
When Democrats take over the House in January, bills that will force them to go on record about social issues that are divisive within the party will probably no longer make their way onto the floor. Which is why Republicans are so anxious to stir the shit with one last push for Sam Brownback's paeleolithic "Unborn Child Pain Awareness Act," based on wingnut-pandering junk science:
Proposed federal legislation would require doctors to provide fetal pain information to women seeking abortions when fetuses are at least 20 weeks old, and to offer women fetal anesthesia at that stage of the pregnancy. A handful of states have enacted similar measures.
The review says medical evidence shows that brain structures involved in feeling pain begin forming earlier but likely do not function until around the seventh month, when fetuses are about 28 weeks old.
[]
Offering fetal pain relief in the fifth or sixth month, when brains are too immature to feel pain, is misguided and might result in unacceptable health risks to women, the authors said.
So basically, the bill forces doctors to provide pregnant women with misinformation that could result in them taking unnecessary actions that could jeopardize their health. One might think that an organization dedicated to women's reproductive rights would object to such a thing, but one would be wrong:
While the measure has provoked strong opposition from Planned Parenthood and the National Abortion Federation, NARAL Pro-Choice America, perhaps the nation's leading abortion rights group, has stayed neutral.
"Pro-choice Americans have always believed that women deserve access to all the information relevant to their reproductive health decisions. For some women, that includes information related to fetal anesthesia options," Nancy Keenan, NARAL's president, has said in a statement on the bill.
Democratic leaders cited NARAL's position when they decided against trying to influence the vote. Democratic leadership aides said yesterday that they are leery of Republicans charging that they are already out of touch with mainstream values, even before they assume power.
NARAL's actions have put pro-choice representatives in a horrible position by giving cover to this cynical ploy to embarass and divide Democrats and provide fundamentalist kindling for Brownback's 2008 bid. It's what we've come to expect from NARAL's Nancy Keenan, who put up no fight against Samuel Alito and undermined Connecticut NARAL's efforts to force all publicly funded hospitals to provide emergency rape contraception by endorsing Joe "short ride" Lieberman, who opposed it.
I know she's anxous not to alienate her GOP donor base who haven't yet tumbled to the fact that there is no such thing as a pro-choice Republican, but really this is just getting ridiculous.
(hat tip TeddySanFran)



222 Comments





Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
fitz
Oh Puhleeze. When will a woman’s own health stop being put at risk?
I had a long conversation a while ago with a former priest who is prochoice but with limitations.
I said I thought emotions had to come out of the discussion about abortion the way it is generally out of discussions about other medical procedures. He could not understand how we could remove them and his right to be involved as “part of a woman’s community”.
He also did not realize that the much vaunted late term abortion often is what should be offered to women whose child has died in utero. He refused to ackowledge that because of emotionalism many woman are forced to live for many days with a corpse rotting inside them before they go into labour and give birth naturally. This is also riskier for the woman than having the abortion.
I am tired of the fact that this fight still has to be fought over and over again. I love your posts, Jane. You see right through to the heart of the matter.
Maybe there should be a Draft Jane movement to elect you president of NARAL. Then maybe we would actually get somewhere.
Christmas!
I don’t even no where to start with the short-sighted idiocy involved in this, other than to ask the following: why is it so seemingly difficult for an organization whose sole purpose is to support choice to stand up and say so when issues involving choice are actually threatened? Am I missing something here that makes this even a remotely close call for NARAL?!?
Fine post, Jane. Astonishing that NARAL can’t find any backbone on its own issue. And this is another one of those “under the radar” efforts of the party that lost the elections to enlarge the mess they’ve left.
It’s really time for a new Women’s Health organization.
Time to build something entirely new that does what it should for women, and frankly, for men, too.
I hate to say it but, it looks like the folks at NARAL are more interested in collecting a paycheck than following through on their stated purpose.
I gotta love this woman Arianna. ;)))) And I do.
“Gather around, little ones, I have a story to tell you. It is a cautionary tale about a perfect little girl who had a seemingly perfect little plan.”
“The perfect girl was named Hillary and her plan was to become President of the United States. So, after joining the World’s Most Exclusive Club, she set out to do everything her head — and her consultants — told her was right.”
“She learned the rules of the Club, and followed them closely. She reached across the aisle and brought home the bacon for her constituents back home.”
“She posed for smiling photo-ops with Bill Frist, Newt Gingrich, and Rick Santorum.”
“She backed a bill criminalizing flag burning, came out against violent video games, signed on to President Bush’s missile defense plan, shifted her language on abortion, and became a bellicose backer of the war in Iraq — convinced that the country isn’t ready for a female Commander-in-Chief who isn’t a hawk.”
Christy,
NARAL has been going south for a while now. I remember a bunch of postings here when they came out for the Party of One.
Oooooh — interesting choice of words from Roberts: “we have a poisonous situation with Mr. Putin.” Hmmmmm…is that a hint?
The New Domino Theory?
Jack
Subway at 9 — I’m more than aware of a lot of stuff about NARAL. But this particular issue — where the science says that the legislation is utter crap – seems like a no-brainer to me. Why they are doing the neutral shuffle is beyond me.
Wow, does this mean we get Margaret Thatcher?
Are the folks at NARAL even interested in choice any more? It sounds to me like they’ve sold themselves to the GOP for use as targets, and think they got a good deal in the process.
Christy: I think Gates just made a mistake by saying that he agrees with Robert’s entire statement/rant/hysteria.
There is always a FUCKING risk…
We WILL NEVER KNOW what happens if we leave.
Roberts is a fucking moron.
Jack
OT – Lieberman up now on gates conf. hearing
Science? I know full well the Earth is flat. And the sun revolves around our planet. Period!
Christy@12
You’re right of course. THe shift is clearly toward the progressive view on just about every issue. For Naral to cave in here is pretty lame.
Lieberman gushing over Gates, and now builds on . . . Roberts!
I’m going to work before my office calls NSA or DHS to find out where I am. Later.
Gah! NARAL is obsolete.
Speaking of short ride, he’s warbling away now at the Gates hearing.
We WILL NEVER succeed in Iraq, Lieberman
you are another moron…
Jack
I find myself in the middle of a dilemma. I cannot decide which is more distasteful. Lieberman or Senator Clinton.
Kennedy had the best analysis…
Our kids are dying…
This should be the overarching concern…
Jack
“Hello, I am Joe Lieberman. And I am using this hearing as an opportunity to publicly polish my “I’m a jolly bi-partisan guy.” badge, but will fail to provide any meaningful oversight in terms of substantive questions.” Arrrrgh…the whining continues.
Did any senator say that he/she would vote against Gates- isn’t this just a ceremony? He’s gonna get approved- two years of greatness..
What an idiot to take the job!!
almost EPU’d:
EvilDrPuma @ 101
Where Rummy hides.
hey, Jane, glad you liked this Nancy Keenan “Wingnut Infiltration Moment.”
well, its just a pipe-dream, but I’d love to see the progressive blogosphere get together and encourage a boycott of so-called “progressive” organizations that undermine those causes themselves — or undermine the progressive movement as a whole by actively supporting conservatives who happen to be “good” on their single issue.
In addition to recommending that people withhold funds from these groups, the effort would also include “substitute” places where progressives could contribute to the same cause….
NARAL and the Human Rights Campaign top my list of “boycottable” so-called “progressive organizations”….
Libruls are the problem.
Don’t forget nursing’s role in this. It’s the registered nurse who provides the majority of health counseling to patients.
We must emphasize the need to separate politics from science and the need to separate church and state from healthcare. Health information must be provided by those educated and expert at providing it: physicians, registered nurses and therapists.
Association of Women’s Health, Obstetric and Neonatal Nurses and its legislative/policy page are two excellent resources.
Oh jeebus — Lieberman is followed by Sessions. My ears are going to bleed. Gack.
Rayne @ 6
Either that, or we have to find NARAL’s pressure points via large donors.
I want Lieberman’s political hide. There must be a way.
If the fundies want to work on something worthwhile, let them tackle this instead of messing with our freedoms.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/HEALTH…..ers.index/
Christy Hardin Smith @ 31
“Our biggest challenge… Is how to handle Iraq.”…
Uh, no kidding, Sen. Sessions.
Btw… Hi, everyone. : )
I’m pro-life, damnit. How else will we have enough troops to fight immoral, illegal, terrorist-incubating wars, for Christ’s sake?
Lieberman4Lieberman pissed off punaise.
Bad Strategy.
Does NARAL have any scientists on its board? Or perhaps I should ask, do they have any scientists left on their board?
It’s all well and good that NARAL wants women to have information to be able to make their own choices, but the key word above is relevant. Does Keenan even realize what she said? Ill-informed, misguided science does not help women make informed choices – it inhibits those choices.
Arrrggggghhhh!!!
I’m really beginning to wonder if Nancy Keenan isn’t a mole bought and paid for by the Religious Right. Or just an enthusiastic volunteer.
angie @ 34
But, let’s remember…
For these people, “pro-life” only means one cares about the fetus up until birth…
Then the baby needs to take personal responsibility for keeping himself/herself alive.
Gates and his shoo-in. Demos. Where are you?
Halftime score:
Texas A&M 7 Plato 0.
OMG, Sessions is now quoting Lieberman on the need for a “bipartisan… tripartisan” foreign policy…
So I’ve got Republicans and CT4Lieberman…
Which is the third party they’re talking about?
Christy Hardin Smith @
31
The man is a Judas Goat in every sense. It would be better to split the senate than to continue to give that man any semblance of creedence.
Is it me, or are the Republican Senators kissing J-Lie’s butt every chance they get?
EPU’d from the last thread. I had to post this where it would actually be seen.
montag @ 136
Go ahead, mention names. My problem with your earlier post was that you castigated everyone in the state for the actions of the majority, and I compared that to the nation electing Bush to try to demonstrate how discriminatory that characterization is. To me, making judgments about whole populations due to the actions of some, even a majority, is intellectually dishonest when that population is not self-defining. It’s like racism or sexism. You may think that, since people choose where they live, it’s fine to judge them by that standard, but just because I needed a job and found one here doesn’t make me a redneck – it just made me employed.
atdnext — don’t forget the stored blastocysts that they prefer to end up in a holy trashcan than to be used to help the suffering people of the world.
“We’ve got an immediate crisis in Iraq…”
-Sen. Reed (D-RI)
OK, we’ve got a real Dem now!
Meet Nancy Keenan.
Contact NARAL.
Oh it’s a Double Civil War!
Jack
jack reed to gates – civil war or sectarian struggle?
gates – it’s more complex than a single title.
I would describe it with three words…
Impeach George Bush!
“We have significant disorder…
And a lot of thuggery…”
OK, Gates is saying that Iraq’s “approaching chaos”, but he won’t say whether it’s a civil war.
Oh, but Gates has clearly drunk the Kool aid and does the administration proud by blaming Iran and Syria.
twolf1 @ 51
Perhaps Gates could use the FDL title of choice for this misadventure: Clusterfuck.
Or even Jon Stewart’s: Mess-O-Potamia.
Iraq’s a “twofold mission”
1. try to improve security
2. prepare Iraqis to take helm in securing their own country
Why are they kissing arse?
Reed sez there could come a time when there is ethnic cleansing.
come on Jack– it’s happening right now!
I still can’t figure out why NARAL is consistently taking such wrongheaded positions on choice issues. Just look at their support of Chafee and Lieberman for two other recent examples.
It seems that the best and only way to deal with this problem is either to (i) render NARAL irrelevant by publicly bashing them for hypocrisy until pro-choice Democrats and progressives stop giving them any money or (ii) figure out why NARAL keeps doing stuff like this so we can apply pressure and force them to change.
Does anyone have a real theory about why NARAL would undercut their own cause so consistently?
I have heard some semi-developed theories thus far, but I haven’t really been convinced by any of them. Anyone have thoughts on this?
Our success in dealing with NARAL under prong (ii) above depends on our ability to figure out what is going on in their decision-making process on matters like the fetal pain bill and support for Lieberman/Chafee.
Oh, gollie gee whiz…
Now Collins is gushing over Gates…
Bay State Librul @ 57
’cause they are arse kissers
“What would be the impact on sectarian violence?”
That is, Collins is asking how a phased troop withdrawal would impact the violence…
Gates says he’ll go to Iraq and talk with the commanders about it…
gates – “i’m not smart enough and I’m not well enough informed”
my cherry picking quote
atdnext — welcome — don’t remember seeing you comment before, but it’s nice to meet you. :)
Christy Hardin Smith @ 64
Thanks! I’ve usually been here for Late Nite FDL… I think this is my first morning here. : )
So many of these jokers voted for the war and they cannot even admit they were wrong and that we have lost…
that conversation should be the central one here, but it won’t happen because they are deluded and too full of hubris (among other things)
Collins brings up the elimination of IG Bowen, but does not tell us who inserted that into the legislation. (I really want to know that.)
Peterr @
38
Peterr,
This administration has never shown so much as a head nod towards true science. Things like fact and scientific method seem only to get in the way of larger agendas. Like the loss of habeas corpus, the dumbing down and absolute abandonment of science is another example of society not holding the leaders accountable.
Most people, asked the direct question, “Do you want expert opinion to be given a place in your leaders’ decision making process,” Would answer, “Yes, of course, I’d be foolish not to want that.”
But, by allowing the exact opposite to occur (vis a vis, junk science morons or even unqualified hacks to be taken in place of true expert opinion), the society has given a carte blanche for the government and the media to continue.
How many times — and of course Faux news is an easy target — have your seen a legitimate, bona fide expert on a subject of scientific importance, juxtaposed with a hack of no particular background other than he/she fits the political ’story’ being told. And their information is given equal weight and consideration. Even Tim Russert does this. It is a pathetic occurrence in our society and it has been coming on for some time?
I don’t really understand it. I can understand why an authoritarian government wants to control a message. I don’t understand why a relatively educated populace continues to allow the mechanism of that control.
I guess I could have just agreed with your sentiment:
aaaaaarrrrrrrrgghhhhhhhhh!
Impeach the person that tried to rein in
on Mr. Bowen… who did that?
Jack
angie @ 66
Yes that person is a traitor…
Bay State Librul @ 68
Last I heard, Collins says she didn’t do it, but suspects it came from the House and maybe a staffer.
c’mon January– this needs to be investigated!
Akaka’s up now…
“We cannot come to depend on DoD to solve these problems…
We must look to State Dept.”
Maybe Senator Akaka did not get the memo that our State Dept. is broken, ineffective, and completely dysfunctional.
Pelosi criticized for offering Hastert a nice office and a crane to get to it.
Akaka’s asking about the personnel system…
Collective bargaining…
“What is your opinion of NSBS regulations affecting collective bargaining?”
Christy Hardin Smith @
12
I think NARAL must have been coopted they way AARP was.
OMG, Lindsey Graham is asking about Iran…
Hmmm, it sounds like he’s ready for war.
If I had to bet on who inserted it, I’d say Duncan Hunter. It’s his MO to insert stuff at the last minute like that — he and his staffers try to sneak stuff in frequently.
graham to gate – is iraq the central front in GWOT?
gates – I think it is ONE of the central fronts
angie @
66
me too
great point that we need answered (clause inserted)
holy shit…did i just hear that correctly? gates says he believes iran is actively seeking nukes, they would use them against the usa, and that the iranian pres is lying.
i’m convinced. any one who votes for gates after that bit is nuts!
Graham makes my skin crawl…
Bay State Librul @ 81
ditto
Sharoney @
39
I vote paid mole.
Is Gates being baptized?
John Casper 32 — why not BOTH?
I think it’s time we build a new organization that actively goes after the donors of NARAL and asks them to support a new, improved and effective organization that stands up for reproductive rights and women’s privacy in healthcare.
Tell me we can’t do it. We’ve got people here who built the likes of BlueAmerican PAC. We’ve got people who can make physical delivery of texts (and rubber stamps) to every member of Congress possible. We’ve got people who are experts in public relations and media access, website and internet community development. We’ve got women who can speak volumes about their need for private, safe healthcare, and men as well who can testify to the need for reproductive freedom.
We have it all, just need to exercise the political will to kick NARAL to the curb.
iraqis are threaten by democracy and that’s why they’re fighting us?
“Mr. Gates, would you say that yer one of them people who LIKE ta see the boys marchin off- flags flyin- guns shinin- ta kick tha holy livin shit out of the enemies of america- er are ya one of them other kind who HATES war?”
Graham gets Gates to say that Ahmadinejad is a liar.
Graham inserts Israel into the mix.
I quite agree, Christy, and would like to see it revealed and Dunkin’s exploratory cmte for the preznincy disemboweled.
oops– Gates just said ” the destruction of Afghanistan”, rather than “the destruction of the Taliban”.
(nice Freudian slip)
Do you renounce satan and all his works?
hell…Graham won’t let Gates disagree or clarify
OT – Gender pay gap narrows — for unexpected reasons
Is it true or false or multiple?
Bay State Librul @ 84
YES!
Pastor Graham: “In the name of JEEEZUSS, I baptize you as our new Chief Woormonger!”
cspan 2 ends coverage…
Bay State Librul @ 89
Gates tried to not renounce a few favorite vices but Graham railroaded him into renouncing it all.
Bay State Librul @
84
ROFL. He is the epitome of all that is increasingly dysfunctional in the far right seats of the US Senate…
Can Levin get Graham off the committee…
twolf1 @ 94
c-span3 coverage is still on…
selise @ 98
http://www.c-span.org/watch/cs…..mp;Code=CS
You can go to the website to watch it.
C-Span3 still has coverage and you can watch online. FYI.
I really have to wonder if NARAL had a stealth takeover by the right. They tried it with the Sierra Club, but the were open about it and people rallied to throw them out; maybe they’ve learned from that. If you wanted to apply to an issue group the Republican government tactic of avoiding the fight of eliminating an agency they don’t like, and instead appointing someone dishonest who will undermine its mission, this seems like a textbook case.
I’m thinking of the documents written by theocrats in the 80s, I think, about how to get elected to school boards and stuff by hiding your real views, and then once you were in a position of power, pushing creationism and no-qualifications homeschooling and such.
What’s NARAL’s governance structure? I know us “Crashing the Gates” acolytes don’t think much of single-issue groups, but it might be worth launching a grassroots takeover just to stop Ms. Nancy from working against us.
why is there a picture of Paul McCartney at the top of this post?
“I know she’s anxous not to alienate her GOP donor base who haven’t yet tumbled to the fact that their is no such thing as a pro-choice Republican, but really this is just getting ridiculous.”
I have to disagree. NARAL has sold out. There is no other good explaination for their choices in the last year. Just like NPR. They may still have good reporters fighting for truth and truthful stories but as an organization they have gone to the dark side.
Problem is, NARAL needs to be a rigid, uncompromising organization. The last thing they need are split-the-difference types. Abortion is a somewhat unique political issue because there’s simply no room for compromise.
1. You can’t be “a little bit pregnant”, you either are or you aren’t. You’re either going to go all the way and give birth to a healthy child (Which means proper diet, excercise & check-ups) or you’re not. There’s no difference between having 0% or 49% of the decision. There’s no difference between having 51% or 100% of the decision. There’s no such thing as 50%.
2. There’s not a whole lot of time in which to decide the issue. It is preferable to get an abortion in the first trimester and women often don’t realize they’re pregnant until they miss their period. After that, they have to pull together some money, make an appointment, make sure they have time off from work, etc. Women who don’t want to raise a child at that particular point in their lives don’t have all day, they have a fairly narrow window.
Abortion rights are not something that lend themselves to a split-the-difference, batgaining type of approach. Those decisions call for a firm, steadfast decisionmaker.
Yeah, NARAL is completely useless.
Well, Graham just proved that Gates doesn’t have the courage/integrity/confidence to stand up to politicians attempting to influence or manipulate. Gates should have at least called time-out or faked an injury,…or something.
“we’re fellating our nominee here so we don’t have to fellate him in the secret session tomorrow.”
Transform this…
Jack
Ahh, Liddy’s up now…
“Do you support the change of the Army to 70 modular brigades?”
Instead of transformation how about enlightenment?
Jack
rumi @ 105
absolutely right.
That was very revealing.
He should have taken a powder like georgie did at the UN when he asked condi permission to go pee pee.
Liddy “stretched too tight under the knife and with scary streaks in her spikey hair” Dole up now.
Is that Wolfie’s World Bank?
Bay State Librul @ 109
So you don’t like Rummy’s transformation of the military? Hasn’t he done a heckuva job?
Re: As to why NARAL has caved, (Sorry I’m a newbie and don’t know how to do quotes yet),
Just spent ten days at my folks home in DC and was shocked at how manipulated the Dems/libs still are there. They have yet to figure out how to stand on thier own principles. NARAL probably thinks they have to give into “middle ground”. It don’t know if they are deluded into thinking they will be met half way by the zealots or they just can’t remove the beltway fairy-dust from their eyes. But I’ve stopped supporting them financially since they supported Chafee.
The Dems in washington are still cowed by the wingnuts. You should have heard the whining about John Murtha and Hoyer. They didn’t understand it was brilliant piece of symbolism on Pelosi’s part. She knew he didn’t have the votes but she wanted to tell the rest of the country that she heard their call on Iraq.
It was depressing.
As far as I’m concerned NARAL has failed its mission and is no longer a viable organization. What good is a lobbying organization like NARAL if they aren’t protecting the issue they purportedly lobby for? I’m influencing as many people as I know to give up on them and shift support to Planned Parenthood.
punaise @ 102
wow, good catch
Grow corn for ethanol?
Mr. Gates, when you are not urinating liquid gold and defecating Lindt chocolates do you take time off of your busy schedule to worship the God’s of war?
-GSD
gates – the afghan farmers aren’t making enough money from their opium crops
Pelosi probably scored a lot of chops with the miltitary by sticking behind Murtha too.
Loyalty goes a long way.
-GSD
2nd Quarter score…
Texas A&M 14 Peace 0
Bay State Librul @
97
No doubt, get the to the curb for your proselytizin’, Grammy.
his stance on agricultural assistance and helping with alternative crops in Afghanistan was the only thing I have agreed with thus far.
Well, as they used to say in `50s B-movies, NARAL is on the take.
GSD @ 119
Which is why it was a brilliant move to support him. He has lots of under the table power on the floor.
If we’re going to discuss fetal pain treatment, maybe we should also discuss enemy combatant torture anesthesia. You know, in the “Enemy Combatant Pain Awareness Act.”
We would be in the streets now if we had a
Draft…
Jack
Finally… A real question!
Nelson (FL) asked about a draft…
Gates is saying that we don’t need one.
puppethead @ 114
Good Idea. But we need somthing stronger too. A message to NARAL that there in trouble for being wishywashy on their core issue.
hmm, Gates admits that kids, moms and dads don’t want their kids putting on a uniform and heading straight for Iraq.
a teensy bit of honesty.
John Casper @
37
oh, yeah: my daily message of enduring contempt for Lieberman must really be getting under his skin.
punaise @
102
Gotta go find out if track lighting is adjustable during the day or only at night.
Topangalib @ 128
It would be really great if Planned Parenthood came out with a fund raising camapaign spotlighting why they are THE organization to support a women’s right to her own body, and how the other groups have failed woman in this matter.
Topangalib @ 128
Perhaps…
Well, I also gave up on NARAL earlier this year, when they “stood by their Joe”.
When I do anything specifically for choice, I do it through Planned Parenthood…
Besides, I have friends who work at the Orange County office! : )
atdnext @
127
Why does Gates hate America? Doesn’t he take the islamofascist threat seriously? We want to fight them over there, so we don’t have to fight them over here. Isn’t this just a 21st century version of Neville Chamberlain’s failed appeasement policies?
close snark tag.
RBG @ 131
surely you have a day tripper on your electrical panel.
puppethead @
114
Best suggestion I’ve read all thread. Unfortunately, NARAL itself has become part of the problem. Too bad, they were great in the late ’70’s and ’80’s. For my money, Planned Parenthood has always been there for women.
“I think that having a channel of comunication is worthwhile…”
Gates answering Thune about his loaded question on asking for Iran and Syria to cooperate…
OK, he’s backpedaling…
He’s going back to the old “all options on the table” line…
“Long term stability in Iraq will be influenced by Syria and Iran”
puppethead good to see you again.
atdnext @ 133
Planned Parenthood is close to as bad as NARAL. I wouldn’t give them a penny either. They supported Lieberman, I believe. Even in the general election, after he lost the primary.
IIRC, Planned Parenthood followed NARAL’s (national office) lead wrt Lieberman.
AFAIK, FDLers cut PP some slack, because they actually run clinics that depend on Federal funding. Lieberman4Lieberman has leverage on them that he doesn’t have over NARAL, which doesn’t support that kind of infrastructure.
Regime change?
A put down on France…
Jack
Jane, could you help me out here? As I recall, Planned Parenthood has been just as out of line as NARAL recently. Could you let us know, and maybe give an example or two? It seems people are thinking Planned Parenthood is an acceptable alternative to NARAL, which I think is incorrect.
Sparkles the Iguana 125 — heck, yeah, let’s write up an amendment to relieve the pain of torture victims. Wait, maybe we should just not torture!! What a novel idea!
Personally, I’d like to see something in the way of pain-relief legislation that sews up Jeff Session’s mouth. Oh, my ears, my nerves…
edit: sew up John Cornyn’s and Lindsey Graham’s mouths, too. Ugh.
Have they asked Gates about torture?
Jack
atdnext @ 133
I have a friend at the OC office too. :) And PP has been great at getting awareness out about this wingnut, Eric Keroack, who the Head Idiot Incharge has appointed as the Dep Ass Sec of Population Affairs which over sees title X. He thinks Birth Control is bad for women. What a pig.
John Casper @ 140
AFAIK, PP let us all down on Alito. They won’t see a penny from me.
montag @ 123
Ding ding ding.. Sounds like a winner to me. Resumes and personal financial statements of every single decision maker in NARAL now please. Finally a complete list of financial supporters.
I smell several rats!
*xyz @ 146
Yeah, but who do we have left? Women need a voice.
Ha… Now the Senator who will be replaced by Claire McCaskill is up.
Who is this asshole talking now?
Jack
Being in Minnesota, I got a glimpse of how Planned Parenthood was planning to deal with the South Dakota rapists’ rights abortion ban. Planned Parenthood in Minnesota was preparing for some pretty heroic efforts had the SD ban not been voted down.
I don’t expect organizations to never make mistakes, but at least Planned Parenthood shows they understand what they’re doing. The same can’t be said of NARAL anymore.
(By the way, thanks Jane. I like it here.)
More background on Planned Parenthood:
http://www.firedoglake.com/200…../#comments
montag – I have replied to your post downthread.
The MO Senator who will be replaced by McCaskill is asking about new weapons…
And a bigger military…
What about all the waste over all the pork projects that we don’t need?
Rayne @ 143
He is a whiny, nasal little fucker, isn’t he?
When I hear him, I’m reminded of the story Leo Kottke tells about inheriting an annoying little dog. The noises the dog was making was really getting on Kottke’s nerves, so he took the dog to the vet. He said, “I want the dog de-barked.” The vet said, “I can’t do that–that’s his natural means of defense… but… I can tune him.”
atdnext @ 149
Give this guy the hook?
Bay State Librul @ 150
Jim Talent…
Or as I like to say,
The Senator from Missouri who will be replaced by Claire McCaskill. ; )
punaise @ 130
It is seriously understating the facts to say you are one of the most creative commenters at FDL. Your comments routinely come from completely unexpected angles. About the only thing they have in common is that they are always fun to read. Joe got more votes than Ned, but he LOST forever the respect of all thinking Americans. I think your daily litany echoes the sentiments of the netroots. Pork for CT??? Fraid not. Legislation that Joe wants, over my dead
fuck’nbody, unless it serves a larger goal that we support. I want Joe and some members of the CT media to beg for his term to end, because we will have made it so miserable. Realistic? Probably not, but I sure do enjoy your daily comments about it.atdnext @ 157
Thanks, Jack
Gates is supporting the Prez… hedge, hedge
Jack
OK, everyone stop everything…
Hillary’s speaking!
She asked how Gates came to the conclusion that “we’re not winning in Iraq”.
IIRC, NOW endorsed Ned.
puppethead @ 151
Ditto my experiences. Where I live, they stood up to bomb threats not so long ago and they are there on the ground and trusted every day. In the real world, people don’t always have the have the luxury of intellectual ‘purity’.
Could we please focus on one single issue at a time? I’m real sick of the Lieberman litmus test. Get over it.
atdnext @ 161
Umm, I’m positively underwhelmed by the perspicacity.
“Do you agree with Rumsfeld’s memo?”
Gates will “consider it”.
montag @ 164
LOL! ; )
tfitznc at 9:44, are you trying to tell me what to do?
tfitznc @ 163
I’m sorry to hear you say that we should “get over” NARAL and Planned Parenthood’s support of Lieberman. These groups demonstrated that there was something fundamentally wrong with the way that their decision-making process when they supported Lieberman over Ned Lamont. Now we are seeing it again with the fetal pain bill. The Lieberman/Lamont race was the canary in the coal mine for these groups – if you choose to ignore it, it is your loss.
John Casper at 158 – you’re too generous, but thanks. even a digital clock gets two 707s per day.
we don’t rest until Lieberman is an ex-Senator.
John Casper @
167
Not in particular
puppethead @ 151
Yep, PPFA might have made the Lieberman mistake as well, but at least they’ve also done a lot of things to protect a woman’s right to choose…
I can tell you that as a Californian, I’m very glad that they’ve been front and center in defeating Prop 73 AND Prop 85 (the parental notification initiative, in two attempts).
Though I promised myself I would never comment on this site again, my conscience will not allow me to keep silent.
Before moving to the substance of my comment, I will state for the record that I am strongly pro-choice and that, if pressed for an answer today as if it were a voter referendum, I would not favor legislation that would require a doctor to provide fetal pain information for women seeking abortions in the second trimester. I really shouldn’t have to say this in order to have what i am about to say considered fairly. I worry that I am pandering in order that readers here cannot leap to the conclusion that I hold a different POLITICAL agenda, and therefore dismiss me on that basis, but this is an important point so I am willing to let you know that I am on your side with regards to the proposed legislation so that doesn’t get in the way of the more general, and serious, point that I am about to make.
Labeling the scientific opinions that hold that pain can be felt during the periods in question as “wingnut-pandering junk science” just doesn’t’ hold water. Posters should refrain from making such sweeping generalizations unless you can show you are on very firm footing, and in this case one cannot. Labeling like this lowers the dialog and dilutes ones credibility with those readers who have a little more than a cursory understanding of scientific research.
Whether or not a fetus feels pain during the period in question is far from a scientifically settled question (more on that below, be patient). Go to the linked MSNBC article and see that the term “likely” is used four times in qualifying the opinions of the scientists who authored the study in question.
Likely is a very uncomfortable qualifier for any scientist to use. In my own research, before I would do that I would go back to the lab and do additional experiments so that i could use more definitive language. In the area of fetal pain research however, there would be serious ethical constraints to doing the types of experiments that would answer this question in a more definitive way. i suspect that it would even be difficult to get Institutional Review Boards to allow experiments on animal models to gain insight into the question, but I can’t say for sure. The take home message is that use of the soft term “likely” with regard to a scientific position shows that the authors of the paper in question are acknowledging that they are basing this on evidence that is not as definitive as one would like.
These scientists may be correct, and they may turn out to be incorrect. The MSNBC article cites the opinion of a scientist who holds a differing opinion, one Dr. K.S. Anand. A few minutes with the google renders his thumbnail qualifications:
A few minutes with a search tool for scientific publications reveals that Dr. Anand is the author of ninety papers in the leading peer-reviewed publications in the areas of expertise cited above, as well as publications in more general readership journals such as JAMA, New England Journal of Medicine, and Nature Medicine. I am far frominformed about this area of science, but based on these facts I hope that considerate people will not dismiss Dr. Anand’s, and other scientists dissenting opinions as “wingnut-pandering junk science” unless you plan to be able to show a connection between wingnuts and the scientific opinion, and scientists in question.
I have heard that Al Gore is going to be coming out with a book that discusses the absence of fact in our current dialogues. I think we all need to read it when it comes out.
I hope that I have made my point here in a way that will not lead to me being attacked the way I was the other day (sock puppet, pedant, prat, etc). Its not that I care ab out being called names. I have a little more ego strength than that. I just do not want to give anyone an easy way to dismiss what I am saying by the way that I may say it.
I respectfully submit that the post should be edited to remove the unfounded implication that scientists who honestly hold a differing opinion are pandering to wingnuts.
When I was a graduate student, the first conference I attended had a special session that sought to resolve two differing opinions about the presence or not of a particular bound water molecule within the structure of a bacterial repressor protein. The two camps argued so passionately that I thought there might be blood on the floor before it was all over. The arguments were rigorous on both sides. The bottom line was that the question could not be conclusively, definitively resolved at the experimental level. Given that illustration, I hope readers here can open their minds about a question like fetal pain. I know you want definitive scientific answers, but they just aren’t there and unless someone devises a reall clever experiment that most experts in the field clearly do not foresee at this point, you are not going to get it. All you get is best opinion, and scientists will always differ. Let’s not unfairly label the camp that we do not agree with because of the practical and political considerations we believe in.
P.S. If Ms. Hamsher has some information that shows that Dr. Anand and other scientists who hold similar opinions are tools of the wingnuts, I will be happy to withdraw and/or revise my commnets based on new information.
The Lieberman/Lamont race was the canary in the coal mine for these groups – if you choose to ignore it, it is your loss.
I agree Completely. Lieberman must go!!!
BTW: Who is IIRC. I googled it and got Interactive Illinois Report Card. I don’t think they are about Choice.
The Domino effect again… pure bullshit!
Jack
Oh, joy… Cornyn’s up.
When doesn’t he parrot Bush on everything?
You know, whatever testy substance is in the water today — I’m truly not in the mood for internal sniping. Just FYI to everyone. Let’s all take a deep breath and try not to snipe at each other in the comments please, recognize that people are entitled to their own, different opinions, and try and be repsectful of that. Don’t make me have to post another “civility” thread. *g*
Oh, and fresh thread for everyone.
*xyz @ 168
I am not supporting NARAL. PP may have some problems that the netroots can help with, but they service real women with real difficult choices every day. IMO we should not judge our representatives or special interests’ recommendations on a single vote. Yes, Lieberman is a moron, but the roots have emboldened him.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 176
OK, I’m following you to the new thread! : )
tfitznc @ 177
tfitznc – do you mind if I bring this comment up into the new thread? I’m sure that a lot of people will be interested in your thoughts on how our challenge to Lieberman has “emboldened” him.
zig maintenance
You know I think a lot of people are missing the point on this Fetal Pain issue. They are saying that a fetus feels pain at 28 weeks – That’s 6 months! As a mom I would guess they are right. BUT NO ONE HAS AN ELECTIVE ABORTION AT 6 MONTHS!!!! The only time that is performed is when THE BABY IS BRIAN DAMMAGED OR DEAD OR THE MOTHERS LIFE IS IN DANGER!!! At which case the abortion is mercy to the mother and the fetus and if the child is viable they try to save it. This is just another wingnut diversion to split the pro choicers just like the “Partial Birth Issue”. Such abortions are rare and only medically nessecary and legal because of real problems for the mother or the child.
Very good points, Crick. It’s always good when people shed light and not just heat on issues.
Topangalib @ 181
I planned, but forgot to make that point in my lengthy post above. You are of course absolutely correct. The question still remains regarding anathesia for the fetus when abortions are necessary later on in the term.
People need to ask themselves this question. If it was an adult, geriatric, terminal…unconscious, and you were unsure about whether this person felt pain or not, what decision would you make about it?
crick at 183 — I don’t know about every medical provider, but I do know that many already offer anesthesia under these circumstances (where it is medically applicable and necessary to do so for the individual case). The proposed bill inserts itself as a governmental edict into the doctor/patient relationship in an already difficult situation. Which is yet another reason that NARAL’s “not gonna talk about it” position is untenable in this case, at least in my book.
I think this bill is hog swalup. To think that a parent who is forced into the horrible decision to have a late term abortion isn’t concerned for the child is ridiculous. If the child is dead the anesthesia is moot. If it is alive and viable then the doctors take every precauation to save the baby. Are we going to insist on anesthesia for the baby at the moment of birth too.
Sorry Crick But this is just more ugly GOP Fairydust again to play with your emotions.
Topangalib @
185
Yep
I am sick and tired of the Congress practicing medicine without a license.
My medical decisions are between me and my doctor, buckos. Now butt out and fuck the fuck off!
Nancy Keenan and Naral need to go away and STFU. They are enabling this hog wash. That is unconscionable.
Christy Hardin Smith @ 184
I don’t disagree with you. that’s not my point. My point is about an unecessary hit job on a scientist. I realize it may be red meat for the base, but it would be nice if someone here could deal with the substance of my comment.
For what its worth, I recoiled at Brownback’s legislation and at NARAL’s position. Obstetricians have to be allowed to give what information they deem appropriate to their individual patients, based on their best judgements about the entirety of oft-times conflicting scientific information, with no governmental interference.
What I vehemently object to is smear a scientific opinion, without real data to support it, that may be used to support the Brownback legislation. You would be screaming the loudest if Malkin was dismissing a scientist whose opinion was consistent with your beliefs and positions. Scientists need to be able to form their opionions without this kind of political clap trap. That’s the way the process works. the disagreements push people to do better and better experiemtns and analysis to move toward greater consensus. that’s the way the process works. Its best if opinion you don’t like is not held put into political gunsights unless you have direct evidence that the scientists objectivity is compromised.
Same as you folks ask of others – support the claims you make. If you know something about Anand, who is cited in the MSNBC article, that suggests that his SCIENTIFIC position is POLITICALLY motivated, step up with it. If not, the appropriate thing to do is retract.
Honestly, I have a hard time understanding the inability to get this. For what its worth, I don’t see anyone directly addressing my concerns. What support do you have for this being “wingnut-pandering jubk science” otherr than it being what you want to believe?
What Christy said. There is all kinds of debatable scientific opinion out there. It evolves all the time. What is appropriate to share with a patient to help them make an informed decision is up to the DOCTOR. Bush does not have to fly back from Crawford to sign a bill mandating that a doctor tell a patient about the latest research on whether fetal pain exists. There is no reason for government to interject itself, especially where next week’s study could change most scientific thinking about an issue. Why should a doctor be forced to tell a freaked out 14 year old rape victim about so called “fetal pain”; how about a 40 year old IVF patient who desparately wanted this baby but now can’t have it without risking death? Let’s leave it up to the DOCTOR.
Crick @ 172
From one scientist to another: I appreciate your comment, but just don’t think it is relevant to what is going on here.
It may be appropriate for a doctor to offer anesthesia to a late-term fetus for any medical procedure. But this should be between a woman and her doctor, not the domain of Congress. And it certainly should not be the business of politicians trying to score points with their base at the expense of women’s health. As I stated above: Congresscritters should stop practicing medicine, and leave it to trained and licensed professionals.
Tlazolteotl @ 191
i don’t think crick is disagreeing with you. my reading of crick’s comment was that the objection was only on the very narrow issue of the discription of anand’s research as “wingnut-pandering junk science“. can we justify that description or not? if not, maybe it should be retracted. such a tiny a retraction (if justified) wouldn’t undermind the overall message of the post (and rightful condemnation of naral). isn’t that the point crick is making?
Yes, that is the point Crick is making, and it’s an excellent point. But if Crick is trying to get that phrase of the post changed, I think Crick is going to be barking in the wilderness for a long time.
Sparkles the Iguana @ 193
nothing wrong with making the point though – i’m thinking that jane (and the other front pagers) rely on us for self-correcting feedback. it’s all good…
Maybe we can call it wingunt pandering junk medicine – i.e. Congress’s attempt to practice it.
bmc90 @ 195
well said!
(I posted this @ Gilliard’s website, too)
Gawd NARAL is awful. Adios. See ya. Good riddance.
This is an unforgiveable move by Keenan — way beyond the Lieberman move which was indeed dispicable. But bolstering the right wing strategy of fetal pain of all things is so beyond the pale I can hardly believe Keenan can look at herself in the mirror.
Fetal personhood is THE BIG GOAL of the right wing Christians. PERIOD. One could argue (tho I would disagree) that many of the other obstacles — parental consent, waiting periods, etc. — are less about fetal personhood and more about overall opposition to abortion and/or a belief that women are infants and incapable of making life decisions. But measures that are aimed specifically and rhetorically at the goal of establishing the concept of fetal personhood in the public’s mind — that is the ball game. That’s about the overall legal structure. It’s about privacy broadly, which underpins gay rights, the rights of pregnant women to make their own decisions free of coercian, the rights of singles and marrieds to contraception, and on and on…
And finally, there are some great & fierce pro-choice groups in addition to Planned Parenthood that actually do the work and don’t spout right wing BS and who do so against huge odds — they deserve our support:
– NAF (National Abortion Federation, represents independent clinics nationally and keeps excellent stats on clinic violence)
– CRR (Ctr for Reproductive Rights, pro-choice legal & policy group — one of the fiercest)
– ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project (legal advocacy)
– PP Legal Defense Fund (PP’s legal arm)
–National Network of Abortion Funds (coalition of state funds that raises $ for low-income women who can’t afford a procedure; this is a very common problem nationally — most clinics need thousands of dollars each week to aid patients who are having trouble scraping the $ together in time to not need a 2nd trimester procedure, for ex — and a little $ goes a long way; they can help you find your local state fund, too.)
Kind of off topic but I’m still stunned that I found out last week that the bible states that abortion is ok. Thought being that if the fetus doesn’t make it that it was part of the grand scheme. So much for people who think that they take the bible literally
selise @ 192
Thanks. that is exactly what I was saying. I regret that I cannot seem to express myself more clearly.
Rayne @ 6
We have one. it is called NAF, the National Abortion Federation. It is secretive for security reasons, but it is the best ally we have. Anyone who is pro-abortion and can afford to write a check to NAF, should do so.
Perrrhaps NARAL ees een need of fifty-thousand or so Rubberstamps left over from the 109th Congress, no?
so.
!El Gato Negro! @
201
Now that’s practical recycling.
crick @ 199
i thought you did just fine… and made a good point, thanks.
!El Gato Negro! @ 201
i love it!
Seorita Hamsher,
there must be a similar way for pipples such as ourselves to register our mass disapproval weeth NARAL’s chickensheet actions.
NARAL must be shown that they can no be “pro-compromise” weeth these theocratistas. That road leads to marginalization of our views, and loss of freedom for women.
I suppose that eef we wanted to be graphic about eet, we could inundate Keenan’s office weeth wire-hangers…
so.
maldito code…
So I take eet that “& n tilde ;” does no fly here, eh?
grumble grumble so grumble grumble…
Sparkles the Iguana @ 193
Maybe you are correct. I hope not. Wasn’t always that way. You know I didn’t really read the site much for a long while (due to personal matters), then I stumbled back in recently in the middle of the (in)civility dust-up. I had not been aware of some of some of the things people were discussing. After getting involved in an uncomfortable dust-up myself shortly thereafter, while trying to address what I opined to be a different instance of a front page post playing it fast and loose with science (or lack of understanding thereof), I did a little research (being an inquisitive science geek), to try and discern what happened to a site that I loved so well not that long ago.
I came across this nugget:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/4/28/04936/1975
This is a diary on kos from “firedoglake”. Notice that in response to the concerns of the of the first person to comment, one “Pachacutec”, diarist “firedoglake” graciously removes a remark about a “trannie” thatreader Pachacutec refers to as “gratuitus an unnecessary.” Didn’t seem to hurt that much.
Compare and contrast with the tone of recent discussions here about things some readers found offensive. What a difference a year-and-a-half seems to make!
Crick—IMNAScientist, just a frequent FDL reader. I’ve read all of your comments over the last few days and thought you took some undeserved hits in one of the late night threads. However, if you read those threads again, you might see how you enabled some of that reaction. Opening with “I call bullshit” may not be the most effective way to engage either a front pager or your fellow commenters in a conversation.
FWIW, I also remember you from your previous monicker and hope we see you contribute to future conversations in a constructive way.
It’s about honey and not vinegar, if you know what I mean.
crick @ 207
I agreed with Pach at that time. We will not be subjecting the content of blog posts to consensus opinion, much less changing it to satisfy the objections of one persistent commenter I don’t happen to agree with.
Thank you for your interest in the topic, and for taking time to express your opinon. That’s what the comments section is there for.
crick – now i think you’re not being fair. the diary you linked to had 19 comments. now there are many 100 comment threads per day.. plus all the off-line organizing.
apples and oranges.
yeah, it would be great if jane had the time to respond to each of us personally – but i don’t think that’s realistic or fair. your comment is up there… and i do think it is a good point. the personal attacks – not so much, and i wish you would lay off them.
but please don’t stop with the constructive comments, i appreciate your contribution… and i think many others do to.
RBG @ 208
I realize that. the reason I used that term is because back when I read the site regularly, that was a favorite expression of both regulars, and at least one main pager (Christie) for things that didn’t survive the sniff test. I do acknowledge that it was a mistake not to realize that I should not be flip like that when posting about the site, rather than people off the site where it was ok. I stand corrected. It was an error in judgment. IF you think saying “I call bullshit” justified the kind of name calling and attacks that issued forth, so be it. Still, it should not mean that the substance of what I was saying could not be considered. I note that anyone who weighed in the next day with something actually substantive to add supported the positions I took.
I am glad you remember me from my other handle. Then you know that I am a well-behaved person. I have to say that when a regular here labels one a sock puppet for no reason, its like painting a target on their back. Everyone who spends time in comments anywhere knows this. that is when the flood gates opened the other night. Nothing I said justified that accusation. Although the moderator added a cautionary note, it spoke volumes to me that no one seemed to take issue with that assertion.
I show that I realize the mistake you cite by the fact that I was walking on eggshells today, sometimes to the point of hurting my clarity.
I will continue to maintain that in both instances, I have asked two different main page posters to qualify assertions they make. In neither case has a shred of information been forthcoming that speaks to the issue. In the first case, I did ask nicely…several times over an hour and a half. I asked nicely today as well. For some readers, the inability of the posters to offer anything substantive along these lines tells you what you need to know, so I will not keep pressing the point like a pit bull, which was another mistake I made the other night.
This isn’t at all personal. I really feel that practices like the one I described above will wind up hurting issues I care deeply about. the main page posters here are highly visible. What they write may be forever here on the internets. I would hate to see it come back to haunt.
If you want to talk the talk, in this case making demands of other journalists, pundits, and bloggers to back up the outrageous things they assert, then you might consider walking the walk by doing the same.
With that, I am going to let this go before the bullies pick up my scent.
Thanks to everyone for their civility regardless of opinion.
somebody needs to start their own blog.
House rules. You get one identity. Anything else is very much sock puppetry and is cause for banning.
This is warning #1, and we didn’t invent the rule today, it is longstanding so please respect it.
TeddySanFran @ 212,
Hahahahaa
NARAL has lost a lot of supporters like me. The election demonstrated its leadership doesn’t get it. Let them sit. I don’t think the organization is worth our time and attention.
Jane
I just want to say thanks for giving us all a great place to share ideas and for your patience when we’re less than tolerable.
:-)
atdnext @ 40
Can I get an “Amen” here?
‘Course, they only want the little bugger alive so’s they can stick a frigging rifle in its hand so’s it can blow away a few of dem dar terrahists! If I see another SUV with a pro-life bumper sticker sitting next to a “Support GWB” car magnet, I’m gonna projectile hurl. Hopefully on the SUV, if my aim’s good.
…and all the people said “A-a-a-a-men“…well, one guy, anyway, in the back row but I said it real loud.
Yup, that’s the ‘Quiverfull’ argument.
While it is not probable, it is possible that NARAL got confused by reading too much technical research on the issue. Like the review of the available literature by the the British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology (the chief Brit ob-gyn journal), which said: “Given the anatomical evidence, it is possible that the fetus can feel pain from 20 weeks and is caused distress by interventions from as early as 15 or 16 weeks.” Or the writings of the eminent Dr. Kanwaljeet Anand of the U of Arkansas, whose research tranformed pain control in premature newborns — he wrote recently, “It is my opinion that the human fetus possesses the ability to experience pain from 20 weeks of gestation, if not earlier, and the pain perceived by a fetus is possibly more intense than that perceived by term newborns or older children.” It is best to avoid such confusing material and just stick with that much-criticized 2005 JAMA article, the chief author of which was a medical student previously employed as a lawyer at NARAL. The JAMA authors assure us that the fetus doesn’t experience pain until about 29 weeks. If these fetuses happen to be born prematurely at 23 weeks, they cry when stuck with a needle, but while in the womb, you can tear their legs off without inflicting pain until 29 weeks. Anybody who thinks that doesn’t add up is obviously a religious fanatic.
I might add that if you actually read the bill (H.R. 6099), you will find even greater outrages.
It starts out, “There is a valid Federal Government interest in preventing or reducing the infliction of pain on sentient creatures. Examples of this are laws governing the use of laboratory animals and requiring pain-free methods of slaughtering livestock …” And then the bill actually cites a bunch of current federal laws dictating how lab animals and food animals must be treated. What motive can have congressional sponsors have, in insisting that the human fetus (after the end of the fifth month) be afforded considerations parallel to those provided to rabbits and lambs, other than sheer misogyny? NARAL must be blind not to see this.
Then, the bill would require that the abortion provider offer the woman a brochure which says, “There is a significant body of evidence that unborn children at 20 weeks after fertilization have the physical structures necessary to experience pain. There is substantial evidence that at least by this point, unborn children draw away from surgical instruments in a manner which in an infant or an adult would be interpreted as a response to pain…You may request that anesthesia or other pain-reducing drug or drugs are administered directly to the pain-capable unborn child if you so desire.”
Well. I suppose they got the “substantial evidence” part from reading the Brit article, the writings of Prof. Anand, and much, much more of the same sort of stuff. But can’t they see, as most of the posters on this thread so clearly see, that pregnant women are incapable of evaluating this sort of confusing information? If, if not entirely incapable, at least not equipped to evaluate such claims with the dispassionate perspective that the posters themselves bring to the task.
No, these women need to be shielded from such possibly distressing information. Oh, sure, the bill says, “a pregnant woman may waive receipt of the brochure” And, that “Nothing … may be construed to impede an abortion provider or the abortion provider’s agent from offering their own evaluation on the capacity of the unborn child to experience pain, the advisability of administering pain-reducing drugs to the unborn child, or any other matter…” But really! If you can’t trust an abortionist to voluntarily give a woman all of the pertinent information on what is involved in an abortion, who can you trust?
I remember Keenan from Montana. She’s what you’d call an “Infilitraitor”.