Jezebel 
Enter your username and password.
New York, 4:05 AM
Fri Dec 11
66 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors:
Editor-in-Chief:
Anna Holmes
| Twitter
Deputy Editor:
Dodai Stewart
| Twitter
Senior Contributing Editor:
Tracie Egan
| Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Anna North
| Twitter
Sadie Stein
| Twitter
Reporter:
Irin Carmon
| Twitter
Editorial Assistant:
Margaret Hartmann
| Twitter
Contributors:
Rich Juzwiak
Email | Twitter
Latoya Peterson
Email
Jenna Sauers
Lizzie Skurnick
Interns:
Katy Kelleher
Twitter
Weekends/Commenter Moderator:
Hortense
| Twitter
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
11/11/09
Yes, I want abortion coverage. I want women to have safe and legal options. But we're not talking about something easy. This is an issue the country is deeply divided on for a lot of different reasons.
There are lots of unsung parts of the Health Care bill that are doing so much for women, not having to pay more for the same plan being just one. I believe we will get abortion funding in the future, but only once healthcare reform is firmly in place.
Until then, pushing on an issue that alienates that nation could throw out the (wanted and loved) baby with the bath water. There are millions of women of all beliefs who need and want the reforms that are already in this bill. Women who are sick and tired of paying more for less care than their counterparts. On that broad subject, this is a step in the right direction for women, and I'm really sad that no one is talking about that major achievement. #kateharding
11/11/09
11/11/09
We eat GM crops and animals, yet we can't take the intellectual risk of entertaining a secular government that works to resolve real problems with science, economics, and policy? Cowardly. Too much controversy, too much work.
If there were a profit in abortions, you'd be able to get one at a vending machine, like a photo-booth. #kateharding
11/11/09
Why is this debacle occurring when the Dems have the majority? Why I am wandering around going "why?"
If we can’t trust the Dems elected into office then what? Sit back and let the Rethugs return to power? Incredibly frustrating. Yes, a third party would be grand but third party intervention gave us King Bush for eight nightmare years.
This whole thing really feels like being kicked. Being furious at everyone isn’t useful. All I know is when those Dem groups come after me for money it’s time to tell them to go fuck themselves with a coathanger.
OK then. I can breathe again. #kateharding
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
Look, GWB didn't even try to ban abortion when he was wildly popular and had a congressional advantage. Obama's not going to use his advantage to put the right to an abortion into law. If any Republican was going to make abortion illegal, it would not have been McCain. Both parties are content to keep abortion rights hinging on the right to privacy as established in Roe. It benefits them both to keep jerking women around. It sounds like you've been had. #kateharding
11/11/09
[www.huffingtonpost.com]
And GWB tried to ban late-term abortion, which is a step in the direction of overturning Roe. #kateharding
11/11/09
I hope that you would reserve your ire for those in power and not the feminists who actually hold their feet to the fire. #kateharding
11/11/09
I don't think Amy Siskind has any clout remaining, since she sold out her beliefs to an explicitly anti-choice candidate just because said candidate was a woman. I don't think feminism should be defined by supporting women in power no matter the beliefs of those women, particularly if their beliefs are anti-feminist to begin with.
I am disappointed with President Obama, but I think this sad occasion should not be used by those who never liked him in the first place (i.e., Siskind) to point the finger and say "I told you so." It's immature, irrelevant, and helps no one. Again, I'd rather make sure some unelected (by the laypeople) bishops and the congresspeople who answer to them get shit for this, since they directly caused it in the first place. And I'll continue to volunteer for Planned Parenthood, and write to President Obama to remind him that I elected him for his pro-choice beliefs, and expect him to uphold them. #kateharding
11/11/09
So it's okay to disagree with Obama on some things, as long as you do it quietly, in private letters, while still voting for him? I wrote him plenty of letters last year, and I have the spam, but no results to show for it. All he cares about is that he gets yur vote.
Siskind has been critical of Obama exactly because of his weak record of supporting choice and other women's issues. You know what's irrelevant and helps no one? Criticizing feminists who demand more than pandering, who actually hold those in power responsible. #kateharding
11/11/09
Obama is not responsible for this amendment. I'm holding Stupak and Pitts and the bishops accountable for this egregious assault on reproductive rights.
I'm afraid we'll have to agree to disagree, which is fine by me. I appreciate your point of view, and it has made me think more about the issue. I'll be more vocal about Obama's complicity in this, for instance, when discussing it with my friends, though I still think the brunt of criticism should fall at the feet of those politicians and religious leaders I mentioned above. #kateharding
11/11/09
If we expect tax payers to pay for other legal, safe, medical procedures. Why can't we expect tax payers to pay for this unexpected health consequence?
*Also, my tax money goes to lots of things I don't personally agree with, that doesn't mean I dont pay my taxes or hold out on something till I get my way. #kateharding
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
Question: Can we just storm the Libertarian's headquarters and repurpose their offices for our own use? Lawd knows they aren't seeing much action right now.
EDIT: In the words of Dwight: "Playtime is OVER!!"
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
Never mind, that's not how government works. #kateharding
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
The guys over at Americablog started a boycott of sorts over LGBTQ issues, and there's really no reason why politically minded Jezzies (are there any other kind?) couldn't do the same thing. Their boycott is actually getting some decent MSM attention, too. #kateharding
11/11/09
We can do it. #kateharding
11/11/09
11/11/09
@Triana Orpheus: I actually agree that local action is likely to be more effective. If you can flood a Representative's local office with messages it will probably have a decent impact.
In general I would focus on your individual Congressperson and Senators. Righteous anger is good, but it only works if you take pains to first position yourself as a "reasonable" person. For example, "I have been generally supportive of Rep. X, but I am absolutely appalled by his support of the Stupak-Pitts amendment." Make sure you have a firm understanding of exactly what it is that the amendment says, especially if you are going to call the office, because Congressional aides are going to try to convince you that you're understanding of the matter is wrong. #kateharding
11/11/09
11/11/09
It's like people are afraid to call this the skidmark it is. Like being pro-choice is something you should be very quiet and reserved about because it might offend someone. I've never heard a politician flat out say "I am a pro-choice candidate and will use my power to protect a woman's right to an abortion." It's not something that can be talked about, apparently. Wouldn't want to go hurting feelings, now would we? #kateharding
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
Wordy McWord. If the Democrats are throwing women and gays under the proverbial bus, the only thing they have left is minorities...minorities who don't happen to also be women and/or gay.
I wanna be a lobbyist when I grow up. #kateharding
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
"I don't want to send John Cornyn another form letter that he's not going to read."
They have you blacklisted too? #kateharding
11/11/09
This is barely a choice lately. Like Kate, I've had it. #kateharding
11/11/09
If taxpaying Americans do not want to cover what some may perceive to be the murder of a child, FINE.
If you choose to have an abortion, then you should pay for it. The American public did not participate in the conception of your child, they should not be expected to pay for its disposal.
Perhaps this legislation will do much to prevent irresponsible women from using abortion as a method of birth control. It is not.
Moreover, this is a health care bill, for all Americans (men, women, and children) not just women. Any attempt to derail it over this issue is selfish beyond all comprehension.
That is all.....
*exits stage left from the soapbox and.....flees the building*
11/11/09
It's not? Fuck, I guess I need to keep my once a month abortion in check. And to think, I could have just been taking birth control this whole time instead!
Editing to add:" The American public did not participate in the conception of your child, they should not be expected to pay for its disposal. "
So wait, maybe pregnancy and birth shouldn't be included in the bill either, since the American public didn't participate in the conception, why should we expect them to pay for it's delivery? Amirite, guys?
11/11/09
Unless, you know, that whole enforcing abstinence-only education and the not-teaching about birth control methods education system. #kateharding
11/11/09
Also this is a slippery slope into allowing the government and/or health care providers to decide what is "medically necessary" for a pregnant woman versus "elective," and I think that should be 100% a woman's decision, under the advice of her doctors or her partner and family only IF she chooses to seek their advice. #kateharding
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
Unfortunately, there are many women who don't have this option. Either the abortion providers in their state (and often neighboring states) have been driven out of business, or the hurdles put up by social conservatives to make it as difficult to obtain an abortion as possible.
I'm talking about basic shit, like being able to take time off of a minimum-wage job, or figuring out how you're going to get the hundreds of miles from your little town to see an abortion provider. The very people who enacted those laws and regulations are the same ones who have demonstrated time and again that they don't give a fuck about the mother, or in fact the baby after it's born.
So the big deal is that something protected under multiple Supreme Court decisions is being chipped away bit by bit, and by the time we wake up and realize we have to fight to protect those rights, they'll already be gone. #kateharding
11/11/09
11/11/09
Furthermore, this whole debate has thrown into relief an issue that I hold dear and that is how much of a say I have in how my tax dollars are spent. I am very interested in how that aspect of the debate will play out.
Also, if your concern is whether or not women have access to safe and affordable abortions, ostensibly the fight should be with the clinics that provide these services and not a health care bill for all Americans.
This isn't about you, it's about us.
11/11/09
Even when abortion was illegal in this country it was still accessible to women who were wealthy and connected enough to find a doctor who would perform the procedure...for a hefty fee. Poor women were forced to either have the unwanted child they could not afford, to turn to back-alley abortions performed by butchers and quacks, or to try "home remedies." This is not something we as a country should repeat.
11/11/09
If this is the precedent you want to set, then I as a vegan think that I have the right to stop all farm subsidies to any animal farmer because I am morally opposed to the use of animals for food. And damn any of you who don't share my beliefs. #kateharding
11/11/09
And way to use a radical right argument about women using abortion as birth control. That's a bullshit argument. What about rape? What about fatal birth defects? They still need to pay for it for being Slutty McSlutsalot? Get some perspective and nuance.
And ALL laws are for men AND women, but all too often, as in this case, it's only the men that count. Sorry, I can't agree with you here. #kateharding
11/11/09
11/11/09
Most of us pay for shit we don't agree with all the time. WARS, for example. So that whole argument is ridiculous.
Healthcare coverage usually pays for Viagra but not contraceptives. Domestic violence and pregnancy ares preexisting conditions. Etc. Etc. Men have always been privileged beyond belief in this system. We expected things to get better for women with this "reform," not worse.
The vast majority of women don't use abortion as birth control. Seriously, I don't know why this myth keeps getting perpetuated.
Further, for ALL Americans? HALF of Americans are female! How is this selfish? I'm sorry, but your entire comment is based on the idea that women are Others whose needs are not as important as men's needs, since men are the norm, the standard, and whatever deviates from that standard is "special" or "extra" and therefore "unnecessary." We are important. We deserve the same fucking rights as men do. Just because men don't need to get abortions or pregnancy care or any other specific needs doesn't make those needs less utterly, utterly crucial.
I know I probably can't convince you, nor the others who will undoubtedly reply, but.... there are a lot of factors you're ignoring here. #kateharding
11/11/09
As a taxpayer, I had no role in creating my Grandfather's arrhythmia. Therefore I should march to Capitol steps and demand a refund for my Social Security taxes? Whhaaaa? Sorry, but that doesn't even begin to make sense when you consider the paradigm under which those who support a nationalized public option are operating. It actually doesn't even make sense at ALL.
And I know that some of your argument is that those who oppose an inclusion of abortion funding see it as them having to fund murder. Well, that's kinda describes how I feel when I see my tax money going to fund the Iraq war.
Also, the insertion of the tired old idea that any significant majority (of course there are some people who do) of women are obtaining abortions as a means of birth control proves that you don't know that much about abortion to begin with. This has been disproven time and time again. It has also been disproven that the removal of restriction on abortion access causes a spike in abortions. Furthermore, the greatest consequence of restricted abortion access is women seeking unsafe back-alley procedures. Is that really what we want? Are those the ideas we want our politicians to propogate? No fucking way. #kateharding
11/11/09
And i'm sure you already thought about this because it's pretty obvious, but some women can't afford abortions, or (more) children. And even if they can afford the procedure itself, the hoops that women in many states have to jump through (2 required visits, or simply not enough providers in her state) make it even less affordable. And how many women do you think just think "hmm, i'm gonna get that 15th abortion today, screw condoms!"? I'll guess that there are some, but not many. More legitimately, I shouldn't be paying for the Oxycontin prescriptions of addicts either.
11/11/09
11/11/09
Their tax dollars wouldn't be paying for the hypothetical abortion here. That's already covered under the Hyde Amendment. This is preventing women from purchasing insurance plans that cover abortions. BIG FUCKING DIFFERENCE here. #kateharding
11/11/09
I say fuck 'em, but I'm in a pretty shit mood. They wanna do some good in this world, adopt a kid that wasn't aborted. Ooopps! Too many black ones not an option generational sin nuuuurrrr
Look, they don't care what we think and I'm tired of worrying about their feelings but if...IF...I still gave a flying fuck about their precious psyches I would tell them that it's not necessarily their money that's going toward abortions. We all have to pay taxes. It's just as likely to be the "whore's" money that's just getting back to her to make the payment! All money is not your money. #kateharding
11/11/09
"The American public did not participate in the conception of your child, they should not be expected to pay for its disposal." First of all, it's a FETUS, not a child, so use your language correctly, please. And second of all, the American public didn't participate in, say, that broken arm you had when you fell out of a tree in 1986. But your insurance carrier paid for it to be set and healed, no? The other people whose contributions went into that insurance company so YOU could be healed didn't help you break your arm, did they?
Logic fail, yo. #kateharding
11/11/09
11/11/09
$3,000? Hell, I paid almost that just in co-pays. By the time we got out of the hospital our little un-family had racked up almost $10,000 in covered expenses.
Seeing "abortion" on the statements of benefit was just an oh-so-awesome reminder of what I did not, in fact, want to have happen. #kateharding
11/11/09
Logic Fail, Ayn Rand. #kateharding
11/11/09
For now, however, abortion is a legal medical procedure. It is not a cosmetic procedure. And no, it is not a colonoscopy. Which we know because a colonoscopy would never be cut from a healthcare bill, because it is something that affects men, and thus they actually give a shit about, rather than pretend to just to appease female voters. #kateharding
11/11/09
If it's a procedure that can happen to half of a country's population, there is a necessity for it to be performed safely and without crippling cost. #kateharding
11/11/09
Perhaps I'm wrong in riding on the coattails of this issue (I'm ambivalent about abortion, but sympathetic to those who do not want to pay for it with tax dollars), I'm not disputing that.
I will, however, say that to argue 'Well, I don't want my tax dollars to fund wars, how about that moral dilemma' is specious and an attempt to deflect from the real issue.
I say this, because your argument would only be true if those who are opposed to abortion also support the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. This cannot possibly be substantiated. It is possible for one to be opposed to both.
11/11/09
Not to mention that I've totally had this very argument on this very site before, but not all women who have unexpected pregnancies are irresponsible with their birth control, and it's disingenuous at best to say that they are. For some women, despite taking ALL precautions possible-- hormonal BC [which is only 50% effective for women on anticonvulsants, the same as pulling out], condoms, sponges [which keep getting inexplicably taken off the market], IUDs, or cervical caps/diaphragms--that one determined sperm still sneaks in under the radar. Until gynos start tying tubes and giving IUD's for women under 30 who are 100% sure they don't want babies, instead of being all patronizing with the "Are you sure?" talk, then YES, there is a valid reason for abortion to be covered.
I'm a taxpaying American, and I believe that continuing detainment at Guantanamo Bay, abstinence-only sex education and No Child Left Behind are invalid uses of my taxpayer dollars. Where are MY Congressmen, dammit? #kateharding
11/11/09
11/11/09
Obviously the main point is what BrutallyHonestBabes said so succinctly above, but I also think it's important for anti-choicers to realize that there is no one face to abortion. This bill WILL affect all women, whether they're anti-choice, pro-choice, or somewhere in between. Every woman of reproductive age is someone who may have an abortion; though the reasons may vary, the procedure does not. #kateharding
11/11/09
11/11/09
It seems to me that many of you are nervous that this amendment marks the beginning of the overturning of Roe. I equate that with having the 13th amendment overturned. I highly doubt that would ever happen.
And for the poster who suggested that this is an infringement upon women's rights because women are being perceived as 'inconvenient' or that they are limiting services devoted to women, why weren't routine mammograms, pap smears, et al attacked?
And when mentioning the fact that women are the majority and therefore this bill shouldn't deal solely with the concerns of men, you conveniently forgot to add that we must also think of the coverage this will provide for children. This is not about men, it's not about women, it's about us. #kateharding
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
The overturning of Roe v. Wade is nowhere near as unlikely as the overturning of a Constitutional Amendment. For one thing, the 13th has a lot more to go through to get taken out. Roe only need 5 people to disagree with it. The likelihood of that is particularly high right now since you have a lot of people on SCOTUS who either openly don't give a shit about precedent setting cases (Thomas. at least he's honest), and justices who claim to care about precedent until it says something they don't like (Scalia, Kennedy). I don't trust Alito as far as I can throw him, and I can see Roberts folding like a tent. Roe IS in danger and it's naive to sit back and pretend it could never happen here. #kateharding
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
11/11/09
By making this a moral argument, you make this conversation about you. About your morals. About your religion. About your choices.
And then you tell the rest of us how to live our lives.
By singling out this one thing, of all the various different moral conversation this country can have about where its money goes -- that is, to wars, to bailing out banks, to supporting genocide in some countries, to subsidies to companies that poison our water and our land, to farms, to school funding, to discriminating about gays and lesbians -- this conversation becomes about you. If it were about us, then you would hope that there was healthcare available to everyone that covers all basic, legal medical procedures and trust that people can make their own moral, religious, and personal decisions based on their lives and their experiences. #kateharding
11/11/09
Is there a reason that you are not responding to this correction? #kateharding
11/11/09
why weren't routine mammograms, pap smears, et al attacked?
Because they were? The public option as it stands doesn't cover your much-vaunted "birth control" solution either, nor does it require coverage of standard gynecological wellness visits. #kateharding
11/11/09
Their concern ends where my taxpaying-ass begins. Why does my well-being have to be affected by their concerns? They certainly won't be there for me if I'm forced to carry a fetus to term.
The whole, "I don't want MY tax dollars" argument is moot, considering I'd rather not have my tax dollars spent on the war, boner pills, or any other cause that would also be greatly assisted by nonexistent tax dollars not contributed by churches. #kateharding
11/11/09
11/11/09
Firstly, being government-run doesn't equal government-funded. Insurance, whether or not it's being offered by the government, is being funded by premiums. Not by taxes, but by you and your peers who pay for insurance plans at the same insurance company, which happens to be government-run. No taxes. Break-even would be the goal here.
Secondly, the amendment makes restrictions that are blatantly anti free-market. It mandates what one can and cannot buy with their own money, just because you are receiving a subsidy, regardless of why you receive the subsidy in the first place. You're free to do whatever you want with that money, you can buy whatever you want for a plan. The only restriction is that you can't have abortion coverage. But how is that not discriminatory? And how would they check you receive credits at all? If they can't, they could shut out everybody out just to be legally safe.
Thirdly. The public option is set up to be competitive to the current insurance companies. To compete. But if you want insurance coverage for abortion, any insurer can get you coverage, except for one. You're shut out of one choice of insurer - the public option - entirely, by law. By the government, because of this amendment. How is that free-market, how is that competition? How is that choice?
Seriously, a public option with the Stupak amendment, which controls by law as to what it can and cannot cover regardless of how much you pay, seems to me more socialist than without it (which should worry the GOP, shouldn't it?). The amendment is controlling free market no matter how you look at it.*
*This is my understanding of it, and I hope I haven't got it wrong. Please, correct me if I'm wrong, any Jezzies who know.
(and I wish Jezebel would stop crashing my browser any time I try to insert text into a post. DAMN IT)
07/17/09
07/16/09
Siskind's entire article comes off as sour grapes. Your candidate lost, P.U.M.A.s. It's time to move on.