Women don't actually need any rights, right?

Well, the Shrub's done it again. This time his assault on womens' reproductive rights is a White House Rule through the Health and Human Services department that is meant to "protect the moral and religious objections" of medical workers who object to abortions or sterilization. The major problem is that the wording is so vague it could end up being applied to simple birth control - among other things. Of course, my feeling is that if a doc or even the person sterilizing the instruments (protected under this proposed rule) has such a strong objection to what they're expected to do in their daily jobs, they should be looking for another one, not expecting me to curtail my rights to please theirs to be an ass.

Here's a link to an Adobe Acrobat pdf of the whole rule: http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2008pres/08/20080821reg.pdf

Read it and see if you have a problem with it. If so, contact the White House before September 25, which is the deadline for public commentary. If you want to leave a comment at the main site, use this link: http://www.regulations.gov/search/index.jsp. Of course, I just tried finding the proposed rule using all the search criteria I could think of and didn't, so good luck that way.

There are plenty of online groups that are already circualting petitions like the NARAL, NOW, Planned Parenthood and MoveOn.org. However, a personal letter with specific insights from the proposed rule itself might be more effective.

Now, to read it more thoroughly and figure out what I'll be using for my letters, one to the editors of the Times and one to the Health and Human Services Department.

Ugh! Shall we all be barefoot and pregnant, ladies?

Colorado "Personhood" Amendment

As much as I would love to be back in Colorado right now, getting my degree, something is happening there that makes me just want to pull a "Hulk Smash!" I wonder how much of this Tancredo pushed for?

In November, Coloradans will vote on an amendment to the state constitution granting "personhood" to "any human being from the moment of fertilization." The ultimate goal being to stop any and all abortions and overturn Roe v. Wade.

Some of my problems with this proposal:
1. A zygote or embryo cannot live outside the womb. Until the third trimester a fetus cannot live outside the womb. Yes, there have been very rare cases of a twenty-week fetus surviving but as I said, they are very rare and most doctors and medical professionals consider the third trimester to be the viable stage. Even early third trimester, premature births need a lot of TLC to make it with reasonable health. My personal opinion is that until viability is reached, said fetus is not a person. Sorry to sound harsh.
2. If a miscarriage (medical term: spontaneous abortion) happens and some yahoo says the pregnant woman did something to cause it like drink or smoke, this could open her up for criminal negligence charges. Please, if she intended to keep the baby and deliver it, she'll already be torn up by the loss. Charging her afterward is like twisting the knife and pouring salt in the wound at the same time. Women are already being charged under child abuse laws if they drink alcohol or do drugs while pregnant, even if nothing bad happens to the child.
3. If there is a medically necessary procedure that will harm the fetus to save the mother, whose rights are paramount?
4. The old stand-by of rape and incest. What do you do? Using the much-to-often-repeated standard "It's not the child's fault" doesn't negate the irreparable harm a pregnancy carried to term could do to the real victim of such crimes, the woman. Again, until viability, not a child. Would this give the rapist a chance to say he demanded the "child" be born, thus compounding and extending his rape for at least nine months. What a power trip. This amendment would hand him the perfect weapon over his victim - one he could wield continuously for at least nine months. Maybe more. As if having to face him in trial isn't bad enough.
5. Who the hell gave some state or government the right to tell me what to do with my own body? Not me. My body, my choice. Stay the hell out of my uterus.
6. I also object to it because it can ultimately be used to halt vital stem cell research into diseases like Parkinson's and spinal cord injuries (to name the most famous). Now, I do think that if using adult stem cells could yield positive results, we should study that, as well. Whatever works the best.
7. What would happen in the case of in vitro fertilized eggs that haven't been implanted and are slated to be destroyed? Do they automatically have to be implanted and given a chance to develop into infants? Who has to carry or pay for them? Honestly, frozen eggs are enough of a pitfall, shall we add more to an already dodgy subject?
8. Do we really want to return (as if we've really left) to the back-alley, coat hanger abortion days? This would simply serve to drive women with no other option to it. Septicemia, bleeding out, permanent injury? Yeah, we really look forward to this type of thing again.

Dianne N. Irving says some interesting things about the proposed amendment, actually. Worth a read.
Also, read this .pdf by JAMA bout fetal pain.

*sigh* There is so much more that's wrong with this asinine attempt to control women's bodies and minds.

Live Long and Marry

Here's a link to a livejournal community that one of my favorite authors, Tamora Pierce, is offering some goodies for auction in. It's called Live Long and Marry. The community/fundraiser is for groups fighting the marriage amendment in California. Here is info from the site:

"What is this? Live Long And Marry is a fandom auction to benefit marriage equality. Bidding begins on July 1, 12:01 AM one minute after midnight Pacific Time, 2008, and closes on July 15, 12:01 AM one minute after midnight Pacific Time, 2008. Please do not bid until bidding opens.

What's the cause? The auction will raise money for the fight against the California initiative which will legally destroy existing same-sex marriages and ban any further ones. If the initiative passes, it will write discrimination into the state constitution, annull existing marriages, and make Mr. Sulu cry.

How can I help? You can bid on fanfic, original fic, vids, cookies, memorabilia, critique/betas, and much more! Or you can offer your skills and services as a writer, vidder, baker, knitter, or whatever else you'd like."

Obviously, the originator of the community is a Star Trek fan. As most Trekkies know, George Takei, our beloved Sulu, has finally been given the chance to marry the love of his life, Brad Altman. It constantly amazes me that people see no problem in denying other human beings basic rights. Let's fight this amendment in whatever state tries it but first, in California.

Right now I'm trying to figure out what I can stitch to offer for an auction.