Political Forums
Forum Notice

Go Back   Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Forum > Current Events

Current Events Current Events Forum - Latest political news and events


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old March 9th, 2012, 11:55 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,333
Most women don't like the GOP, and the misogyny of Limbaugh, Santorum, Paul, Romney and other Republicans is certainly to blame:



Quote:

http://www.washingto...fM1R_story.html



The fragile gains Republicans had been making among female voters have been erased, a shift that has coincided with what has become a national shouting match over reproductive issues, potentially handing President Obama and the Democrats an enormous advantage this fall.



In the 2010 congressional midterm elections, Republican candidates ran evenly with Democrats among women, a break with long-established trends. That was a major reason the GOP regained control of the House.



Now, female voters appear to be swinging back to Democrats.



A number of polls show Obama’s approval among women has risen significantly since December, even as it has remained flat among men.



The same trend, which began even before the controversy in recent weeks, is also showing up farther down the ballot.



When the Wall Street Journal/NBC News survey asked last summer which party should control Congress, a slim 46-42 percent plurality of women said it should be the Democrats.



But in a survey released Monday, compiling polling since the beginning of the year, that figure had widened considerably to a 15-point advantage for the Democrats, according to polling by the team of Democratic pollster Peter Hart and Republican Bill McInturff. Fifty-one percent favored Democratic control; only 36 percent wanted to see the Republicans in charge.




Both sides have tried to shape the narrative in this battle for and about women. But many Republicans are beginning to wish they had never waded into what has become a heated conversation over contraception, who should have it and what it says about people who use it.



GOP pollster Kellyanne Conway, an adviser to presidential candidate Newt Gingrich’s campaign, said Republicans need to return to pocketbook and fiscal issues: “We know what works, and we need to get back to it.”



In focus groups, said Democratic pollster Celinda Lake, what women are expressing is not anger at the positions Republicans are taking, but frustration with the amount of attention reproductive issues are getting.



“Particularly among blue-collar women,” she said, “what we hear is, ‘How can you be arguing over this, when Rome is still burning for me and my family?’”



Even the wife of presidential contender Rick Santorum has told him to quit trumpeting his opposition to birth control.



“My advice to him was stop answering the question,” Karen Santorum told Politico. “Tell them, ‘I’m not going to answer this question. Let me tell you what I know about national security. I know a lot about national security.’ ”



A prominent GOP strategist, who requested anonymity to discuss the party’s situation frankly, said: “It’s devastating. I don’t think it’s going to go away. I think it’s going to be a significant challenge the Republican nominee is going to inherit.”



Obama has moved aggressively to take advantage of the opening Republicans have provided. He personally called Sandra Fluke, the Georgetown University student who had been attacked by conservative radio personality Rush Limbaugh over her advocacy for contraceptive coverage, and expressed his support.



And the White House announced in recent days that the president will give the commencement address this year at Barnard College, an all-women school. (Ironically, the previously scheduled speaker bumped off the stage by Obama was Jill Abramson, the first female executive editor in the history of the New York Times.)



The attention to women’s issues has reassured Obama’s feminist allies who had been concerned with what they had seen as a lack of attention to female voters, who had been drifting away from the Democratic fold.



“No question that if you are Obama, you have to do better with women in order to win,” said Democratic pollster Anna Greenberg, who estimates that the president will need at least 53 percent of female voters to get reelected.



Feminist groups and Democratic candidates across the country are taking the opportunity to raise money with the “war on women” theme. The mother of embattled Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) sent out of a fundraising letter blasting “Rush Limbaugh and his out-of-control nasty mouth.” Tennis legend Billie Jean King has signed on to the House Democrats’ fundraising efforts, asking donors to “help us send Republicans a clear, unmistakable, and powerful message.”



Virginia state Sen. Janet D. Howell (D-Fairfax) said the focus on abortion and contraception will turn many women — and men — away from the GOP.



“I think most women assumed that these were settled issues probably three decades ago and are aghast that it’s been reopened,” Howell said. “Almost half my e-mails ...are from men. And they’re speaking for their wives, their girlfriends, their daughters, and are very upset by what’s happening. Many of them say they have been Republicans but they’re not going to vote Republican in the future.”



Some Democrats say the contraception issue gives them an opportunity to connect with women who were born after the early years of the feminist movement, and who don’t believe abortion rights are under a serious threat.



“We always have had challenges with younger women,” said Neera Tanden, president of the liberal Center for American Progress think tank. “All of a sudden, when the national conversation is about contraception, they wake up.”



A perfect storm of social-issue controversies had been building, and the clouds burst in February.



The first thunderclap was the announcement by the Susan G. Komen for the Cure foundation that it was ending its grants to Planned Parenthood. It reversed itself in the ensuing furor.



That was quickly followed by a standoff between the Obama White House and the Catholic church over a requirement that employers provide contraceptive coverage under the new health care law.



Senate Republicans got into the fight as well, making an unsuccessful attempt to pass an amendment that would have allowed any employer to opt out of providing birth control. They cast it as a vote for religious freedom.



“This is tyranny,” Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) said of the new health-care law’s requirement. “This is discrimination masquerading as compassion, and I’m going to fight it.”



For at least one female senator, however, remorse soon followed. “I have never had a vote I’ve taken where I have felt that I let down more people that believed in me,” Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) told the Anchorage Daily News on Sunday, adding: “The wind had shifted, and Republicans didn’t have enough sense to get off of it.”



Meanwhile, the Virginia legislature found itself the target of national outrage — and ridicule — over its effort to require women to undergo invasive ultrasounds before they get abortions. Gov. Bob McDonnell ® signed a weakened version of the bill into law on Thursday.



Republicans and their allies have fueled the fire, most damagingly with accusations that women use birth control so they can be more promiscuous.



Santorum’s biggest financial backer, Foster Friess, told a mossy joke on MSNBC about aspirin being a form of birth control if a woman puts it between her knees. Limbaugh called Georgetown law student Fluke a “slut” and a “prostitute.”



Making it all the more awkward for Republicans was the fact that all this was happening just at the moment that a vocal social conservative was moving to the front of the GOP presidential pack.



“Part of it had to do with Santorum as the front-runner at the time this broke,” Conway said.



Conway warned that there are political dangers for the Democrats as well, if they appear so caught up in the contraception controversy that they take their focus off the economy.



“Voters tend to reject overreach and distraction — women in particular,” she said.






Seriously......even Santorum's wife is telling him to shut up.
skrekk is offline  
Remove Ads
Old March 9th, 2012, 12:05 PM   #2
Banned
 
garysher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 34,678
Quote:
Originally Posted by skrekk View Post
Conway warned that there are political dangers for the Democrats as well, if they appear so caught up in the contraception controversy that they take their focus off the economy.




There ya go
garysher is offline  
Old March 9th, 2012, 12:06 PM   #3
Banned
 
garysher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 34,678
Quote:
Originally Posted by skrekk View Post
A prominent GOP strategist, who requested anonymity to discuss the party’s situation frankly, said:


How convenient, another solid shriek source..........
garysher is offline  
Old March 9th, 2012, 12:24 PM   #4
Eyes Wide Open
 
waitingtables's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NJ
Posts: 39,407
This article is in the Washington Post. Let's not pretend otherwise. The republican that wished to remain anonymous is anonymous, not the entire article. This is a perfectly acceptable source and is speaking to exactly the issue today. Women do not want to be going over this fight again, especially since we still are trying to stay afloat in a crappy economy. We have really pressing issues at at hand and they want to do these things? That is a blatant example of a party with no solutions to our most troubling problems and that is trying desperately to take attention away from the fact that the situation is definitely improving, albeit slowly. And it isn't because of their actions.
waitingtables is offline  
Old March 9th, 2012, 12:33 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,333
Here's a related report showing just how screwed the GOP is (and that they really did it to themselves):



Quote:
http://www.npr.org/2012/03/07/148116...en-in-november



For the first presidential cycle in years, Republicans seemed to have a shot at overcoming Democrats' long-standing edge with women voters.



They fared better than Democrats among women overall in the 2010 midterm election — the Republicans' best overall national result among women in 18 years.



And 2012 seemed to have the potential to turn that good showing into a trend, a key advantage in an electorate where women make up the majority of all voters.



Polls taken as recently as the end of last year suggested that women's support for President Obama was weakening. In 2008, Obama corralled 56 percent of women's votes — 13 percentage points more than his GOP opponent John McCain. And, since women cast nearly 8 million more votes than men that year, Obama rode the gender gap all the way to the White House.



Republican front-runner Mitt Romney appeared poised to challenge Obama for the women's vote. Exit polls from Super Tuesday's GOP presidential contests suggest that Romney does better among women voters than among men. Earlier this year, he also polled better than Obama among women in hypothetical head-to-head national matchups.



But the events of recent days are raising questions about whether Republicans, who so recently saw an opportunity to close the gender gap, may now be watching it widen given the recent maelstrom surrounding women, contraception, Congress, Catholics and conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh.



And surveys taken even before the commotion suggested that women were already starting to come back to Obama, giving him more credit than men were for economic gains.



The Limbaugh Effect



Many Republicans are still shaking their heads at how quickly the debate turned on an issue where they had traction with a wide swath of the electorate.



Limbaugh's on-air characterization of a young female advocate of employer coverage of contraception as a "slut" and "prostitute" galvanized Democrats who had been attempting to establish a narrative that Republicans were attempting to meddle with women's rights and health choices.



Before Limbaugh's crude injection of himself into the discussion, the public was divided over a proposed federal rule that would require employers, including most religious organizations, to cover contraception as part of their health care benefit plans, according to a February Pew Research Center poll.



Independent voters surveyed were the most evenly split, with 48 percent saying that religious institutions should be required to provide contraception coverage, and 46 percent saying they should be "given an exemption."



The survey, says Pew's Carroll Doherty, was taken during the time the Obama administration modified its proposal to include most, but not all, institutions affiliated with religious organizations in the coverage mandate.



But once Limbaugh weighed in, the debate center shifted from the question of religion and contraception coverage to women's private lives and their ability to speak in a public forum without being denigrated.



Obama telephoned the young activist, Georgetown law student Sandra Fluke, to encourage her to stay involved and suggest that her parents would be proud of her. On Tuesday he told reporters that he was motivated, in part, by thoughts of his own two daughters and how he would want them to be treated when they grow up and engage in issues publicly.



"I don't want them attacked or called horrible names because they're being good citizens," Obama said.



The head of Carbonite, one of the many businesses that have pulled advertising from Limbaugh's show, said on Facebook that he, too, thought of his daughters when he made his decision.



Ground To Make Up



The GOP candidates' tepid responses to Limbaugh's comments did not help the party's effort to woo women. They ranged from Santorum suggesting that as "an entertainer," Limbaugh "can be absurd," to Romney's "it's not the language I would have used." The superPAC supporting Newt Gingrich is running ads on Limbaugh's show.



"Republicans are not hostile toward contraception," says conservative pollster Kristen Soltis. "The real issue is what employers should be required to do, and what should government pay for."



"There are real arguments about the role and size of government, and the employer/employee relationship that can be very favorable to Republicans," Soltis says. "Unfortunately, the conversation has gone to birth control and value judgments about people who use birth control."



Conservatives have also argued that liberal and progressive commentators, including MSNBC's Ed Schultz and Chris Matthews, have made disparaging comments about women that prompted none of the outrage heaped on Limbaugh.



Liberals have, indeed, been more effective in making Limbaugh a symbol in a conversation that was already beginning to favor Obama.



Polls Show Obama Gains



An Associated Press-GfK poll conducted in February showed Obama's approval rating improving, and gaining with women who give him more credit than men for the strengthening economy. His support between December and February climbed 10 percentage points among women.



A Washington Post/Pew poll released this week showed that Obama was even gaining among white women, a group he lost in 2008. In January, white women preferred Romney 50-44 percent, according to Doherty of the Pew Research Center. By February, Obama had taken the lead, with 52 percent of white women saying they preferred the president to Romney, who had fallen to 46 percent.



Pew experts were also struck, Doherty said, that Obama's lead against Romney among all women "was quite substantial, 59-38 percent." Men polled preferred Romney, 50-45 percent.



The gap between men and women, however, has not been out of line with previous elections, though the survey was taken in the early stage of the contraception controversy, Doherty said.



At the end of the day, however, Democrats like consultant Kiki McLean say that it will be economic issues that drive the choices of women voters.



Access to contraception and health care are part of that economic equation for women, says McLean, a veteran Democratic campaign adviser, but "they don't stand alone."



"Women voters are very sophisticated, and they won't be taken for granted," she said. "The concept that women vote on a single issue is a falsehood — they care about the economy as much anyone else, from how it affects health care, job creating and taking care of their children, to building a business, and providing economic and educational opportunities."



On that, she and Soltis, the Republican pollster, agree.



"Economic issues will be what decide the election at the end of the day," Soltis says.



Obama himself suggested as much at a White House press conference Tuesday, when asked about the Limbaugh controversy.



"There are millions of strong women around the country who are going to make their own determination about a whole range of issues," Obama said. "It's not going to be narrowly focused just on contraception. It's not going to be driven by one statement by one radio announcer."



"I'm not somebody who believes that women are going to be single-issue voters; they never have been," he said. "But I do think that we've got a strong story to tell when it comes to women."



While the events of the past several days haven't been helpful to Republicans, Soltis says she doesn't see them as decisive.



"There is plenty of time and plenty of opportunity," Soltis says. "If this GOP primary has shown anything, it's that a week is an eternity."



And it's certainly given women voters plenty to contemplate.
skrekk is offline  
Old March 9th, 2012, 01:34 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,333
More reason for women to steer clear of the misogynistic GOP, this from the insane state of Kansas:



Quote:
http://www.huffingto..._n_1327301.html



Among other provisions in the proposed legislation are measures allowing doctors to withhold from patients medical information that might encourage them to seek an abortion and prohibiting malpractice suits if the woman or the child suffers a health complication as a result of information being withheld. A wrongful death lawsuit could be filed if the mother dies. The bill also would require doctors to tell women that abortion causes breast cancer and would prohibit state employees from performing abortions on the job.



The sweeping anti-abortion bill working its way through the Kansas Legislature would levy a sales tax on women seeking abortions, including rape victims.



Buried in the 69-page bill being considered by the House Federal and State Affairs Committee are several provisions, in fact, that opponents say would increase taxes on those who seek abortions. The tax sections do not include exemptions for women who want an abortion after a sexual assault or to end a life-threatening pregnancy.






Republican priorities, in chart form.

(Guttmacher Institute)
skrekk is offline  
Old March 11th, 2012, 07:42 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,333
This article is very telling - Republican women are now upset by the GOP's 13th century mindset on women's health and contraception:



Quote:
http://www.nytimes.c...?pagewanted=all



As baby showers go, the party Mary Russell attended to celebrate her niece’s first child was sweet, with about a dozen women offering congratulations over ice cream and cake.



But somewhere between the baby name game and the gifts, what had been light conversation took a sharp turn toward the personal and political — specifically, the battle over access to birth control and other women’s health issues that have sprung to life on the Republican campaign trail in recent weeks.



“We all agreed that this seemed like a throwback to 40 years ago,” said Ms. Russell, 57, a retired teacher from Iowa City who describes herself as an evangelical Christian and “old school” Republican of the moderate mold.



Until the baby shower, just two weeks ago, she had favored Mitt Romney for president.



Not anymore. She said she might vote for President Obama now. “I didn’t realize I had a strong viewpoint on this until these conversations,” Ms. Russell said. As for the Republican presidential candidates, she added: “If they’re going to decide on women’s reproductive issues, I’m not going to vote for any of them. Women’s reproduction is our own business.”



In Iowa, one of the crucial battlegrounds in the coming presidential election, and in other states, dozens of interviews in recent weeks have found that moderate Republican and independent women — one of the most important electoral swing groups — are disenchanted by the Republican focus on social issues like contraception and abortion in an election that, until recently, had been mostly dominated by the economy.



And in what appears to be an abrupt shift, some Republican-leaning women like Ms. Russell said they might switch sides and vote for Mr. Obama — if they turn out to vote at all.



The sudden return of the “culture wars” over the rights of women and their place in society has resulted, the women said, in a distinct change in mood in the past several weeks. That shift adds yet another element of uncertainty to a race that has been defined by unpredictability, at least for Republicans.



To what extent women feel alienated remains unclear: most interviews for this article were conducted from a randomly generated list of voters who had been surveyed in a recent New York Times/CBS News poll, and their responses are anecdotal, not conclusive. But the latest comments from the Republican candidates and in the right-wing media, aimed at energizing the party’s conservative base, have been enraging to some women.



After the talk show host Rush Limbaugh denounced a Georgetown University law student as a “slut” and a “prostitute” for her advocacy of insurance coverage of contraception, some women were critical of Mr. Romney’s tepid response.



Rick Santorum, a former senator from Pennsylvania who is one of Mr. Romney’s rivals for the nomination, created a tempest late last month by speaking out against prenatal testing. Earlier comments about women in combat and the role of “radical feminism” in encouraging work outside the home also left some women ill at ease.



“Everybody is so busy telling us how we should act in the bedroom, they’re letting the country fall through the cracks,” said Fran Kelley, a retired public school worker in Seattle who voted for Senator John McCain over Mr. Obama in the 2008 election. Of the Republican candidates this year, she added, “They’re nothing but hatemongers trying to control everyone, saying, ‘Live as I live.’ ”



She continued, “If Republicans would stop all this ridiculous talk about contraception, I’d consider voting in November.”



From 1992 to 2008, Democrats won the overall women’s vote in every presidential election.



But in the 2010 midterm election, women swung to the Republicans. Now there are signs of another shift: in a New York Times/CBS News poll last month, the president finished ahead of Mr. Romney among all women by 57 percent to 37 percent. He held much the same advantage over Mr. Santorum.



But how moderate Republican women gauge social issues as a factor in voting is unclear. Nor have there been many women at the Republican primaries who consider themselves moderate.



Last week Joyce Kimball, a retired secretary in Greenville, Ill., who voted for Mr. McCain in 2008, said she had recently become “fed up,” adding that it was not out of the question for her to vote for a Democrat in November. “I’m looking to hear how the candidates propose to put people back to work, not what they think about contraception,” she said. “I hope to God they stop talking about this.”



Kirsten Kukowski, a spokeswoman for the Republican National Committee, said the party intended to focus on women’s issues as they relate to the economy to win in November. “It’s the kitchen table issues, the cost of milk and gas,” she said. “That’s what we are going to be talking about.”



Even more than Mr. Romney, Mr. Santorum has made himself a champion of the traditional family with two parents, arguing in speeches that single motherhood increases a child’s chances of poverty and related problems.



The stance particularly vexes Meredith Warren, a Republican strategist in Andover, Mass. “Well, guess what?” she said. “There are a lot of single moms out there. That’s reality. I don’t think he does himself any favors denigrating that situation.”



Ms. Warren said her job had not been made any easier lately. “A lot of my younger friends are Democrats, and it’s hard for them to understand how, as a woman, you can be a member of the Republican Party,” she said.



Deborah R. Stevens, a self-described “dyed in the wool” Republican, said she felt hopeless.



“I’m looking for a candidate that will be honest, that will come out and say, ‘Yes, I support women, I want you advanced and not trampled upon,’ ” said Ms. Stevens, 63, who lives near Myrtle Beach, S.C. “I want answers desperately. I want candidates to tell me, ‘I’m not overturning Roe v. Wade.’ It’s there. Leave it there.”



Ms. Russell, who changed her political views at the baby shower, said she was impressed with how Mr. Obama handled his administration’s compromise over the much-debated birth control policy, saying, “I think he’s more of a women’s candidate.”



Mr. Romney’s reaction to Mr. Limbaugh’s statements about the Georgetown student cemented a negative view of him. “I expected him to have the guts to stand up and say what Rush did was wrong,” she said. “Wrong, wrong, wrong in every sense of the word wrong.”



A rally for women’s rights in San Diego on Thursday drew Jessica Lopez, 27, a registered independent who said she voted for President George W. Bush in 2004. Ms. Lopez said her choice this year became clear amid the Republican debate on contraception and abortion. “This has really energized me, that I need to get more involved with the Obama campaign,” she said.



Ms. Lopez added: “The G.O.P. has never been so clear about their agenda for women. I’m afraid if we get a Republican president, my health will be up to their personal discretion.”


Based on the discussions with conservatives I've seen on DTT, it's clear that conservative men in general are incapable of understanding how important this issue is. They'll cling to their regressive anti-sex, anti-women views, and not even dimly recognize what it's doing to the viability of their party.
skrekk is offline  
Old March 11th, 2012, 11:31 AM   #8
Banned
 
garysher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 34,678
Quote:
Originally Posted by skrekk View Post
Based on the discussions with conservatives I've seen on DTT, it's clear that conservative men in general are incapable of understanding how important this issue is. They'll cling to their regressive anti-sex, anti-women views, and not even dimly recognize what it's doing to the viability of their party.


Of course the four people who posted about the subject on DTT can be extrapolated to give an accurate indication of national opinions
garysher is offline  
Old March 11th, 2012, 11:32 AM   #9
Banned
 
garysher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 34,678
Quote:
Originally Posted by skrekk View Post
More reason for women to steer clear of the misogynistic GOP, this from the insane state of Kansas:



Quote:
http://www.huffingto..._n_1327301.html



Among other provisions in the proposed legislation are measures allowing doctors to withhold from patients medical information that might encourage them to seek an abortion and prohibiting malpractice suits if the woman or the child suffers a health complication as a result of information being withheld. A wrongful death lawsuit could be filed if the mother dies. The bill also would require doctors to tell women that abortion causes breast cancer and would prohibit state employees from performing abortions on the job.



The sweeping anti-abortion bill working its way through the Kansas Legislature would levy a sales tax on women seeking abortions, including rape victims.



Buried in the 69-page bill being considered by the House Federal and State Affairs Committee are several provisions, in fact, that opponents say would increase taxes on those who seek abortions. The tax sections do not include exemptions for women who want an abortion after a sexual assault or to end a life-threatening pregnancy.






Republican priorities, in chart form.

(Guttmacher Institute)




How does this graph define "Abortion Restrictions"?
garysher is offline  
Old March 14th, 2012, 12:07 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 8,333
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IfjAMRgpoug
skrekk is offline  
Old March 14th, 2012, 12:09 PM   #11
Banned
 
garysher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 34,678
Quote:
Originally Posted by gary View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by skrekk' timestamp='1331332492' post='388889

More reason for women to steer clear of the misogynistic GOP, this from the insane state of Kansas:



Quote:
http://www.huffingto..._n_1327301.html



Among other provisions in the proposed legislation are measures allowing doctors to withhold from patients medical information that might encourage them to seek an abortion and prohibiting malpractice suits if the woman or the child suffers a health complication as a result of information being withheld. A wrongful death lawsuit could be filed if the mother dies. The bill also would require doctors to tell women that abortion causes breast cancer and would prohibit state employees from performing abortions on the job.



The sweeping anti-abortion bill working its way through the Kansas Legislature would levy a sales tax on women seeking abortions, including rape victims.



Buried in the 69-page bill being considered by the House Federal and State Affairs Committee are several provisions, in fact, that opponents say would increase taxes on those who seek abortions. The tax sections do not include exemptions for women who want an abortion after a sexual assault or to end a life-threatening pregnancy.






Republican priorities, in chart form.

(Guttmacher Institute)




How does this graph define "Abortion Restrictions"?


Still no answer?
garysher is offline  
Old March 15th, 2012, 06:16 AM   #12
Eyes Wide Open
 
waitingtables's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NJ
Posts: 39,407
Why on earth would you ask such a stupid question? The graph represents legislation since 2010 that has further restricted abortion in various states. Go and read the things passed to see just how and what those restrictions are. And then come back and try to argue your bull so I can once again shut you down. I'll wait. Just look up abortion restrictions enacted in states since 2010 and you'll get all the info you need. As I said, I'll wait.
waitingtables is offline  
Old March 15th, 2012, 01:08 PM   #13
Banned
 
garysher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 34,678
Quote:
Originally Posted by waitingtables View Post
Why on earth would you ask such a stupid question? The graph represents legislation since 2010 that has further restricted abortion in various states. Go and read the things passed to see just how and what those restrictions are. And then come back and try to argue your bull so I can once again shut you down. I'll wait. Just look up abortion restrictions enacted in states since 2010 and you'll get all the info you need. As I said, I'll wait.




No surprise you back away from offering any examples of "abortion restrictions"



Probably because it's another example of exaggerated left wing hysteria
garysher is offline  
Old March 15th, 2012, 01:40 PM   #14
Eyes Wide Open
 
waitingtables's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NJ
Posts: 39,407
Quote:
Originally Posted by gary View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by waitingtables' timestamp='1331820980' post='389598

Why on earth would you ask such a stupid question? The graph represents legislation since 2010 that has further restricted abortion in various states. Go and read the things passed to see just how and what those restrictions are. And then come back and try to argue your bull so I can once again shut you down. I'll wait. Just look up abortion restrictions enacted in states since 2010 and you'll get all the info you need. As I said, I'll wait.




No surprise you back away from offering any examples of "abortion restrictions"



Probably because it's another example of exaggerated left wing hysteria


Open your eyes and read:



http://www.guttmache...ates/index.html
waitingtables is offline  
Old March 15th, 2012, 01:44 PM   #15
Eyes Wide Open
 
waitingtables's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NJ
Posts: 39,407
Keep reading:










Quote:

January 5, 2012



By almost any measure, issues related to reproductive health and rights at the state level received unprecedented attention in 2011. In the 50 states combined, legislators introduced more than 1,100 reproductive health and rights-related provisions, a sharp increase from the 950 introduced in 2010. By year’s end, 135 of these provisions had been enacted in 36 states, an increase from the 89 enacted in 2010 and the 77 enacted in 2009. (Note: This analysis refers to reproductive health and rights-related “provisions,” rather than bills or laws, since bills introduced and eventually enacted in the states contain multiple relevant provisions.)



Fully 68% of these new provisions—92 in 24 states—-restrict access to abortion services, a striking increase from last year, when 26% of new provisions restricted abortion. The 92 new abortion restrictions enacted in 2011 shattered the previous record of 34 adopted in 2005.



  • For the complete review of state level actions in 2011 click here.
  • For summaries of major state-level actions in 2011, click here.
  • For a table showing reproductive health and rights-related provisions enacted in 2011, click here.
  • For the status of state law and policy on key reproductive health and rights issues, click here.

Abortion Restrictions Took Many Forms





Bans. The most high-profile state-level abortion debate of 2011 took place in Mississippi, where voters rejected the ballot initiative that would have legally defined a human embryo as a person “from the moment of fertilization,” setting the stage to ban all abortions and, potentially, most hormonal contraceptive methods in the state. Meanwhile, five states (AL, ID, IN, KS and OK) enacted provisions to ban abortion at or beyond 20 weeks’ gestation, based on the spurious assertion that a fetus can feel pain at that point. These five states join Nebraska, which adopted a ban on abortions after 20 weeks in 2010 (see State Policies on Later Abortions). A similar limitation was vetoed by Minnesota Gov. Mark Dayton (D).



Waiting Periods. Three states adopted waiting period requirements for a woman seeking an abortion. In the most egregious of the waiting-period provisions, a new South Dakota law would have required a woman to obtain pre-abortion counseling in person at the abortion facility at least 72 hours prior to the procedure; it would also have required her to visit a state-approved crisis pregnancy center during that 72-hour interval. The law was quickly enjoined in federal district court and is not in effect. A new provision in Texas requires that women who live less than 100 miles from an abortion provider obtain counseling in person at the facility at least 24 hours in advance. Finally, new provisions in North Carolina require counseling at least 24 hours prior to the procedure. With the addition of new requirements in Texas and North Carolina, 26 states mandate that a woman seeking an abortion must wait a prescribed period of time between the counseling and the procedure (see Counseling and Waiting Periods for Abortion).



Ultrasound. Five states adopted provisions mandating that a woman obtain an ultrasound prior to having an abortion. The two most stringent provisions were adopted in North Carolina and Texas and were immediately enjoined by federal district courts. Both of these restrictions would have required the provider to show and describe the image to the woman. The other three new provisions (in AZ, FL and KS), all of which are in effect, require the abortion provider to offer the woman the opportunity to view the image or listen to a verbal description of it. These new restrictions bring to six the number of states that mandate the performance of an ultrasound prior to an abortion (see Requirements for Ultrasound).



Insurance Coverage. Kansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma and Utah adopted provisions prohibiting all insurance policies in the state from covering abortion except in cases of life endangerment; they all permit individuals to purchase additional coverage at their own expense. These new restrictions bring to eight the number of states limiting abortion coverage in all private insurance plans (see Restricting Insurance Coverage of Abortion).



These four provisions also apply to coverage purchased through the insurance exchanges that will be established as part of the implementation of health care reform. Five additional states (FL, ID, IN, OH and VA) adopted requirements that apply only to coverage purchased on the exchange. The addition of these nine states brings to 16 the number of states restricting abortion coverage available through state insurance exchanges.



Clinic Regulations. Four states enacted provisions directing the state department of health to issue regulations governing facilities and physicians’ offices that provide abortion services. A new provision in Virginia requires a facility providing at least five abortions per month to meet the requirements for a hospital in the state. New requirements in Kansas, Pennsylvania and Utah direct the health agency to develop standards for abortion providers, including requirements for staffing, physical plant, equipment and emergency supplies; supporters of the measures made it clear that the goal was to set standards that would be difficult, if not impossible, for abortion providers to meet. Enforcement of the proposed Kansas regulations has been enjoined by a state court.



Medication Abortion. In 2011, states for the first time moved to limit provision of medication abortion by prohibiting the use of telemedicine. Seven states (AZ, KS, NE, ND, OK, SD and TN) adopted provisions requiring that the physician prescribing the medication be in the same room as the patient (see Medication Abortion).



Family Planning Under Pressure





Family planning services and providers were especially hard-pressed in 2011, facing significant cuts to funding levels, as well as attempts to disqualify some providers for funding because of their association with abortion. Considering the historic fiscal crises facing many states, it is significant that family planning escaped major reductions in nine (CO, CT, DE, IL, KS, MA, ME, NY and PA)of the 18 states where the budget has a specific line-item for family planning. The story, however, was different in the remaining nine states. In six (FL, GA, MI, MN, WA and WI), family planning programs sustained deep cuts, although generally in line with decreases adopted for other health programs. In the other three states, however, the cuts to family planning funding were disproportionate to those to other health programs: Montana eliminated the family planning line item, and New Hampshire and Texas cut funding by 57% and 66%, respectively.



Indiana, Colorado, Ohio, North Carolina Texas and Wisconsin, meanwhile, moved to disqualify or otherwise bar certain types of providers from the receipt of family planning funds. New Hampshire decided not to renew its contract through which the Planned Parenthood affiliate in the state received Title X funds.



Given the difficult fiscal and political climate in states in 2011, it is especially noteworthy that Maryland, Washington and Ohio took steps to expand Medicaid eligibility for family planning. With these changes, 24 states have expanded eligibility for family planning under Medicaid based solely on income; seven have utilized the new authority under health care reform (see Medicaid Family Planning Eligibility Expansions).



Abstinence-Only Education Is Back





Unlike in recent years when states had moved to expand access to comprehensive, medically accurate sex education, the only relevant measures enacted in 2011 expanded abstinence education. Mississippi, which had long mandated abstinence education, adopted provisions that make it more difficult for a school district to include other subjects, such as contraception, in order to offer a more comprehensive curriculum. A district will now need to get specific permission to do so from the state department of education. A new requirement enacted in North Dakota mandates that the health education provided in the state include information on the benefits of abstinence “until and within marriage.” Including North Dakota, 37 states now mandate abstinence education (see Sex and HIV Education).



Sexually Transmitted Infections





Over the course of 2011, three states adopted provisions permitting a health care provider to prescribe STI treatment to the partner of a patient, even if he or she has not been seen by the provider. (see Partner Treatment for STIs).




waitingtables is offline  
Old March 15th, 2012, 01:46 PM   #16
Banned
 
garysher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 34,678
Quote:
Originally Posted by waitingtables View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by gary' timestamp='1331845729' post='389787

[quote name='waitingtables' timestamp='1331820980' post='389598']

Why on earth would you ask such a stupid question? The graph represents legislation since 2010 that has further restricted abortion in various states. Go and read the things passed to see just how and what those restrictions are. And then come back and try to argue your bull so I can once again shut you down. I'll wait. Just look up abortion restrictions enacted in states since 2010 and you'll get all the info you need. As I said, I'll wait.




No surprise you back away from offering any examples of "abortion restrictions"



Probably because it's another example of exaggerated left wing hysteria


Open your eyes and read:



http://www.guttmache...ates/index.html

[/quote]







Guttmacher Institute An institute seeking to advance sexual and reproductive health through research, policy analysis and public education



As soon as we see see expressions like "reproductive health" we know it is code for abortion. Instead of giving me some bigoted web sites just explain why any of the legislation you referred to restricts abortions.
garysher is offline  
Old March 15th, 2012, 01:48 PM   #17
Eyes Wide Open
 
waitingtables's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NJ
Posts: 39,407
Quote:
Originally Posted by gary View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by waitingtables' timestamp='1331847651' post='389794

[quote name='gary' timestamp='1331845729' post='389787']

[quote name='waitingtables' timestamp='1331820980' post='389598']

Why on earth would you ask such a stupid question? The graph represents legislation since 2010 that has further restricted abortion in various states. Go and read the things passed to see just how and what those restrictions are. And then come back and try to argue your bull so I can once again shut you down. I'll wait. Just look up abortion restrictions enacted in states since 2010 and you'll get all the info you need. As I said, I'll wait.




No surprise you back away from offering any examples of "abortion restrictions"



Probably because it's another example of exaggerated left wing hysteria


Open your eyes and read:



http://www.guttmache...ates/index.html

[/quote]







Guttmacher Institute



An institute seeking to advance sexual and reproductive health through research, policy analysis and public education







As soon as we see see expressions like "reproductive health" we know it is code for abortion. Instead of giving me some bigoted web sites just explain why any of the legislation you referred to restricts abortions.

[/quote]







No it isn't genius. It is exactly what it sounds like. Everything to do with women's reproductive health. That includes all of it, not just what is going on when one is pregnant. Family planning, birth control, preventative screenings and exams, etc.



And it isn't a bigoted site, you are the bigot here, not the Guttmacher Institute.
waitingtables is offline  
Old March 15th, 2012, 01:57 PM   #18
Banned
 
garysher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 34,678
Quote:
Originally Posted by waitingtables View Post
January 5, 2012



Bans. The most high-profile state-level abortion debate of 2011 took place in Mississippi, where voters rejected the ballot initiative



So forget that one



Waiting Periods. Three states adopted waiting period requirements for a woman seeking an abortion.



So what? A waiting period is perfectly normal for many major medical procedures. It seems perfectly rational that a woman should take time to decide if she wants to kill her baby



Ultrasound. Five states adopted provisions mandating that a woman obtain an ultrasound prior to having an abortion.



Again - so what"



Insurance Coverage. Kansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma and Utah adopted provisions prohibiting all insurance policies in the state from covering abortion except in cases of life endangerment; they all permit individuals to purchase additional coverage at their own expense. These new restrictions bring to eight the number of states limiting abortion coverage in all private insurance plans (see Restricting Insurance Coverage of Abortion).



If you care about equality and rights then you should support the right of individuals not to be forced to fund the slaughter of unborn babies



Clinic Regulations. Four states enacted provisions directing the state department of health to issue regulations governing facilities and physicians’ offices that provide abortion services. A new provision in Virginia requires a facility providing at least five abortions per month to meet the requirements for a hospital in the state.



Wise safety standards which any woman should welcome



Medication Abortion. In 2011, states for the first time moved to limit provision of medication abortion by prohibiting the use of telemedicine.

Wise safety standards which any woman should welcome



Family Planning Under Pressure



Family planning services and providers were especially hard-pressed in 2011, facing significant cuts to funding levels,







Everyone faces cuts why should pregnant women get special deals on their abortions?



Abstinence-Only Education Is Back



How is this a restriction on abortions?!?





Sexually Transmitted Infections



Over the course of 2011, three states adopted provisions permitting a health care provider to prescribe STI treatment to the partner of a patient, even if he or she has not been seen by the provider. (seePartner Treatment for STIs).



How is this a restriction on abortions?!?


As I suspected, none of this legislation restricts abortions, these are attempts to make women consider their decision carefully, because it is irreversible, and provide the conditions to perform abortions safely.



Opponents of abortion should not be forced to fund it



It's just the usual left wing hysteria and lies
garysher is offline  
Old March 15th, 2012, 03:52 PM   #19
Eyes Wide Open
 
waitingtables's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: NJ
Posts: 39,407
Not so fast, shifty, You haven't bothered to really read that link. Try again. Read:



http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2012...cord-last-year


Quote:





The NARAL report shows that the 69 anti-abortion laws fell broadly into five separate categories.


1. Mandatory ultrasound laws. These laws, now passed by eight states, require a physician to perform an ultrasound on a pregnant women before performing an abortion, even if it is not medically indicated and the woman does not request it.


2. Abortion insurance coverage bans. These laws, now passed by 16 states, ban abortion coverage by private health insurers. Some apply to all health insurers in a state, some to the new health "exchanges" that will be created by the Affordable Care Act.


3. Nebraska copycat bans. In 2010, Nebraska banned most abortions after 20 weeks gestation, on the contested theory that it marks the point in pregnancy when a fetus can feel pain. So far at least five more states — Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Oklahoma, and Alabama — have joined Nebraska in enacting similar laws.


4. Race and sex selection laws. These are laws that make it a crime for physicians to fail to ensure that abortions are not being done purely for race or gender selection reasons. Arizona passed such a law in March 2011, joining three other states that had older laws already on the books.


5. Affiliation bans. These laws seek to bar abortion providers (often, but not exclusively Planned Parenthood) from receiving state funds for family planning or other services. Three states passed new laws in 2011, bringing to 11 the number of states with such laws in place, although four are currently being blocked by court order.


And action is already heating up for 2012, say both sides. Several states are looking at"personhood" ballot amendments, which define life as beginning at fertilization. Such laws would not only ban all abortions with no exception, but also many forms of birth control.


Meanwhile, the Ohio Senate is expected to move early this year on a bill to ban abortion at the point the fetal heartbeat can be detected – about eight weeks into pregnancy. The bill passed the Ohio House last year.


That bill "would outlaw abortion at a point in pregnancy when most women aren't even aware they're pregnant," said Kellie Copeland, executive director of NARAL Pro-Choice Ohio.


And it would almost certainly prompt a challenge to the Supreme Court's landmark Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion. That decision marks its 39[sup]th[/sup] anniversary this Sunday.

waitingtables is offline  
Old March 15th, 2012, 04:05 PM   #20
Banned
 
garysher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 34,678
Now you've switched from "abortion restrictions" to " anti abortion" laws.



In fact neither is true. Women are able to get abortions in all 50 US states.



In some cases they may have to pay for the slaughter themselves, or get the father of the little baby to pay for his child's murder.
garysher is offline  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Forum > Current Events

Tags
gap, gender, increasing


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
President Obama Speaks On Increasing Oversight On Manipulation In The Oil Market The White House The White House 4 April 17th, 2012 06:21 PM
Aids Increasing For Practicing Homosexuals And Bisexuals garysher Gay and Lesbian Rights 1 August 4th, 2011 10:03 AM
Maternal Mortality Increasing in US and Canada, Decreasing in Other Countries intangible child Healthcare 0 April 13th, 2010 10:15 AM
Increasing homicide rates aMFliberal Political Talk 22 January 13th, 2006 04:45 PM
China's increasing military might Steven M Warfare 32 September 26th, 2005 07:56 PM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2013 Defending The Truth. All rights reserved.