Hot News!
• Freestore Foodbank Battle of the Blogs!
• Cincinnati NAACP President shares update on Cincinnati Retirement Plan
Contact Us
v mail, fax: (214) 481-6464
e mail: click here
On today's date in The Beacon archives, we published:
•Fans find reality not reported by Enquirer (2007)•Open Letter to John Pepper about Disney Characters (2006)
•More Lack of Coverage from The Cincinnati Enquirer (2006)
Events
 |
|
|
Monday, November 26, 2007
Reproductive Choice—Draconian Measures Proposed at Home, Free Speech Thwarted Abroad:
Posted by The Dean of Cincinnati
Guest article by Cincinnati Progressive Action
It has become routine to expect attacks on the civil liberties of women of child bearing age. Nevertheless, Cincinnati Progressive Action brings to the attention of the readers of the Beacon two current fronts in this struggle.
In Ohio, representatives including Tom Brinkman have introduced legislation—Ohio H.B. 287—to ban abortions without the written consent of the “father of the fetus.” If a woman names two or more men, a prenatal paternity test (ironically, carrying a small risk of miscarriage or harm to the fetus) would be required before accepting consent. The legislation provides an exception from these requirements for women who have become pregnant as a result of rape or incest ONLY if the woman presents a copy of a police report, indictment, complaint, a copy of a paternity test, or other court document to prove that the pregnancy was a result of rape or incest. The legislation does not provide an exception for women who do not know the identity of the (potential) father.
For more information about H.B. 287 see http://www.law.uc.edu/students/students_lawwomen.shtml and go to ‘Pending Legislation’.
Cincinnati Progressive Action urges you to contact Ohio representatives and loudly oppose this legislation that would make the decision to carry out a pregnancy no longer a matter of choice for Ohio women. Go to http://www.house.state.oh.us/jsps/Representatives.jsp and put in your zip code to find your Representative’s contact information.
Overseas our government censors medical practitioners in ways that most Americans would find offensive. Bush II’s first executive act once he assumed the Presidency was to impose what is known as ‘the global gag rule’ on overseas health clinics. This rule blocks women’s access to family-planning services that prevent maternal and child deaths, unintended pregnancies, unsafe abortions, and the spread of HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases.
The global gag rule prohibits the granting of U.S. funds to any overseas health clinic unless it agrees not to use its OWN, PRIVATE, NON-U.S. funds for: (1) abortion services, (2) abortion-related advocacy, or (3) abortion counseling or referrals.
Anti-choice politicians deliberately claim these funds are used to pay for abortion services overseas. The anti-choice groups and politicians are wrong. U.S. law already blocks abortion funding overseas. Those who claim to be ‘non-interventionists’ when it comes to U.S. foreign policy should oppose this rule that tries to mandate what foreign health clinics do with private, non-U.S. funds.
As part of the annual foreign-aid bill, the Senate passed a full repeal of the gag rule; the House passed a partial repeal; and now the Senate and the House are working on a compromise version to send to the president.
We support a full repeal of the global gag rule.
Even though President Bush has threatened to veto any bill with any pro-choice provision (including the gag rule repeal), Congress needs to send the president the bill and force him to choose between improving women’s health and bowing to pressure from anti-choice groups.
In a blatant display of hypocrisy, the president and his anti-choice allies who support the global gag rule are blocking women’s access to the very contraception that is the best way to prevent unintended pregnancy and therefore reduce the need for abortion.
Go here to learn more about Bush’s global gag rule and to take action!
Sincerely,
Cincinnati Progressive Action
• Share This Article!
Listen to this article
|  |
Register
Anonymous comments are allowed, but you can create an account above to stamp your name and to avoid typing the anti-spam code.
If you are not familiar with our rules for leaving comments, click here! The Cincinnati Beacon is not responsible for the contents of any comments. Comments do not represent the views of the moderators of The Cincinnati Beacon.
26 Nov 2007 at 10:42 am | #
This HB 287 addresses an issue I have long thought needed addressing. That is, that the father should have some say in an abortion decision.
HOWEVER - If the father is not going to take any responsibility for the kid, why the hell should he have the power to block it’s abortion ?
For something like this to work, the father would have to assume responsibly for the kid, once born, as well as pay for all care & insurance for the mother. The father would also have to be required to handle any long term care the mother, forced to give birth against her will, might incur.
I doubt 90% of the deadbeat fathers would or could accept this responsibility.
26 Nov 2007 at 12:13 pm | #
.
How ironic:
The Beacon as Free Speech advocate ?
What happened to my money, we can do with it what we want ?
The president earned has power by the people: when they voted for him.
Why the double standard ?
Why K-not, arrogantly, tell them to get their own clinics ?
Why should our tax dollars be spent on murder ?
.
26 Nov 2007 at 03:21 pm | #
I’m waiting for all the idiots who are going to argue that a woman should have a man’s permission before doing anything with her body and her life.
Good luck fellas. You’re gonna need it.
26 Nov 2007 at 04:34 pm | #
I am 100% undecided on the issue of abortion. (So please remember that if you respond to me.) My wife, on the other hand, opposes abortion completely.
What is the problem with Quim’s statement? If two consenting adults have sex, if the woman becomes pregnant, and if the man is placed in a situation where he is legally required to support the newborn (freeing the woman from any obligation)—why should the father be denied that right?
Is it a man’s fault that he has no womb?
Again, just questions. I wonder if they can be answered without yelling…
26 Nov 2007 at 04:36 pm | #
Again, I know this all hinges on how one defines life. The problem, for me, is that boundaries become absurd when you try to locate them at particular slices of time. And I’m not sure that air in lungs is more compelling as a definition for life than a heartbeat, having human appendages, and so forth.
Take some time to read Peter Singer—then explain to me why we should not allow infanticide for, say, up to one month after birth should the mother change her mind.
26 Nov 2007 at 05:06 pm | #
.
“...should have a man’s permission.... Good luck fellas. You’re gonna need it.”
It is not man’s permission if we are to follow what is claimed to be God’s inspired Christian compus, the Bible. That Deborah Girl could learn to be submissive and keep her head covered.
Man may be AWARDED and evening of enjoyment, but, God REWARDS the birth conception ?
“...Is it a man’s fault that he has no womb?..”
NO !
.
26 Nov 2007 at 06:40 pm | #
Here’s a suggestion. How about stiff (excuse the pun) penalties up to and including jail depending on how many unwanted children he’s fathered, against any man that impregnates a woman that does not want to bear a child? Or does that sound too controlling of men’s wallets and bodies?
Dean you’ve said time and again you’re undecided on a woman’s right to choose and then continue with an argument against it. I can respect your opinion and your wife’s opinion so I suggest that you avoid having an unwanted pregnancy and if one occurs, don’t have an abortion. But don’t force other women to abide by your beliefs.
26 Nov 2007 at 08:06 pm | #
Why should our tax dollars be spent on murder ?
Great question for the administration
26 Nov 2007 at 08:24 pm | #
Good one anon! Money for education and health care, not war.
26 Nov 2007 at 10:05 pm | #
Brinkman is about as reprehensible a character as you can find. His suit against Miami University to stop their offering benefits for unmarried partners, and now this. He’s a radical right wing nutjob. Ditto for Finney, Heimlich and the rest of the disgusting COAST cabal. Yea, the father should have a say, has long as he’s able to carry the baby in his gut for 9 months.
Freedom Fighter/The Bold Typist is a anti-choice/pro forced-pregnancy nut. Who’d of thunk it.
26 Nov 2007 at 10:50 pm | #
.
“...depending on how many unwanted children he’s fathered, against any man that impregnates a woman that does not want to bear a child? Or does that sound too controlling of men’s wallets and bodies?....”
How about a woman just saying, NO ?
How about a woman taking responsibility for her own body ?
Birth control, condoms ?
There are no unwanted children, just selfish individuals.
.
27 Nov 2007 at 12:56 pm | #
Abortion is taking responsibility for her own body. I see you started going ballistic when consequences were mentioned for men. How about vasectomies for men that cause more than one unwanted pregnancy? When you get a uterus, you get a say.
And as a taxpayer I’m getting sick of all the baby factories, especially Brinkman, dropping another little blessing each year to suck up my already stretched thin tax dollars. Overpopulation is a problem not a solution. I’ve proposed before and I do again, let those that use more resources (i.e., those that have children) PAY MORE NOT LESS. Eliminate child dependent credits, child care credits, college funds, etc. and all the other unfair perks. Make them start paying their fare share! Many people with children end up paying nothing! You think COAST will jump on that one?
27 Nov 2007 at 01:13 pm | #
Bold Typist/FF;
Birth control doesn’t always work. Condoms break. Many pharmacies and wingnut pharmacists do not carry o will not give out emergency controceptives (the so called marning after pill). Many victims of rape and/or incest are afraid, ashamed or unable to come forward and jump through the hoops that wingnut Brinkman is putting forth.Walk a mile in someone elses shoes.
Either way it’s none of your business. A woman is not an incubator.
27 Nov 2007 at 02:31 pm | #
.
“...Abortion is taking responsibility for her own body...”
No, it is depriving another (child) the responsibility to take care of their body.
“...How about vasectomies for men that cause more than one unwanted pregnancy? When you get a uterus, you get a say....”
For those whom have a uterus it is their responsibility to act responsible. Would they not, still, have to verify that the individual has had a vasectomy ?
“...Make them start paying their fare share! Many people with children end up paying nothing!....”
Propaganda. Anyone whom raises a child has paid their fair share.
“....Many victims of rape and/or incest are afraid, ashamed or unable...”
Society presents many hazards. An individual shot and paralyzed during a robbery is a victim, as well. They must live with the consequences of crime. We certainly, would not kill them to elevate someones (caretaker) suffering.
<i>...Either way it’s none of your business. A woman is not an incubator...”
The fabric of society is determined by how we treat the least among us by taking care of those that can not take care of themselves.
.
27 Nov 2007 at 03:25 pm | #
I bet that FF/Bold Typist also thinks that contraceptives are immoral. You know the type of holie than thou nutter, they think that Every Sperm Is Sacred.
They are just another taliban at the end of the day.
27 Nov 2007 at 03:54 pm | #
That’s absolutely ridiculous and a lie that those with children pay their fair share. Ever see a 1040? Riddled with exemptions and credits for babymakers. They get all the breaks while singles childless and/or responsible couples and seniors pay out the ass. I think it’s a good and reasonable idea to start to not penalize, but even the playing field by eliminating all these incentives for people to procreate.
And Freedom Fighter did you just equate a pregnant woman with a criminal? Your seething hatred of women and your driving need to control them comes through with every italicized word. You couldn’t care less about children just like the rest of you anti-choice people that won’t even feed, clothe and educate children that are here walking on this earth. It’s easier to worry about something that doesn’t exist. What are you doing for kids living in shelters, and homeless and in foster care? My bad. Those are real kids and Freedom Fighter can’t be bothered with them.
27 Nov 2007 at 04:49 pm | #
.
“...They are just another taliban at the end of the day...”
The taliban devalues human life more in-line with abortionists ?
“...Riddled with exemptions and credits for babymakers....”
They are the caretakers of the future. Without them, we cease to exist.
“....And Freedom Fighter did you just equate a pregnant woman with a criminal?...”
Wow, what a twist. Crime was equated to crime. Rape - robbery. Get it ?
“...Your seething hatred of women and your driving need to control them comes through with every italicized word....”
If you are assuming Freedom Fighters are all male, you would be wrong. We can assure you the males love women. One can not control anyone, unless allowed.
“...You couldn’t care less about children just like the rest of you anti-choice people that won’t even feed, clothe and educate children that are here walking on this earth....”
So wrong. We more firmly understand the value of family as our parents were killed and left us orphaned at one year old. We know the difficulties of raising a family on public assistance. We as a nation do not do enough. That is not justification for termination.
.
27 Nov 2007 at 04:54 pm | #
FF, Go and tell it to the struggling families of the hundreds of thousands of Deadbeat Dads out there. You sound like a very lonely person FF.
27 Nov 2007 at 05:38 pm | #
so if a man should have no choice about whether or not a child should be born he really shouldn’t have to pay child support afterward should he?
if we want ot take him out of the loop lets take him out of the way completely
27 Nov 2007 at 06:28 pm | #
.
“...CincyCapell says: 27 Nov 2007 at 04:54 pm | # FF, Go and tell it to the struggling families of the hundreds of thousands of Deadbeat Dads out there. You sound like a very lonely person FF...”
So, you equate the purpose of life is based upon:
If one can afford a child with that man-made illusion of value, we call the DOLLAR ?
CincyCapell sounds like a SICKO, phony.
.
28 Nov 2007 at 12:23 am | #
Just for fun let’s get this thread back on track (aren’t there rules about this, Dean?).
This article states:
“Anti-choice politicians deliberately claim these funds are used to pay for abortion services overseas. The anti-choice groups and politicians are wrong. U.S. law already blocks abortion funding overseas.”
So it is not about funding abortions. It’s about tying money for other health issues to a gag order about reproductive options. It is also tied to requiring women to get a man’s permission to make a decision about her own body. Contact your representatives through the links above, and don’t forget Brinkman’s increasing legislation to legalize misogyny.
The issue is freedom of choice and free speech, those pesky liberties that neo-cons find so annoying. Just what freedoms do you fight for ironically-named Freedom Fighter?
28 Nov 2007 at 12:15 pm | #
.
“...Just what freedoms do you fight for ironically-named Freedom Fighter?...”
Freedom FighterS.
Constitutional rights !
They would include speech, LIFE, LIBERTY, and the PURSUIT of HAPPINESS.
Take a look at a pre-birth sonogram and then tell me a helpless individual should be subjected to the uterus sucking vacuum cleaner.
.