Do you believe life begins at conception?

We all know the US anti-abortion movement is full of shit when they call themselves "pro-life" otherwise Sandy Hook would have been the US's Port Arthur (if the gun control mess was even able to become as bad as it is).

That said, science fiction writer Patrick S. Tomlinson tweeted this scenario:

Whenever abortion comes up, I have a question I've been asking for ten years now of the "Life begins at Conception" crowd. In ten years, no one has EVER answered it honestly.

It's a simple scenario with two outcomes. No one ever wants to pick one, because the correct answer destroys their argument. And there IS a correct answer, which is why the pro-life crowd hates the question.

Here it is. You're in a fertility clinic. Why isn't important. The fire alarm goes off. You run for the exit. As you run down this hallway, you hear a child screaming from behind a door. You throw open the door and find a five-year-old child crying for help.

He is in one corner of the room. In the other corner, you spot a frozen container labeled "1000 Viable Human Embryos." The smoke is rising. You start to choke. You know you can grab one or the other, but not both before you succumb to smoke inhalation and die, saving no one.

Do you A) save the child, or B) save the thousand embryos? There is no "C." "C" means you all die.

In a decade of arguing with anti-abortion people about the definition of human life, I have never gotten a single straight A or B answer to this question. And I never will.

They will never answer honestly, because we all instinctively understand the right answer is "A." A human child is worth more than a thousand embryos. Or ten thousand. Or a million. Because they are not the same, not morally, not ethically, not biologically.

They are lying to you to try and evoke an emotional response, a paternal response, using false-equivalency. No one believes life begins at conception. No one believes embryos are babies, or children. Those who cliam to are trying to manipulate you so they can control women

We can make this even more interesting by saying the embryos may not make it full term, whereas the child would grow up and make a significant contribution to society.

The reality is that we don't know if these viable embryos can actually make it to full term.  Doggone has said that god is the most prolific abortionist since quite a few pregnancies end in miscarriage (I'll leave it to her to explain all that).

All I know is that  foetus is not guaranteed to be born alive (or in perfect condition).  On the other hand, someone who is alive really has a right to life.

A Victory for Women!

Sanity instead of medical malpractice being forced on women by conservative thugs elected to office!
From a recent email from the Center for Reproductive Rights:

When it comes to fighting for reproductive rights, there’s often no sweeter word than “unconstitutional.” It’s sounding especially sweet today: A district court just struck down Oklahoma’s demeaning and invasive mandatory ultrasound law for being an “unconstitutional special law”—treating abortion differently from other medical procedures without justification. Left unchallenged, this law would have forced a woman seeking an abortion to undergo an ultrasound, have the image placed in front of her, and hear it described in detail—even if she says NO. But the Center for Reproductive Rights did challenge the law, and the fundamental rights of Oklahoma women have been rightfully protected by the courts. Today’s ruling resoundingly affirms what should not be a matter of controversy at all—that women have both a fundamental right to make their own choices about their reproductive health, and that government has no place in their decisions. Similar laws in Texas and Virginia have illustrated the harm that results when these laws go into effect. Women feel humiliated, even bullied by their own doctors—and access to essential reproductive health care services is severely threatened. Today’s decision means that Oklahoma women will not be subjected to this kind of treatment—and it adds to the growing momentum of a nationwide backlash against the overreaching of lawmakers hostile to women, their doctors, and their rights. We still have a long road ahead of us in the battle to reclaim our reproductive rights—but today we celebrate and stand proudly with the women of Oklahoma. When we work together, we can be victorious. Thanks, as always, for all you do,

Nancy Northup President & CEO

PS - The Center for Reproductive Rights has filed three lawsuits against ultrasound laws and is tracking 22 copycat bills. We are on the frontlines fighting in the courts because we all have a human right to dignity and health. There is a larger relevance to the 22 copycat bills the Center for Reproductive Rights is following.

Not surprising, anytime you see the copycat (or as I've called it previously, cookie cutter legislation) like this from the right, you can pretty much expect that the secretive, special-interest / corporate-legislator-buying ALEC is in the mix somewhere. If you oppose legislation written outside your state being pushed in your state to benefit special interests and corporations hiding their identities from the legislative process......then YOU TOO OPPOSE ALEC, and entities that engage in illegal acts like voter suppression, funded by the Koch Brothers. Making that clear and well-outlined link between ALEC, and right wing legislation is the Sunlight  Foundation Reporting Group:
Virginia ultrasound law is the image of a few others By Ryan SibleyMar 07 20129:59 a.m.3 comments
Source: Sunlight Foundation; Guttmacher Institute
Source: Guttmacher Institute Updated March 7, 4;22 p.m.

The bill Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell signed Wednesday requiring women in his state to undergo ultrasound screening before they can proceed with an abortion represents the latest victory for anti-abortion activists pushing to get similar legislation enacted nationwide. Seven states already have laws on the books requiring pre-abortion ultrasound screening, according to Elizabeth Nash, state issues manager for the Guttmacher Institute, an abortion rights group that focuses on reproductive health policy. At least 18 more states are considering similar bills. Above is a map showing states that either have or are considering ultrasound legislation, including states that have legislation but are considering further changes. Light purple states are those that have already enacted legislation; medium purple are states where legislation is under consideration. Dark purple states have laws on the books but are considering changes. Among the states that have already passed ultrasound legislation, some are attempting to expand the provisions. The Oklahoma state legislature, for example, is considering a bill that will mandate the woman considering an abortion listen to the sound of the fetus' heartbeat as well as look at images of it. Kristi Hamrick, a spokesman for the anti-abortion Americans United for Life, confirmed that the group authored a model bill, titled “The Woman’s Ultrasound Right to Know Act” that appears to have been the inspiration for a number of the bills currently under consideration. A Sunlight Foundation analysis that uses technology called SuperFastMatch shows the AUL bill has instances of text matching with all 13 bills to which we compared it. Of course, some bills show much more overlap than others. Matching instances run from a low of one to a high of 29. Given that ultrasound bills enacted by two states -- Oklahoma and Louisiana -- are on hold while they are challenged in court, an even more popular model may turn out to be a Texas ultrasound law that was upheld in January by the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Sunlight's analysis using SuperFastMatch shows that the Texas bill shares multiple instances of identical text with 12 of the 13 bills to which it was compared, including Virginia. Our analysis also showed text overlaps between the Texas bill and the model bill written by Americans United for Life. SuperFastMatch, an automated textual analysis, identified overlaps in text in multiple ultrasound bills, but also found cases where entire passages were replicated. In some cases an entire passage was replicated across bills with exception of one word, such as the use of “that” instead of “which,” causing the technology to overlook those instances and not count them as matches. When that occurs, it takes the work of a human to point out that that passage is in indeed the same. An example of this is below, with the single distinguishing word in each passage boldfaced: Alabama SB12: MEDICAL EMERGENCY. A condition which, in reasonable medical judgment, so complicates the medical condition of the pregnant woman as to necessitate the immediate abortion of her pregnancy to avert her death or for which a delay will create serious risk of substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function, not including psychological or emotional conditions. No condition shall be deemed a medical emergency if based on a claim or diagnosis that the woman will engage in conduct which she intends to result in her death or in substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function. Oklahoma SB1274 "Medical emergency" means a condition that, in reasonable medical judgment, so complicates the medical condition of the pregnant woman that it necessitates the immediate abortion of her pregnancy to avert her death or for which the delay will create serious risk of substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function, not including psychological or emotional conditions. No condition shall be deemed a medical emergency if based on a claim or diagnosis that the woman will engage in conduct which she intends to result in her death or in substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function. Sometimes the similarities between bills are immediately obvious, like the case of AUL’s model bill and the bills being considered in Alabama and Pennsylvania. All three have a similar title: The model bill is titled “The Woman’s Ultrasound Right to Know Act”, while the Alabama and Pennsylvania bills are titled, “The Right to Know and See Act” and the “Women’s Right to Know Act, respectively. The 13 bills that Sunlight ran through SuperFastMatch are: • Alabama SB12 • Alaska SB191 • Illinois HB4085 • Iowa HF2033 • Kentucky SB103 • Michigan SB150 • Mississippi HB1107 • New Jersey S231 • Ohio HB125 • Oklahoma SB1274 • Pennsylvania HB1077 • South Carolina H3026 • Virginia HB462 Model legislation appeared on the country’s radar last year after the work of two left-wing organizations revealed the entire catalog of model bills curated by the conservative group American Legislative Exchange Counsel (ALEC). According to the AUL website, members of the anti-abortion organization attended the 2010 ALEC conference to network with state legislators and promote their model bills.

For those who aren't familiar with the Sunlight Foundation Reporting Group, it is part of the larger Sunlight Foundation.  this excerpt provides more information and context  From their 'about' section:

About Sunlight Foundation Reporting Group

The Sunlight Foundation Reporting Group is part of the Sunlight Foundation, a nonprofit, nonpartisan Washington, D.C.-based organization that uses cutting-edge technology and ideas to make government transparent and accountable.
The Reporting Group applies the techniques of journalism to make government more transparent. We report on everything from congressional office disbursement reports to lists of individuals and entities who are banned from getting government contracts, from campaign finance records to the $787 billion Recovery Act. Our goals are to identify and describe little known and underused federal data sets, to assess the accuracy, completeness and usefulness of federal data, to demonstrate through our reporting how this data can be used effectively, and to help other reporters do the same...

Women's History Month - 2

Margaret Sanger funded the development of the modern birth control pill out of her own pocket.  She went to jail for giving women contraceptive diaphrams, comdoms, and the most important thing of all, factual sexual medical information.

It LIBERATED women.

That was decades ago, more than half a century ago.  Only the reactionaries are trying to take us back to the bad old days for women.  They hate sex, except when they are having it, often extramaritally despite the lip service to 'family values'.  Lying repressed prudish hypocrites.

Doonesbury nails it - thanks MN Central for the heads up:

and while we are in the neighborhood of humor pointing out the tragedy of right wing policies towards women and reproduction, here are a couple of recent ones from another of my favorite cartoonists, Steve Sack of the STrib, who makes pictures worth a thousand of my words:

For the record, I've referred to Ann Coulter as a 'media slut and/or whore', clearly referring in the context to her willingness to flip flop for support (in that specific case switching from anti-gay to pro-gay) and to say outrageous things, like Limbaugh, just to get attention.  Ultimately, she seems to operate ONLY on getting attention from the media, imho, not at all on legitimate substance of her own.  I would point out that differs in two key respects from Limbaugh: 1. it refers to actual conduct, where Limbaugh's comments, particularly against Sandra Fluke do not; and 2. it refers to media conduct, not Ms. Coulter's private and personal sexual conduct, which is her business unless she opts to use it for media fodder.  The term slut in that context relates to doing things publicly for attention (and in some cases, presumably money) that is offensive, and it is appropriately insulting.  Absent the word 'media', which makes this about public behavior involving someone selling their integrity for money and attention, as Ms. Coulter does routinely, that is a term which is neither specific to women, and therefore not sexist, and which refers to a pattern of public behavior sought by Coulter, unlike Ms. Fluke and so many others who have been insulted by Limbaugh and others on the right.  It is not 'nice', but neither is Coulter; it is an attempt to accurately portray her behavior.  It is not however, unlike Limbaugh and others, intended to intimidate or otherwise control or restrict that behavior either.  It is in fact, considerably LESS offensive and inflammatory than routine statements from Ms. Coulter.

You have to doubt the religious convictions of a man who lies so often about other people's speeches.



Well done, Steve.  Nothing like pointing out the hypocrisy of the serial adulterer.  I'm not persuaded that either of these two individuals have really either found religion or monogamy; rather I think it is nothing but an unconvincing pose - an attitude not limited or specific to either side or the center of the political spectrum.



Thank you T

Thank you Steve! Well done, and clever and witty as always. I'm not worried about Satan in my uterus, but I certainly want Santorum and the rest of the republican extremists and religious fanatics out of it.  The Puritans are trying to make a comeback; they are unwelcome.  Nathaniel Hawthorne in the 19th century pegged them for the hypocrites they were in their original incarnation, in the Scarlet Letter.  Now they just consider themselves part of partially or predominantly entire 'red' states.