Adoption Reform, Right-to-Life Style
Kathryn Joyce reveals what’s really going on with the adoption reform bill currently being debated in Ohio. Continue Reading →
Tag: “pro-life”
Explaining US Foreign Policy
From an October 2011 article at Human Life International World Watch, a “pro-life and pro-family” organization dedicated to monitoring “anti-life forces operat[ing] under the radar implementing their destructive agenda”:
…You would think, in an empty nation like Kazakhstan, there would be groups encouraging people to have more children, but exactly the opposite is the case. Family Health International and USAID distribute contraceptives by the ton, the Population Council writes long reports supporting the continued availability of abortion for any reason or no reason at all, and, of course, the lethal alphabet soup of the United Nations coordinates everything — UNAIDS, CEDAW, UNDESA, UNDP, UNIFEM, and the omnipresent UNFPA.
Nobody could explain why all of these population control groups are necessary in a nation that has an average of only 15 people per square mile.
Service Announcement for Journos
A friendly reminder to all of us at the start of this new election cycle: “Pro-life” means much, much more than just anti-abortion. It’s an entire set of beliefs leveled at legislating bodily autonomy. For women, yes and most controversially, but also for the sick, the poor, the disabled, the terminal, gays, parents; in short, “pro-life” efforts impact health care access for all of us, regardless of our belief systems. So stories like this, at The Economist, are helpful but fall way short of the necessary discussion that should be taking place in the national media. Continue Reading →
The Bishops, Proving Me Right
I shouldn’t take any credit for predicting the actions of the most predictable institution on the globe, but I’ll take it anyway. I made the case at The Nation last week that the USCCB’s recent statement on aid in dying would lead to broader crack-downs on end of life rights, privacy, and awareness. I was right. According to a new report at Crisis Magazine and a press release from the bishops today, they’ve targeted Catholic professors at four universities: Georgetown, Marquette, Santa Clara and Boston College. How did the bishops identify the academics they wanted to discredit? Writes Patrick J. Reilly at Crisis:
The professors’ efforts came to light during a Cardinal Newman Society investigation in 2005, following news reports of a legal brief filed by 55 bioethicists in opposition to “Terri’s Law,” a Florida measure that empowered Gov. Jeb Bush to ensure that the comatose Terri Schiavo received water and nutrition. As reported in “Teaching Euthanasia,” an exclusive report in the June 2005 issue of Crisis, multiple professors at Catholic universities had taken positions on end-of-life issues that seemed to conflict with Vatican teaching.
Exporting the "Pro-Life" Movement to Russia
Last month the Russian Orthodox Church issued a statement that supported Moscow’s squashing of the gay pride parade there. But it seems limiting the rights of gays isn’t the only issue on which the church has found a chance to work with the state. The New York Times reports that the Russian government and the ROC are working together to keep the native Russian population from being overrun by immigrants by fostering a US-like “pro-life” movement. Continue Reading →
Exporting the “Pro-Life” Movement to Russia
Last month the Russian Orthodox Church issued a statement that supported Moscow’s squashing of the gay pride parade there. But it seems limiting the rights of gays isn’t the only issue on which the church has found a chance to work with the state. The New York Times reports that the Russian government and the ROC are working together to keep the native Russian population from being overrun by immigrants by fostering a US-like “pro-life” movement. Continue Reading →
What's In a Title?
Andy Kopsa writes about the awkward title of a fantastic and haunting article by Sarah Blustain at Mother Jones. Blustain chronicles the work and activism of “pro-life” lawyer Harold Cassidy. The article was first posted with the title A Pro-Choice Feminist’s Worst Nightmare which has since been changed to The Man Who Loved Women Too Much.
Pro-Life: adj. opposing abortion and euthanasia
Feminism: n. the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes
Absurd: adj. unsound, ridiculous, incongruous
Manipulate: v. control or influence someone in a clever or underhanded way
Pro-Life Feminism: The word you’ve entered isn’t in the dictionary.
What’s In a Title?
Andy Kopsa writes about the awkward title of a fantastic and haunting article by Sarah Blustain at Mother Jones. Blustain chronicles the work and activism of “pro-life” lawyer Harold Cassidy. The article was first posted with the title A Pro-Choice Feminist’s Worst Nightmare which has since been changed to The Man Who Loved Women Too Much.
Pro-Life: adj. opposing abortion and euthanasia
Feminism: n. the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes
Absurd: adj. unsound, ridiculous, incongruous
Manipulate: v. control or influence someone in a clever or underhanded way
Pro-Life Feminism: The word you’ve entered isn’t in the dictionary.
Antichoice at the End of Life
by Ann Neumann
Reposted from The Nation.
Last week a regulation to provide Medicare coverage for advance care planning counseling—that is, offer reimbursement to doctors for time spent talking to patients about end-of-life care—was abandoned… for the second time.
Section 1233 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) died a first death in the summer of 2009 in the debate over healthcare reform, during which healthcare opponents characterized the provision as a call for government-run “death panels.” Former Lieutenant Governor of New York State Betsy McCaughey, who consulted with Philip Morris while working on the hit piece against the Clinton healthcare plan “No Exit,” coined the “death panel” moniker; Sarah Palin popularized it. Then John Boehner, at the time the House minority leader, claimed that the provision would lead the country down “a treacherous path toward government-encouraged euthanasia.” Fox & Friends repeated the “death panel” meme dozens of times, and soon, the provision was stripped from the healthcare bill. But last November, the Obama administration quietly inserted it into Medicare’s annual regulations—after the customary public review period. The New York Times‘s Robert Pear broke the news on Christmas Day that end-of-life counseling was to be covered by Medicare. Immediately, right-wing think tanks, some with legal cases against the healthcare bill, leveraged the “death panel” rhetoric to bolster their arguments. Continue Reading →
Abortion as "Black Genocide"
Read former Revealer managing editor Kathryn Joyce’s new article on efforts by the Religious Right to gain new black members by pushing the (old) idea that “family planning is a racist plan to wipe out populations of color.” Continue Reading →