Feminists
Related: About this forumWho's behind the war on women's rights?
The Secret About The Men Behind The War On Women
A group of men with no real background in law or medicine, but blessed with a strong personal interest in womens bodies, have quietly influenced all of the major anti-abortion legislation over the past several years. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops may be one of the quietest, yet most powerful lobbies on Capitol Hill, with political allies that have enabled them to roll back decades of law and precedent.
Over the past two years the GOP-controlled House of Representatives has launched one of the most extreme assaults on women's choice the U.S. has seen in decades. Republicans voted twice to slash federal family planning funds for low-income women, moved to prevent women from using their own money to buy insurance plans that cover abortion, introduced legislation that would force women to have ultrasounds before receiving an abortion and, most recently, passed a bill that will allow hospitals to refuse to perform emergency abortions for women with life-threatening pregnancy complications.
But the erosion of women's rights didn't begin with the GOP takeover. President Barack Obama's health care reform law contained some of the most restrictive abortion language seen in decades.
Lift the curtain, and behind the assault was the conference of bishops.
"It is a very effective lobby, unfortunately, and now they have an ally in the Republican majority because both groups find this a means by which to fight women's health issues in general," said Rep. Lois Capps (D-Calif.), a member of the House Pro-Choice Caucus. "The bishops carry a lot of clout."
(((SNIP)))
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/01/the-men-behind-the-war-on_n_1069406.html
---edited to put up a working link
---obviously the bishops aren't the only people trying to deny women's rights, but I found the article interesting nonetheless.
redqueen
(115,164 posts)I would bet that the restrictive language on abortion was part of the horse trading used to get some other things in the bill.
Convenient timing: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002163756
backtoblue
(11,681 posts)I think you might be right. Bargaining away rights is just as bad as denying them in the first place. It's kinda like giving a horse an apple - in exchange for cutting off it's leg.
iverglas
(38,549 posts)Something I've been saying for years.
Apart from the total futility of thinking one can reach compromise with people like the anti-choice brigade by giving in on something like "partial-birth abortion" -- give them an inch, and they've already been plotting for how that will help them take the mile -- that is the big question.
How can anyone bargain away someone else's rights?
Who appointed anyone to bargain women's reproductive rights with anyone else?
Fundamental human rights aren't bargainable. It's that "inherent, inalienable" thing.
The exercise of those rights may be limited, where justification is shown. But not bargained away.
Granted, in the case of your healthcare legislation, it wasn't the fundamental rights (life, liberty) themselves that were in issue. Equality rights were, though. How about if one side had demanded that sports-related hernias not be covered?
backtoblue
(11,681 posts)Last edited Tue Jan 17, 2012, 10:04 AM - Edit history (1)
Who appointed anyone to bargain women's reproductive rights with anyone else?
---good question!
Certain rights that we already have (and ones we're still fighting for) are non negotiable. Period. Our representatives either don't care that much about women's rights or simply don't want to get their sleeves dirty fighting for us.
By bargaining away these rights (one by one), they are systematically dismantling Roe v. Wade and all other feminist movements.
Women are more than mere sex objects made for breeding. With so much poverty, war, disease, and social unrest you would think that these people had more pressing and meaningful things to occupy their mouths/wallets with than attacking reproductive rights.
And - the people bargaining with our reproductive rights are no less at fault than those lobbying and pushing against those rights.
CrispyQ
(38,238 posts)The ultimate victory for the bishops would be to reverse Roe vs. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision that prevents states from banning abortion before the fetus is viable. But even without that prize, women's choice advocates said the effect the bishops have had on reproductive choice in the U.S. has already been noticeable.
"Women have fewer abortion rights today than we had three or four years ago," O'Neill said. "We are so grateful for our friends in Congress who stopped the Stupak amendment, but ultimately we did see an anti-abortion provision go into health care law, and in 2011 alone we had more than 100 anti-abortion laws signed into law at a state level, which is unprecedented."
O'Neill finds it troubling that a group of men that has historically denied women the opportunity to participate in leadership positions is exercising so much power over such a broad range of women's reproductive health legislation.
"Clearly there's a problem when men take such an interest in the sexual function of women," she said. "There's something deeply off about it."
So much is deeply off about these men. So very much. I can barely express the loathing I have for them.
iverglas
(38,549 posts)This far on from 1995 it can be a bit tricky googling for the story. Here's a little.
http://webspace.webring.com/people/mg/glowmaid/glowingmaidrant15.html
In the year 2000, this line of thinking might seem merely quaint were it not for the cloak of respectability afforded to these and other reactionary positions by the Vatican's access to the floor of the United Nations. Although it has refused to sign the UN Convention to Eliminate Discrimination Against Women because it reserves the right to discriminate against Catholic women, the Vatican has used various UN bodies to try impose its opinions on female sexuality and health on all the women of the world.
It was the Vatican that led opposition to providing contraception and abortion for women in conflict zones such as Bosnia and Kosovo, where rape was a weapon of war. The Vatican's childless celibates also orchestrated a campaign to cut off funding to UNICEF for the world's most needy children because the agency distributes emergency contraception to teenage girls in war zones.
At a meeting in March to prepare for this week's conference following up on the Beijing session, the tactics of the Holy See and its fundamentalist allies changed from obstruction to intimidation. Priests in full clerical garb, waving rosaries as a weapon to ward off evil spirits, invaded women's caucuses. Some conducted an exorcism in the room where the lesbian caucus had met.
Given this latest rash of outrageous behaviour, a movement known as See Change is building among several non-governmental organizations determined to expose the status of the Holy See to public scrutiny. ...
And more intersectionality.
The Vatican's allies in 1995 included the most fundamentalist Muslim regimes in the world. United against women. They certainly know where their interests intersect.
Sera_Bellum
(140 posts)of overturning Roe v. Wade. The abortion issue keeps the money flow going. This issue alone finances many of their anti-women projects. But what they are doing is eroding women's choices by defunding PP, creating bills that call a twinkle in the dude's eye a fetus and so on.
Keeping their base pissed off about the abortion issue is job one.