissed at Pelosi. Open wide Nancy.

    Can I see the the Members haggle this out live on C-Span when it goes to conference??? Bets anyone? What? That horse called “Women are from Venus” is at 50 to 1 on a muddy track?

    Amy Suskin, thank you so much! What makes these people think a womans body is a political bargining chip and willing to trade a way the majority constitutants wishes?

  • donjo

    Anyone who supported 0bama should not be surprised at his rebuke of women’s rights. 0bama never let an opportunity pass to dis women.

    Who wouldn’t do the same if they had to live with Michelle?

  • trist

    What is this “love affair” crap?!?! If you’re feeling guilty because you were one of those so-called feminists who was suckered in by the one, and are NOW crying “if only there had been warning signs before we voted…” Ummm… all I can say is take a flying leap! Well I COULD say much more, but it might get me banned!
    The signs were there, and there were PLENTY of them!! PUMAS have been screaming at the top of our lungs all along for the rest of you to see them! You wouldn’t, now this is what we have.

    How anyone who claims to champion womens rights, and the first real chance we have to elect a qualified and worthy woman as President, you all chuck her to the curb in favor of the man-child candidate, because you fell in love, or whatever you want to call it, can STILL claim to be an advocate for those rights is SERIOUSLY delusional. You are NO friend to women, nor people in general for doing all you could to stick us with this narcissistic, clueless, a-hole when we COULD have had true leadership and someone who actually thinks of someone other than himself!

  • TeakWoodKite

    “and what that tells me is that there needs to be some more work before we get to the point where we’re not changing the status quo” says BO.

    mmmm mmmm mmm love that “Hope and Change” status quo!!!

    The bill prevents individuals from purchasing insurance outside of a government-run insurance exchange and only allows them to purchase policies that have been approved by the Health Choices Commissioner Czar. And the reason why existing restrictions on taxpayer funding for abortion need to be applied to private insurance for the first time, is that for the first time taxpayer subsidies are being used for people to purchase private insurance.

    .

  • FranSC

    Well, Amy, it may be “a good thought” from the NARAL representative that “and we could have had Hillary”, but for me it’s akin to “crying over spilt milk”. I will have a hard time ever forgiving those groups for what they did to Hillary. As a left of center dem who helped win the battle for abortion rights, they will never get another penny of my money regardless of what they say.

    Apparently women like those of us at NQ had no voice where NARAL and N.O.W. were concerned for one very simple reason – those women think that being feminist is about being pro-choice. We tried to tell anyone that would listen 0bama did not have a feminist bone in his body.

    He voted for late-term abortions when people like Senator Barbara Boxer, even, did not. That is all 0 thought he needed to do to get the women sewed up. Frankly these groups led him to erroneously think in this way. 0bama gets no help from Michelle on this subject because she does not have a clue either. The race issue will trump women every time with most AA women.

  • FranSC

    Yes, I think Taylor Marsh’s outrage is a bit disingenuous!

  • BINKY

    I wish someone would explain to me why taxpayer dollars should pay for abortions. I limited the number of my children through preventative measures — and there are a variety of products available for that. I’m not talking rape here — but if someone chooses not to practice birth control, I truly don’t understand why they expect the taxpayers to pay for the abortion. Abortion rights have not been negated. If anyone chooses abortion then they should be prepared to pay for it or buy a rider to their own insurance that would pay for the abortion.

  • http://thecoffeeshopblog.blogspot.com/ Rose

    The Obama-driven Congress has just created a whole new class of criminal – the law abiding, hard-working honest person who doesn’t choose to buy health insurance.

    They did this without blinking an eye.

    Rights – all kinds of rights, including abortion rights, mean nothing to this Administration. And you would be wise to look back at all the rhetoric of the left during the Bush years. Because the activists clearly trumpeted the things that they are now doing. “Your issues are your own.”

    We’re gonna be lucky if we still recognize this country by 2012.

    I hope you are right. I HOPE the sleeping giant is awakened. I HOPE the promise of the PUMA is realized, that we set aside our partisan hatreds for a greater love of COUNTRY and CONSTITUTION, and RIGHTS, to freedom of choice in all manner of thins, and the individual responsibility that not only comes with it but makes all things possible.

    They’ll put abortion back in before they are done, that deal was only crafted to buy the temporary support they needed, and the people whose votes they won will be stabbed in the back.

    But when the abortion funding is added back in, don’t forget the larger issue – all rights are being flushed away, and you have just been branded worse than a burglar, a rapist, you can go to jail for 5 years for not buying an ‘approved’ plan.

    …..and on a lighter note, check out Nancy Pelosi, telling people how horrible it is that Congress would vote on a bill they haven’t seen or read… “If you have to twist people’s arms…”

  • hc123

    Um, please excuse Prime Obot, his brain is addled with kool aid.

  • FranSC

    BTW, I don’t think any sleeping giant is being awakened on this issue. This issue splits women right down the middle – pro-choice (50%) and pro-life (50%).

    If women ever come together to elect a woman for president, it won’t be through this issue. Will it take another 100 years for us to learn that?

    African women seem to have learned that by electing a woman President of Liberia. They were quoted as saying, “Politics divide women”, but issues like rape, enslavement, and violence against women did bring them together.

    Until American women come together on issues such as these that they CAN agree on like sexism, misogyny, disrespect, equal pay for equal work, the boardrooms of Corporate America, etc., we will make no progress. If liberal women continue to let the hugely divisive issues of abortion and lesbian rights define feminism as well as conservative women letting Christianity be their requirement for being accepted by them, we will stay in this intractable state.

  • http://www.vitabits.co.uk/slimming hoodia gordonii

    This post seems to be great because it gives information about the women power and status.Barack Obama has done a great work by voting out for the women and give them best support.I want to ask why Taxpayer dollar should pay for the abortions.Abortions is legal situation and can be avoided because the new born child is future of tomorrow and According to the Save child concept ,it is considered to be the crime.

  • abycat

    Get a grip Amy. This abortion dead horse is so stinking old and tired that no one cares anymore. It has been beaten to death. Let’s see, where is all the so called feminist outrage over this????? Crickets………………….. Spare me.

  • hc123

    What taxpayer dollars should and should not do is certainly a valid discussion, but I think the author is pointing out that Obama sold progressive women a bill of goods on which he will not ever deliver.

    One aspect of this was him pretending to be a strong pro-choice candidate during the democrat primaries (ditto for gay rights). He is really an opportunist, but plenty of people didnt see this or didnt want to see this back when it mattered.

    I cannot tell you how many pro-choice, progressive female friends told me they preferred Obama to Hillary Clinton during the primaries (“I just dont like her”). Watching them spin his administration would be amusing if it were not so sad.

  • FranSC

    You’re right, Nobama4me. This is no longer about politics for B0 – he used them for his purposes and it won’t matter how many guns they bring out. To be nice, they have been screwed!

    He is still under the illusion women are for him because he is pro-choice. He has no concept that the Healthcare amendment (which btw, was forced on Nancy Pelosi by the Catholic Archbishops that she stayed on the phone with all of last Friday) is a breech of support. Pelosi will listen to no one, but she listened to the archbishops since as a Catholic she stays in hot water with them over her own pro-choice leanings.

    Perhaps this was a concession to her own faith which opens up another can of worms about separation of church and state. This was exactly why people were scared to death to vote for John Kennedy for POTUS. Nancy Pelosi has played out their fears.

  • beachnan

    I agree that whether or not abortions should be paid by us, the taxpayers, should be debated. I believe that one reason why women have been afforded free abortions is that it would be cheaper for the government in the long run. I imagine the cost to support these babies until the age of 18 through public assistance is staggering.

  • beachnan

    Abycat, I don’t think the issue is dead, it is taken for granted. I remember, a long time ago, when this topic was debated back and forth, and women marched for the right to make decisions concerning their own bodies, their own reproductive rights. We won those rights for our generation and future generations. Women of younger generations, who have never had to worry about these rights, have taken them for granted. I imagine the outrage will take place if and when those rights are taken away. Then they may appreciate the efforts of the women who have carried this torch for so many years.

  • http://www.hillaryorbust.com Hillary or Bust

    I agree. I don’t think taxpayers should have to pay for abortions. I am pro-choice.

  • jbjd

    No; we could not have had Hillary. Why do you suppose Nancy Pelosi, Chair of the 2008 DNC Convention, prevented a roll call vote on the floor of the Convention? Because after the over allocation of delegates to black districts and under allocation to Latino districts; and hiring ACORN to rig the caucuses; and bribing the press to print the ‘news’ no way Hillary could win, when she was winning; and ratcheting up the fraud when that still didn’t make her quit; and taking delegates pledged to her away from her and giving them to him; and harassing her pledged delegates to switch to him before the Convention, even in vote binding states, where this conduct was illegal; Nancy Pelosi was going to deliver BO’s nomination and sign those bogus Certifications of Nomination swearing he was Constitutionally qualified so that state election officials would print his name on the ballot. Like she was hired to do. And she managed to pull this off at the last minute by hiding the votes of those hundreds of delegates from vote binding states, like CA.

    This was election fraud, fair and square. Hillary could only have prevented BO from walking away with the nomination by blowing the lid off the whole D Party.

  • Dbb

    If you care so much about legal abortion available to poor women without driving 600 miles, why was the New Agenda silent about the Dr. Tiller murder, Amy? Also, did you notice your hero Sarah Palin stuck a shiv in the back of Dede Scozzofava in NY23, endorsing the whackjob loser Doug Hoffman? Not to mention backing Rick Perry over Kaye Hutchinson in the upcoming Texas governor’s race? So much for TNA’s cause to elect more women to public office regardless of their politics.

  • Northwest rain

    No YOU are NOT.

  • kgirl1028

    Ok i’m prochoice, but please explain to me why i should have to pay for an elective abortion. If the mother’s life is not endangered kill your baby on your own dime. If it’s a case of rape and or abuse i might think about it. OTher than that, it’s not different than a boob job. I can think of other places i’d rather have my tax money spent. Some time even the prochoice community goes to far. If you want us to keep our hands off your body, keep your hands out of my pocket. That way we can all keep our opinions to ouselves. I’m agree with abortion because i don’t want a room full of men making intiment decisions for women, besides it is us not them who bear the brunt of child rearing also I’d rather have selfish people not raise kids because children deserve better than what Susan Smith did to her two. But I do know a fetus is person and one who is a whole lot more innocent than most of the dregs on death row whom i already have to pay to kill, and are mearly getting the axe becasue they are an inconvience to some one. So if you don’t have a medical/psychiatric reason for why you can’t carry this baby to term then it needs to be just like any other elective surgery and you pay for it yourself. Besides the door swings both ways when yhou introduce the state into someting so sensative who to say they want swing it back the other way. it might be cheaper to kill a baby than to have to place one more person on the national health care system? Or what happens if we get a prolifer and he get’s rid of it period. Ever think of that?

  • jennifer

    Abortion is LEGAL. A fact of which continues to be lost in the debate.

    As a taxpayer I think I can name numerous medical procedures that my tax dollars should not pay for–how about anything that is directly a result of your abuse of alcohol, illegal drugs, steroids, smoking. Why do those items not get thrown under the bus, too?

    Why is abortion–a women’s right to choose always the quick and easy route to go when it comes to compromise or “common ground”. Why are those people we elect on the premise of “pro-choice” really not pro-choice at all.

  • kenoshamarge

    I don’t think taxpayer money should pay for abortions either. So I guess if I say that I am Pro-Choice, NorthWestRain gets to decide that I am not.

    I believe that you have the right to choose. I don’t believe you have the right to have your choice paid for by others. If that’s not being Pro-Choice in some people’s eyes, so be it.

    I’ve been called so many names and insulted so many times by members of my former party that I quite honestly don’t give a rat’s ass what they say about me anymore.

    I am and always have been Pro-Choice. And I am and always have been against taxpayer dollars funding abortions.

  • jennifer

    my a@@ you’re pro-choice

    how about we change the debate a bit. you are a lazy couch potato about 300 pounds, smoker. Your best days are behind you because you abused steriods as a college student. My tax dollars pay for your unemployment benefits because your increasing mental issues cause you to not get along with anyone or keep a job.

    Now you run to the government, saying “pay for this, pay for this”? Why should my tax dollars pay for one dime of your self inflicted addictions health problems?

    I say leave you in your mother’s basement to rot.

  • Texas Playwright

    While each important issue,including women’s reproductive rights and the massive misogyny of the 2008 elections were clearly exposed, the larger lesson for the electorate is:

    bho the fraud is bho the fraud. He was handpicked to destroy America. The fact that he is a lying, cheating, stealing, amoral, America hating misogynist just helped his puppeteers pick him.

  • tek

    What really stinks about this is that Catholic bishops sitting in Nancy Pelosi’s office dictated this amendment. (Pelosi, Durbin, Kerry, Kennedy–all Catholic). So now the Catholic church is running the U. S. Well, we don’t have to wonder what will happen with amnestying 50 million illegal hispanics.

  • tek

    How about this, why should my tax dollars be given to the tune of billions to Christian churches and organizations just because they are that particular religion and the christians voted for first Bush then Obama?

    Why should billions of my tax dollars be given to particular neighborhoods because they are black or hispanic and those groups voted for Obama?

    Why should my tax dollars be given to corporate farmers in subsidies so they can undercut every other farmer in the world creating a crisis of wherewithal in other countries that the tax payers of America now have to support? These people are already making billions from their corporate food, they don’t need my hard-earned money.

    Why should my tax dollars be given in the billions to American oil companies in subsidies when these people are already making billions?

  • LDW

    Are the contraceptive measures you took legal? Was a doctor involved – either to write a prescription for the pill or spermicidal jelly; fit a diaphragm; insert an I.U.D.; or tie your tubes (or vasectomy)? To get the morning after pill? Do you think these things should be insurable services even in government subsidized healthcare?

    None of the methods mentioned above is fool-proof. In fact, the only thing guaranteed to work is to not have sex.

    So, the woman who finds herself pregnant with an unwanted child, despite using birth control, has a legal option to terminate the pregnancy. If doctors’ visits to obtain legal contraception are covered, why shouldn’t legal abortion services also be covered?

    Taxpayers have no choice about many things their taxes pay for. A taxpayer might disagree with the tax exempt status of many religious organizations or charities they don’t support. A taxpayer might disagree with the present use of the armed forces, for example, or even be a pacifist who wants to disband the army altogether.

    Your individual luck with contraceptives should not be the grounds on which a law is made for all women. You may or may not be in favour of abortion, but abortion is legal. Why shouldn’t it be covered? Because you don’t agree with it? If taxes could only be used to cover services no one objected to, many things you rely on might also not be covered. For example, rural people in your state might not approve of the state subsidizing road repair in your town. Young people might not agree with subsidizing Medicare for the elderly. Rich people in your state might blame the poor for their lot in life, and not support any welfare or Medicaid programs. Jehovah’s Witnesses might disagree with the government paying for blood transfusion. Homeopaths might disagree with paying for antibiotics for most conditions.

    The belief that an embryo is equivalent to a full-term infant and should have all the rights of a child is a religious and moral idea that many people don’t agree with. Some religions think sex outside of marriage is a sin, and should not be permitted. Should single males and females be denied medical coverage for any contraception-related doctors’ visits?

    Just because someone isn’t as lucky as you, or doesn’t believe exactly what you believe, cannot be the basis for laws constraining behaviour in a large pluralistic society like the United States, or the result would be chaos.

  • jennifer

    the subject is health care reform

    as to your other points, its called democratic elections and they have consequences.

  • cotrip

    I guess this means that since I’m against paying taxes for war that “KILLS” people, then we should and will no longer have war. Don’t I wish! But that will never happen.

  • Nobama4me

    You forgot Viagra. Abortions are not Botox or facelifts. Plus, as I understand (in as much as anyone can understand this bill)the legislation doesn’t differentiate between abortions and miscarriages. So if a woman miscarries and needs, say, a D&C, it will not be covered: she can pay for it herself or,if she can’t afford it, die. I would like for someone,smarter than me, to clarify this point, if possible. Thanks.

  • Tony Stark

    They made their beds endorsing Obama. Now they fully deserve to sleep in it.

  • Unabashed Galt

    The problem his hand-pickers are going to have is the same problem Dr. Frankenstein had when he created his monster: he can’t ultimately be controlled. Unintended consequences can’t be avoided.

  • grayslady

    Isn’t being pro-choice about choice? One choice is to continue the pregnancy to childbirth. The other choice is to terminate the pregnancy. Why shouldn’t we be paying for both options? They both constitute reproductive health care.

  • LDW

    Rose you are a freedom loving American, no doubt. But outside of America, in other rich first world nations, healthcare comes under strict government control.

    The Swiss and the Taiwanese were some of the late coverters to strict government controls over healthcare, but they are now firmly onside.

    In all other developed nations, the government regulates healthcare and mandates coverage for everyone. The poor and disabled are subsidized, and no one goes bankrupt because of medical bills.

    These other nations provide first rate medical services for their people, and they do it for less than what Americans pay to have 47 million uninsured and some 30 million more underinsured.

    The World Health Organization only ranks America 37th in positive health indicators.

    Healthcare expenditure, per capita (2007)OECD countries
    USA $7,290
    Switzerland $4,417
    Canada $3,895
    France $3,601
    United Kingdom $2,992
    Average of all OECD countries: $2,964

    http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/46/2/38980580.pdf

  • kgirl1028

    Jennifter i’m not a smoker, I don’t think i way 300 punds. And yes i’m prochoie. But dear you are not entitled to my money to pay for wanting to nix your kid, and there nothing wrong with my believing that. At age 32 I am beginning to appreciate all forms of life, because i find it miraculous, i have problem killing ants these days. See unlike you I’m comfortable with my belief systems, to the point were I understand that reality and my belief systems are two different things. I can except that fetuses are people too, but without proper guidence and training are dangerous. So if parents don’t have the capasity for what ever reason to raise that child and give it the love it needs to develope into a capable health happy human beings then they shouldnt be parents. Nor am I oblivious to the fact that giving birth to a chlild with handy caps means worrying what will happen to that child after they are gone, and the sress, and the medical care, time and attention. I work in mental health and I work with mentally retard people who have no one who really loves them taking care of them, no one should have to experience that, but as i nurse I view all life as viable. And unlike most I belive fetuses are not potential people but people with potientual and if it’s own mother can’t see this then she doesnt need to be a mother. I take parenting seriously which is why currently i’m not one. It requires a selflessnes i just don’t have. I grew up watching my mother wear the same dresses that she made when i was 3 or 4 almost until I went to college, so that me and my brother could have the best or close to it. So no one without that level of detication should ever become a parent.

    Few people understand the magnitude of what Susan Msith did to her boys, sure she killed them that’s bad. But the first thing and infant learns is trust, and the person they trust more than anything it is their mother. So when those two little boys were sitting in car seats frighten crying for their mother, and she didn’t come, there entire psychosocial foundation was obliderated. Do i wish she had and an abortion vs her getting these two children to trust her, hell fraken yeah. Having a 3 year old spending the last minutes of their life being beaten to death or a two year old having it’s mother bash it into cement floors hurts a whole lot more painful than being nixed when you don’t hae a complex immune system to feel what is being done to you, But don’t expect me to think ther is any fairness to a situation and i’m not pretend there is. Someone else is being punished for the actions of other,s and if you can’t understand the gravity of such a decision then maybe YOU don’t need to be pro-choice because it is evident you don’t have a clear understanding of what you are endorsing. I”m a person who has never been afriad of information because everything I believe I have thought it through, so i can embrace the idea that fetuses are people, yet be prochoice. But i’ not going to pay for your choice either, unless there is a medical reason to do so nor am I going to take lip off of people who support causese they refuse to think through because they don’t want to understand and or realize what they are doing or supporting. But don’t expect me pay for this act when there are a whole slew of contraceptive that i’m already paying for with my taxes. And let’s get this straight, I did say I don’t mind paying for them when it involves rape and abuse, or if the pregnacy it will harm the mother. I would never want to see a woman forced to take the child of her rapist she’s gone through too much already. But elective abortions shouldn’t be funded by my or anyone else tax moeny than we should pay for your botox cause you haxe probem with getting old.

  • SFIndie

    Beautifully said, LDW.

    It’s also my understanding, although this House bill is so convoluted it’s difficult to get a clear picture, that abortion cannot be covered even by private insurers. So, if you are lucky enough to be able to afford insurance privately, or your employer offers it, you still will not be able to add termination of pregnancy as a covered procedure. The only way you will be able to obtain an abortion would be paying out of pocket, outside of any insurance coverage.

    Except, I believe, in cases of rape or incest. I wonder what a woman will have to go through to prove that she was, indeed, a victim of rape or incest, in order to get approval for termination of pregnancy paid by her insurance?

  • kgirl1028

    Yawn. Look i’m not paying for other peoples mistakes, espeically when it involves killing someone who hasn’t done anything to anyone but being inconvience. I’m not like most people, Im consistant, if I understand the sanctity of life, the I morally oppose all taking of life, Yet i don’t forget the grave realities of a real world.

    And Jennifer, i’m a woman, and if prochoice people become more like you. I”m just might go life because detest bullies. Furthermore, you are invidiual who doesn’t even know why you believe what you believe, because if you did you woundn’t have resorted to a red herrings when you could prove your point. Insult me as much as you like, but much like my fellow AA who use the race card and tantrum when you don’t get what you want it looks pathetic. I don’t like being bullied nor do I like seeing other bullied, it’s the easist way to piss me off. but cause iknow for a fact I am a very accepting person. NOw i support a womans right to choose if she wants to have achild. That’s her right, but what’s not her right is to ask me to pay for it. Furthermore I have said repeatedly in cases in cases of medical I don’t mind paying, but what i’m not going to do is to help you hurt anyone else for no good damn reason, especially when we have a sluwe of effective contraceptives that are accessable throught the health care department. It’s why I didn’t enter the military, or become policemen. I would never want to be in a position wherei hurt or kill another individual especially one that has done nothing to anyone. Now you have the right to ask my support, kindness, and respect, but what you do not have the right to do is ask me to PAY for your for you self centered anti social BS. And to top it off most of you don’t see the danger in what you are suggesting. One day we are going to elect a republican president and congress, and with this health care system, being funded by the state, Republicans could come in and get rid of your freedom of choice period. Did it every cross your mind that taking money to fund abortions might mean that you could be denied of one, by the same people you are getting money from. And to be honest with the way Obama and firends keep screaming about cost they could deem abortion to be too expensie, or even better unhealthy so they will not longer fund it then what?. SO my suggestion to all of you is that you think about 3,9,12 down road instead of trying to change my PERSONAL morality. Pat Robertson pays taxes too. In bullying others who simply disagree with you, you are going screw your ownsevles. Already the democratic party kicks woman around is because you value Roe vs Wade more than sticking to what you believe inif you want an abortion and it’s not for medical resons pay for it your self

  • kgirl1028

    Nope, if you give money to churches they you can control them, and i believe in religious liberty. LIke i said i’m consistant. I don’t say hands off my body but give me free health care. You pay for everthing tek and no onee gives you anything for free and doesn’t want something in return.

  • Peggy Sue

    I agree, grayslady. Pro-choice has always been about choice, not what a woman decides to choose. So, if termination is deemed unworthy then childbirth expenses should also be defunded.

    You cannot have it both ways. And for those who would tell women that their right to decide their own biological fate is less important that getting health care reform passed, I say think again. How many times have women been told to get to the back of the line, that their concerns and interests were secondary?

    The House pushed this montrous healthcare bill through on the backs of women. And the Dems, once again, have shown their true colors.

    How much evidence do women need?

  • Peggy Sue

    Thank you, LDW!

  • kgirl1028

    Tek i don’t think they would have wanted to be apart of it, i think they were asked to much like with the AMA and ARP. Also Nancy Pelosi is a Catholic and the Pop let her know she was wrong for supporting pro choice idiology. Also a few months ago Obama was targeting relgious leader to help push this health bill, pontificating about being your brothers keeper, and that people were baring false witness by lying about the health bill. So unless i see other wise I think it’s not Bishops or the Catholic chruch you need to be mad with. Becaus hey were were invited into the conversation, and Obama wanting to use them to promote his health care agenda.

  • mountainaires

    Thanks Amy. I guess I am just past the point of outrage anymore. Or maybe I’m just tired of people who think 47 years old is an appropriate age for a president in the first place. We are a “pop” civilization, trivializing ourselves at every turn. Our country elected a POP STAR, not a PRESIDENT, so what do people expect?

    Some people looked beyond the halo and saw it coming. We tried to warn others, but they just wouldn’t hear of it. So, basically, I’m just too disgusted with foolish people to give a rat’s ass whether or not those women lose their “reproductive rights.” Serve’s em right if they lose them and have to learn painful lessons already learned by their grandmothers! Generations always have to re-learn the lessons of previous generations because they don’t pay attention.

    Obama TOLD you that he wasn’t going to protect you. He TOLD you in South Carolina. The people a person chooses to surround himself with is a clear indication of his perspective. You should have listened.

  • mountainaires

    They’re healthier, their infant mortality rate is LOWER, and they aren’t bankrupted by medical crisis, and they pay LESS…

    I can’t comprehend the argument that we don’t want “government-run” health care. I’ve been getting care from the government most of my life, and it’s been great.

    What can these people be thinking? They don’t mind military getting “government run” health care; they don’t mind medicaid; they don’t mind getting “medicare” and they don’t mind getting “government run” health care right in their Senate and House doctor’s office which is run by MILITARY DOCTORS. They get care from this government run and paid for system right in the Capital, even as they pretend it’s not a good thing.

    If people weren’t so damn STUPID they’d catch themselves on and realize they’re being scammed.

    But what the hell, I’m going to get military “government run” health care until I’m medicare eligible, so screw the rest of you who think “government-run” health care is a threat. It’s patently ridiculous.

    You’ve gotta be a real moron to think this is about ideology; it’s about freakin’ MONEY. You’re gonna pay, and they’re gonna profit!
    Oh, well, whatever. I don’t care if it passes or doesn’t pass. I won’t go bankrupt when a medical crisis occurs.

  • MrMike

    They were stuck with Obama and had no choice by the time the convention rolled around. Had they allowed a roll call and Hillary won, Donna Brazile’s blood in the streets prediction would have come true.

  • mountainaires

    NOW, NARAL, and TAYLOR MARSH can all go eat dirt. They deserve it.

    They endorsed this man. Now, they’re going to have to live with the consequences of their idiocy. We are in a post-feminist society now. Deal with it. The choice was Hillary Clinton, for God’s sake! They rejected her.

    Ha, I swear, if I weren’t such a nice person, I’d just say F* ‘em. They’re idiots, and just re-reading your reminder pisses me off all over again.

    There is a reason I don’t consider myself a “feminist” anymore, nor will I ever support, give money to, or listen to ANY activist groups or people calling themselves “feminist.”

    And, it is this:

    The National Organization for Women (under its former leader) endorsed its first all-male ticket. And NARAL endorsed Obama over Sen. Clinton, even though she had a proven track record on reproductive rights. In January 2009, Ms. Magazine’s cover featured a now-infamous image of Obama in a superman pose sporting a t-shirt that reads: This is What a Feminist Looks Like.

    With these women leaders behind him, President Obama felt he could be himself. He appointed fewer women into his cabinet than President Bill Clinton. He surrounded himself with czars, more than 90% of whom are male. He appointed Larry Summers, of “girls are inferior in math and science” fame, to a key economic post. He played basketball, golfed and fished with men and men only. He had beers with Skip Gates, but ignored it when Rihanna was almost strangled to death. And so on.

    The love affair started to fade with Obama’s off-handed response during an MSNBC interview questioning his all-male outings: “I think this is bunk.” That remark gave women a reason to take a closer look at the inner workings of Obama and his ideas. And just as Betty Friedan described the subtlety of sexism as “the problem that has no name,” “bunk” revealed that the boys club was still alive and well at the White House.

  • HEPT

    women always have a fit for something they want blind to all the advice and recommendations against it. blind to everything but the attitude of “don’t tell me what to do” till finally they get that which they desired and find that it’s really what they deserve but not at all what they thought they wanted.
    A smart man doesn’t even try to help or hurt the process, Men just stand back and say, “Have at it” then prepare for the torrents of tears after the woman has figured it all out or not.

  • Unabashed Galt

    We could have survived blood in the streets. I don’t think there would have been any, but if there was it would have been due to the self-fulfilling prophecies of misguided fools with a lust for a “black” president – damn the consequences to our sacred right to having our votes count equally.

    How come the white people did not riot when McCain lost? Only black people can riot if they don’t get what they want? Black “leaders” who promoted this notion are some of the worst kind of racists. It is a fact America was shaken down by a strange amalgam of black and white racists.

    Our Republic may not survive having the election process perverted and twisted as it was. Certainly the Democratic Party will implode from this, and it will be their own damn fault.

    I have my popcorn machine ready for that day. :)

  • Ani

    Spot on, FranSC. I believe both parties use the abortion issue like a weapon to rally the party faithful and to keep women in line.

  • Peggy Sue

    And so, women are mere children, who can’t be expected to know their own hearts and minds??

    Nice!

    I guess we should consider ourselves lucky for all the “smart” men who have figured this out.

    And exactly what century are you in? I’d like to think you’re being ironic, HEPT. But I suspect you’re not. Which is sad.

    Earth to HEPT: Father Knows Best was taken off the air decades ago.

  • Ani

    Unfortunately, Amy, this “sleeping giant” is pretty much a joke, along with every other group he has thrown under the bus who has suddenly expressed displeasure.

    Women who turned a blind eye to Barack Obama’s actions on the campaign trail and bought into his rhetoric, voting for him over Hillary have only themselves to thank. They are now merely a notch on his bedpost, along with GLBT voters.

    If you will recall, whenever Obama did something they didn’t like, he used a rather cocky tone to say “I understand if it’s a deal breaker, but where you gonna go?” FISA was a case in point. He takes for granted they would never vote Republican or third party. As far as he is concerned, he has you over a barrel. And if history is any indicator, he’s probably right. I wish I could say that I saw that changing. I do not.

    I agree with the poster above who pointed out that until women unite around other issues and stop letting pro-choice/pro-life be the thing that defines their politics, the battle lines will be drawn the same way — and ultimately, it is women who lose.

  • Ebby

    Here is my concern: In allowing the govt to pay for care, we are ebbing away at our rights to dictate what happens with our bodies under any circumstances – male or female, young or old, etc.

  • trixta

    Nancy was “forced” to go with the Catholic Church on this matter? I don’t see it that way. She made a choice to sell out women for her Messiah — Obama.

  • trixta

    More like pickled in Kool-Aid.

  • TeakWoodKite

    LDW, well said. I as don’t agree with abortion, it doesn’t matter what I think. I also think that a womans body is hers and no one else is legally entitled to dictate a womans choice.

    The issue is that PRIVATE insurance companies are being legally compelled to NOT provide this service because a of the Stupak amendment and no doubt else where in this monster.

    If you compel a private entity to use public money how can you then tell them that a service they provide if left a lone is no longer viable?
    It IS legal to have abortions.

    The government should pay for the procedure. I don’t have to agree with it.

  • jbjd

    Ah, see, this is the problem. People mistakenly believe they have the right to ‘elect’ a particular nominee from a political party, over another. They don’t. However, citizens in vote binding states had the right to have the delegate they elected in the Presidential preference primary, vote for the party candidate they elected her to represent. Citizens from these 13 vote binding states should have read the riot act to their A’sG for not going after the DNC for trying to ‘turn’ HRC pledged delegates to support BO, before the Convention; and then, for circumventing the law, by denying a floor vote at the Convention. Pledged delegates from vote binding states should have been suing the pants off the DNC for thwarting their fiduciary responsibility to vote for the candidate voters elected them to represent.

    Blood in the street? BS. Even the polls right outside the voting booths showed, Hillary would have bested BO over McCain in the general election. Think of it this way: if BO hadn’t lost the D primary, his handlers would not have had to work so hard trying to make it look like, he won.

  • trixta

    Let’s take it a step further, kgirl. If you or any other woman decides to have children, why should I who have opted not to have children, pay taxes for public schools, etc.? Also, why should men pay for women’s reproductive health, etc. See how all of this gets a bit thorny? There will be women who will get pregnant and who would rather have an abortion but can’t afford it. Their economic status will determine their right to exercise “choice”. BTW, abortion is not the same as opting for cosmetic surgery. Bringing a child into this world (or not) has consequences not just for the woman, but for society as a whole.

  • Pablo Cruz

    Wow — 100% of the Republicans in the house team up with 60-some cowardly Democrats to pass this draconian anti-abortion measure that liberals generally hate. Obama then goes on to criticize the language, and it’s OBAMA’s fault?

    Get a clue!

    Please feel free to start flaming me for posting facts.

  • NomNomNom

    What makes these people think a woman’s body is a political bargaining chip and willing to trade a way the majority constituents wishes?
    probably the fact that women’s bodies are bargaining chips that can be traded regardless of the fact that women constitute a majority of US citizens.
    women need an all woman party that supports only women candidates that support all of those rights that women now have and are dedicated to expanding those rights (wage parity, social parity, religious parity, job access; proscribed jobs (military)). they need to refuse to donate to or vote for any other candidates.

  • trixta

    From the viper’s mouth — Camille Paglia’s, that is!:

    “Whether or not her bill survives in the Senate is immaterial: Pelosi’s hard-won, trench-warfare win sets a new standard for U.S. women politicians and is certainly well beyond anything the posturing but ineffectual Hillary Clinton has ever achieved.”

    It escapes Paglia that Clinton was the first viable woman running for POTUS, winning 18 million votes at that– more than any other man running for POTUS. PeLouse-ie would be laughed off the stage if she were ever to announce a run for the presidency. The only thing PeLouse-ie has surpassed Hillary Clinton on is her skullduggery and betrayal of women.

  • NomNomNom

    I agree. And if I had to choose between them, I had far rather pay for some other woman’s abortion than her baby: it’s a lot cheaper.

    Also, those persons who believe that a woman’s right to prevent pregnancy and control her own destiny are not at the heart of this matter are delusional.
    There is a war against women: it is not just on women’s right to abortion, but their right to BIRTH CONTROL.
    Has everyone forgotten Amendment 48–the new version of the Comstock Laws– so soon, with its labeling of IUDs, the pill, and emergency contraception as abortificaents?
    That would leave women with condoms, diaphragms, and sterilization. The first 2 have a high failure rate and the 3rd, besides being expensive, isn’t always available: it took me, starting at age 18, 8 YEARS for a doctor to agree to perform the legal-in-all-50 states surgery, after I was 26.
    What about pharmacists’ right to refuse you birth control? Do you believe that all people live in large towns where numerous pharmacies are available?
    What risk is there in the growth of megastores such as Walmart whose pharmacies refuse to carry birth control and who edge smaller stores out of business? Do you think this is a trend that is declining?
    How do you think the influx of anti-abortion, anti-birth control immigrants will affect choice in the future?
    Allowing any whittling away of one’s rights is a bad move. The Stupak amendment is just one more sign of the problem.

  • NomNomNom

    the pos took his name off the Mi ballot so Clinton couldn’t kick his @ss there: he showed he didn’t think women had the right to a vote (and in FL); why the h#ll would anyone believe he thought women had a right to an abortion?

  • NomNomNom

    The answer is 17 in the senate (13D to 4R)
    & 74 in the house (57D to 17R).
    A better question might be: what percentage of women are in congress as compared with the US population: answer 17% [13%D/4%R both times] vs. 51% of the population.
    Yuo can pretend that the most important numbers are the 13 and 4, but imo the most important are the 17 and 51.
    Hope this puts things in perspective, PrimeObot.
    http://www.nfrw.org/republicans/women/21.htm

  • http://rabblerouserruminations.blogspot.com Rabble Rouser Revrend Amy

    I concur. And the Democrats didn’t JUST sell out women – they sold them out long ago. Their treatment of Hillary, Sarah, and ALL women, has made that abundantly clear.

    These so-called women’s groups, many of which I belonged to until they sold their souls, have absolutely NO ONE to blame but themselves. They stabbed Hillary in the back, the one person in the entire field who has worked her entire life for women and children, to support this man.

    Frankly, they are partners in what happened with this bill by supporting Obama. They need to shut the hell up and admit they were WRONG. (Though, that won’t get me back, and believe me – I supported NARAL and NOW for YEARS, and had given money to Emily’s List, too. Never again.)

  • BINKY

    “I agree with the poster above who pointed out that until women unite around other issues and stop letting pro-choice/pro-life be the thing that defines their politics, the battle lines will be drawn the same way — and ultimately, it is women who lose.”

    You are sooo right. Obama worshipping women ignored the disrespect he showed Hillary Clinton. There were plenty of reports that the Obama machine paid their female workers less than their male workers–those two alone should have been a clue as to his real philosophy toward women. The right to choose abortion is law — get on with it and look at other issues!

  • Unabashed Galt

    I won’t flame you or anyone else. But you are posting more than facts – there is opinion attached to your comments.

    My opinion: I think its a stretch to believe Obama had no hand in orchestrating that amendment, in order to get the bill passed. He felt he needed to save face from the NJ and VA defeats, so he betrayed women to do so.

  • http://rabblerouserruminations.blogspot.com Rabble Rouser Revrend Amy

    That is such amazing misogyny from this Paglia. Hillary was a two term senator and is the freakin’ Secretary of State!!!! What delusional hatred Paglia has for Clinton.

    What sheer jealousy.

  • Jackie

    We tried to tell the women of the is nation that Obama Sucked.

    Nobody wanted to listen.

    If you voted for him Shut your trap you did this to us as women. Good job.

  • NomNomNom

    thx, very good points
    ANY ANSWERS?

  • NomNomNom

    we might easily afford reform if not for all the subsidies given out in other arenas: the points are valid

  • James W

    Women’s rights would be so much safer in the hands of republicans. You know: the guys behind the Stupak Ammendment; the guys against Equal Pay; the guys who fought against SHIPP; the guys who love their Viagra, but don’t think insurers should also pay for birth control pills; the guys who fought approval of the morning after pill, and will illegalize abortion at the first opportunity; the guys who think it’s OK for women to have to pay more for the same health policies as men; the guys who…

  • imustprotest

    “the guys who….” perhaps you’re right! Too many guys making decisions about women’s bodies on both sides. Time for women to take charge.
    Hillary
    2012

  • beebop

    We are going to have to survive what will be — in effect — five years of a lame duck.

    While he says one thing and does another — which anyone could tell by a cursory review of his record in Illinois — those in the House and Senate are ramming their own agendas through as fast as they can while he curls in the fatal (not an error) position under JFK’s desk.

    Nancy needs to get her health care passed? Out go women’s issues.

    Don’t Ask Don’t Tell? Frank says that will be part of the DEFENSE APPROPRIATION bill in 2010 — thoroughly not appropriate and dooiming it to “Republican” failure just because the Campaigner in Chief is a flake.

    Gitmo?

    Troops in Afghanistan?

    Can you really think of anything he has done that he said he would do … other than the basketball court and getting a dog?

  • N. Lee

    I think the health care bill stinks altogether. Women’s rights and abortion are two separate issues, though. Just because I am a woman doesn’t mean I am for abortion. And I refuse to help pay for abortions. I’m happy the health care bill doesn’t support paying for abortions on demand. Remember, half of the babies ripped out of a woman’s body are females

    I am sick of people thinking that all women are for abortions. It’s just another form of holding our reproductive organs hostage. If women are going to gain rights, we need to shed this “abortion” association.

  • ziggy

    The presidential pen isn’t a magic wand. Unless, of course, the person weilding it believes in Unitary Executive Theory and the ultimate power of Presidential Directives and Signing Statements.

    It’s also useful to have an evil familiar for Vice President, who can help potentiate the diabolical magic.

    If Obama isn’t actually doing anything, why are so many eyes bugging out on the far right?

  • Pablo Cruz

    If you had any evidence to support the ridiculous claim that Obama was behind the Stupak amendment (which he has publicly criticized), I’m sure you would have presented it. This is just insanity.

  • Unabashed Galt

    No its not “insanity” or a “ridiculous claim.” It is a well founded opinion based on observing his behavior as a human being and politician. And for your information his public stance of being against the amendment is just that, his public stance – what he really thinks and does behind closed doors is very open to scrutiny.

  • lorac

    It’s not about being for abortions. It’s pro-CHOICE. It’s about having the right to be in charge of your own body and life.

blog comments powered by Disqus