Obama signs executive order on abortion funding limits

Ugh. From CNN:

President Obama signed an executive order Wednesday ensuring that existing limits on the federal funding of abortion remain in place under the new health care reform law. ...

The White House has said the executive order reaffirms abortion funding restrictions first enacted in 1977.

"While the legislation as written maintains current law, the executive order provides additional safeguards to ensure that the status quo is upheld and enforced, and that the health care legislation's restrictions against the public funding of abortions cannot be circumvented," the White House said previously. ...

At one point, the abortion issue nearly derailed the reform bill. But after Obama promised the executive order, the anti-abortion Democrats switched their votes to "yes" to help pass the measure pass 219-212 on Sunday night.

Stupak had led the anti-abortion Democrats in opposition to the new health care law because, he claimed, it would allow federal funding for abortions beyond the current limits of cases of rape or incest, or if the woman's life is in danger.

The controversy centered on whether the bill would force all taxpayers into paying for abortions, by subsidizing insurance policies that pay for the procedure and by funding federal health clinics that might offer abortions.

Leading up to the vote Sunday night, the main focus of anti-abortion activists was the insurance "exchanges" created by the law, the new marketplaces in which businesses and individuals will be able to buy insurance.

Under the exchanges, there must be a plan that offers abortion coverage and another that doesn't, according to the measure.

To appease abortion opponents, Democrats also added language requiring anyone whose policy does cover abortion to pay -- separately -- a small surcharge, with the funds kept separate.

Stupak and other abortion opponents also complained about a lack of anti-abortion restrictions for new, federally run community health clinics, which would receive $7 billion under the legislation.

Yes they did. Great.

Utah Bill Criminalizes Miscarriage

Seriously Utah? Again? A bill passed by the House and Senate in Utah this week could make it a crime to have a miscarriage, with penalties up to life in prison. RH Reality Check reports:

The bill passed by legislators amends Utah's criminal statute to allow the state to charge a woman with criminal homicide for inducing a miscarriage or obtaining an illegal abortion. The basis for the law was a recent case in which a 17-year-old girl, who was seven months pregnant, paid a man $150 to beat her in an attempt to cause a miscarriage. Although the girl gave birth to a baby later given up for adoption, she was initially charged with attempted murder. However the charges were dropped because, at the time, under Utah state law a woman could not be prosecuted for attempting to arrange an abortion, lawful or unlawful.

The bill passed by the Utah legislature would change that. While the bill does not affect legally obtained abortions, it criminalizes any actions taken by women to induce a miscarriage or abortion outside of a doctor's care, with penalties including up to life in prison.

Lynn Paltrow of National Advocates for Pregnant Women tells RH that while other states have feticide laws specified to prosecute third-party attackers, directing it at the woman will have severe repercussions. It could create cases where women are prosecuted for having an unintentional miscarriage if there is any indication of "reckless behavior," like drink alcohol and miscarry, or do any number of other things that could be deemed "reckless."

"This statute and the standards chosen leave a large number of pregnant women vulnerable to arrest even though they have no intention of ending a pregnancy," Paltrow said. "Whether or not the legislature intended this bill to become a tool for policing and punishing all pregnant women, if enacted this law would permit prosecution of a pregnant woman who stayed with her abusive husband because she was unable to leave. Not leaving would, under the 'reckless' standard, constitute conduct that consciously disregarded a substantial risk," Paltrow explained.

Disabled Kids are God's Punishment for Abortion

Sigh.

From Newsleader.com:

State Delegate Bob Marshall of Manassas says disabled children are God's punishment to women who have aborted their first pregnancy.

"The number of children who are born subsequent to a first abortion with handicaps has increased dramatically. Why? Because when you abort the first born of any, nature takes its vengeance on the subsequent children," said Marshall, a Republican.

"In the Old Testament, the first born of every being, animal and man, was dedicated to the Lord. There's a special punishment Christians would suggest."

What cruel ableism. But he keeps spewing dumb shit out:

"Looking at it from a cultural, historical perspective, this organization should be called 'Planned Barrenhood' because they have nothing to do with families, they have nothing to do with responsibility," Marshall said.

Nelson suggested that the organization be called "Klan Parenthood," saying that the group's founder, Margaret Sanger, made racist comments in the 1930s and that the organization has shown a "willingness to take donations from people who are racist."

Does NO ONE read scientific studies anymore?! And I like his use of the race card, even though he is a person who is sexist and ableist, just to start.

Side note, a commenter on the original news story wrote "the bible also says "speak softly and carry a big stick".......maybe ... he should think of that" Just, you know, an fyi. That was actually Teddy Roosevelt, and not the Bible. Ah teh interwebs.

Utah House OKs ultrasounds before abortions

From The Salt Lake Tribune:

A bill that would give a woman seeking an abortion the option to first view her ultrasound passed the Utah House on Friday.

Before HB200 cleared the chamber in a 53-15 vote, Minority Leader David Litvack, D-Salt Lake City, unsuccessfully attempted to amend the bill to delete language he believed to be flat-out false, referring to viewing the heartbeat of a fetus at three weeks.

"It is not medically accurate," Litvack said. "It's not possible. It does not exist."

Litvack read from a physician's e-mail that said you could expect to see embryonic cardiac activity at about six weeks from the woman's last period.

Rep. Carl Wimmer, the bill's sponsor, disputed Litvack's claim.

"There are arguments on both sides of the issue," Wimmer, R-Herriman, said.

Rep. Neil Hansen, D-Ogden, supported Litvack's amendment because of the added costs the bill would incur. Enactment of Wimmer's measure is projected to cost $7,000 in 2011, then $4,000 each year thereafter.

This makes me really uncomfortable, as it feels less like allowing women to hear the heartbeat and more like requiring them to, potentially by having to wait another 3 weeks before they can get an abortion. Where there really that many women asking to hear the fetus's heartbeat and being denied by their doctors? Couldn't that money be used more productively?

Seriously?

Found here:

Ryan Bomberger, co-founder of the Radiance Foundation, said 35 should be up by Feb. 15. “We’re aiming for a lot more, but that’s where we’re at,” Bomberger said.

The billboards were announced at a state Capitol news conference at which another group, Georgia Right to Life, announced that it would back legislation this session that would make it a crime to “solicit a woman to have an abortion based on the race or sex of the unborn child.”

The two groups are citing what they say are federal statistics that indicate 56 percent of abortions in Georgia are performed on African-American women, though black make up 30 percent of the general population.

Not that they are ignoring anything like access to birth control or socioeconomic status or anything. And not that comparing African-Americans with animals has a long history of racism and oppression.