START A PETITION 27,000,000 members: the world's largest community for good
START A PETITION
x
1,241,965 people care about Women's Rights

Repro Wrap: Holocaust Memes, the “Softer Side” of Rand Paul and Other News

Repro Wrap: Holocaust Memes, the “Softer Side” of Rand Paul and Other News

This week combined the National Day of Prayer and Holocaust Remembrance Day, giving us an abundance of  politically calculated and often inappropriate remarks about abortion. Holocaust re-appropriation spilled into a South Carolina abortion ban debate, deeply offending one Jewish lawmaker, who said you can “debate science and medicine and personhood all day,” but in the end it’s not comparable to 6 million people dying in a gas chamber.

His opponent disagreed. ”Six million is incredibly horrible, what they endured. But those 60 million taken out of the womb will never have a chance to be dragged into anything. They’re gone.”

Anti-abortion politicians in Vermont were just as eager to score points in Vermont, where one injected a diatribe about Planned Parenthood killing babies into a bill discussing environmental toxins harming children. And nationally, abortion opponent James Dobson used the National Day of Prayer to attack President Barack Obama as “the abortion president,” causing one congresswoman to leave the event in disgust.

Oddly enough, one presidential candidate who is normally fully flung into anti-choice rhetoric is going oddly silent, and it’s worrying his supporters. Kentucky Senator Rand Paul is considered a front runner for 2016, and has wooed the rabid anti-abortion crowd with his push for a Human Life Amendment, which would define life as beginning at the moment of conception and ban all abortions and likely even hormonal birth control. Yet at a recent event he said he doesn’t believe abortion law in general would change anytime soon, as the country wasn’t ready for it.

That didn’t make the extreme anti-abortion wing happy at all. “Maybe it was inarticulate, or maybe these are the senator’s real feelings, but that last comment certainly set off alarm bells for social conservatives,” responded Tony Perkins, head of Family Research Council.

Maybe there won’t be an outright overturning of Roe v. Wade anytime soon, but that doesn’t mean accessibility to abortion isn’t in immediate danger. There are a number of states that are proposing legislation that would allow anyone, not just someone directly involved in an abortion, to file a complaint against a provider. Now, Michigan shows a clear example of the end goal in the story of an ambulance-stalking anti-abortion activist annoyed that she can’t violate HIPAA statutes by publicly naming the patient involved in an abortion complication or file charges against the doctor involved.

It’s looking more likely that a 72 hour waiting period for an abortion in Missouri will pass this year, leaving a governor’s veto as the only hope of stopping it from becoming law. In Mississippi, the governor signed a later abortion ban that was originally 20 week post conception then revised back to 18 weeks and reapproved by the legislature, and a 20 week post conception ban is moving ahead in South Carolina. Abortion opponents angry about the governor’s veto of a 20 week ban in West Virginia are preparing to march on the state capitol.

More abortion clinics are in danger this week, as news comes across the country regarding pushes to further implement TRAP (Targeted Regulation of Abortion Provider) bills on the books, especially admitting privileges rules. Mississippi’s sole abortion clinic had a hearing over the law meant to shut them down, although the judges’ ruling isn’t expected until June. The Ohio medical board appears ready to move ahead with closing the last clinic in Toledo — ending abortion access for most of northwester Ohio – stating that the transfer agreement the site has with a hospital over the border to the north in Michigan isn’t close enough to count. This despite the fact that the clinic has never had a complication requiring hospitalization in the last 10 years. And once again, activists in Michigan are doing their own push against a group of abortion providers, in this case demanding a Catholic hospital cease having any relationship with them in order to prevent them from providing reproductive health services — even birth control or sterilizations — in their other medical practices.

In other countries the situation is grim as well. Al Jazeera ran an extensive profile of a woman forced to lie about being raped in order to get an abortion in Brazil, a story that was also recounted earlier at Cosmopolitan by Jill Filopovic and Ana SiedschlagVice Magazine reports of the continuing trend in El Salvador of imprisoning women and girls who miscarry, suspecting them of inducing or procuring illegal abortions. Then again, the U.S. is taking another step towards imprisoning of women as well with a new law in Tennessee that will criminalize those who are found to have used drugs while pregnant.

In good news, in a victory against deceptive advertising, Google will now be pulling crisis pregnancy center ads when they pretend that they offer abortion services, thanks to NARAL’s work exposing the misleading practice. Crisis pregnancy centers, of course, are claiming that nothing has actually been removed. Then again, their track record for truth isn’t exactly untarnished, which was the whole point in the first place.

Read more: , , , , , , ,

Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons

have you shared this story yet?

some of the best people we know are doing it

93 comments

+ add your own
1:51PM PDT on Aug 6, 2014

I am pro-choice. Rand Paul is not but At least he is honest about it. Just think an honest politician.

If asked, I would vote for Rand Paul.

12:14PM PDT on May 19, 2014

Really, what more can be said?

12:14PM PDT on May 19, 2014

Aye aye.

3:25AM PDT on May 6, 2014

ty

8:12PM PDT on May 5, 2014

Thank you.

4:15PM PDT on May 5, 2014

one thing that always amazes me, is that the right to life people, only care about the baby being born, not about it surviving, being fed, educated, given a chance to life. The same politicians that vote to limit abortion, also vote to limit the funds to care for the babies born to those who can not afford to feed them. How is this statement okay "how about the 60 million who were never born, they can never be dragged into anything" so we want babies to be born to be killed? Why? Just so we can starve them, are we building a slave base for the future?
And if you are pro-life, how do you then okay capital punishment? Isn't taking a life against everything you propose to believe in?
I guess I just don't get it.

2:20PM PDT on May 5, 2014

@Karen, thanks for the link.

I signed on and put the connection up on Twitter.

2:04PM PDT on May 5, 2014

https://action.standtogether.org/page/st/politiciansplayingdoctor This is scary!

8:55AM PDT on May 5, 2014

Dr. Dobson - ugh - this is the same guy who whined in 2008 that he wasn't going to vote if John McCain was the Republican's candidate. Why? Because McCain wasn't rabidly anti-abortion enough for Dr. Dobson. Focus on the Family is focused on just about anything but in my opinion. His diatribe against President Obama shows that Dr. D is not the 'fine Christian' he makes himself out to be since the Bible exhorts Christians to 'pray for their leaders' not publicly insult them. Regardless of one's religious persuasion (or lack of same) Dr. Dobson was out of line.

3:14AM PDT on May 5, 2014

Anne M. & Deborah L. - a whole galaxy of green stars to you both.

The US used DU ammunition in Gulf War 1 under Daddy Bush too. The reports & pictures of horrendously deformed babies were all over the media, so no-one can claim that they didn't know what would happen when they used them again in GW2. They knew, they just didn't care.

I found it sickeningly hypocritical that amongst the lies for GW2 was the accusation that Saddam had used chemical weapons against his own people (which he had) but they omitted to mention that the US (Donald Rumsfeld) had provided those weapons to Saddam for use against Iran; and their use against his own people in 1988 was never mentioned as a reason for GW1, so it was OK to use them against Iran, and OK against Iraqis in 1991, but not in 2003?

Knowing the sort of weapons in the US arsenal, everyone who voted for those wars has blood on their hands, as does every politician who refuses to acknowledge the devastation that has been wrought and refuses to apologise and take measures to mitigate the damage. With so many holocausts coming from their own hands, it behoves them not to get all holier-than-thou and superior about what other people do, whether that be in war-time or in personal decisions.

add your comment



Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of
Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

Care2 - Be Extraordinary - Start a Care2 Petition
ads keep care2 free
CONTACT THE EDITORS

Recent Comments from Causes

@ Madhu R: If you kill an animal for food, it is very ethical. Of course "playing with it first" is unkind…

Chris Sosa, this is a wonderful article and one that I hope everyone will read and reflect upon. Thanks…

Gee, how long has this been going on. Show some teeth and find him and kill him...

meet our writers

Kathleen J. Kathleen is currently the Activism Coordinator at Care2. more
ads keep care2 free



Select names from your address book   |   Help
   

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.