More Bush parting gifts

[Ken]

For all those who remember when even contraception was illegal.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9DkqU-uWojc

http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2008/07/15/hhs-moves-define-contraception-abortion

The Department of Health and Human Services Monday released a proposal that allows any federal grant recipient to obstruct a woman’s access to contraception. In order to do this, the Department is attempting to redefine many forms of contraception as abortion.

excerpt:

Abortion: An abortion is the termination of a pregnancy. There are two commonly held views on the question of when a pregnancy begins. Some consider a pregnancy to begin at conception (that is, the fertilization of the egg by the sperm), while others consider it to begin with implantation (when the embryo implants in the lining of the uterus). A 2001 Zogby International American Values poll revealed that

49% of Americans believe that human life begins at conception.

Presumably many who hold this belief think that any action that destroys human life after conception is the termination of a pregnancy,

and so would be included in their definition of the term “abortion.” Those who believe pregnancy begins at implantation believe the term

“abortion” only includes the destruction of a human being after it has implanted in the lining of the uterus.

…

Both definitions of pregnancy inform medical practice. Some medical authorities, like the American Medical Association and the British Medical Association, have defined the term “established pregnancy” as occurring after implantation. Other medical authorities present different definitions. Stedman’s Medical

Dictionary, for example, defines pregnancy as “[t]he state of a female after conception and until the termination of the gestation.”

Dorland’s Medical Dictionary defines pregnancy, in relevant part, as “the condition of having a developing embryo or fetus in the body,

after union of an oocyte and spermatozoon.

full text pdf

http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/emailphotos/pdf/HHS-45-CFR.pdf

Roe v wade means nothing if you can just redefine reality based on a zogby poll.

Share This

[JanS]

OUTRAGEOUS !! But you know, he’s gonna try to leave his mark (even more than he already has) in these last few remaining months. (Shaking head)

Thanks for sharing this, Ken.

Share This

[JoB]

apparently we don’t need to pass a law to limit women’s rights… Bush just creates policy…

and you thought ratifying the ERA wasn’t necessary…

one would hope… that with any luck… this one might be on step too far.. even for a supreme court that sits squarely to the right…

but since they limited the right to sue about equal wages to the first few months of employment.. when you are unlikely to uncover wage disparity… i wouldn’t count on it.

those rights women are counting on aren’t law… and without law there is little legal recourse.

Share This

[Author]

Posts