salienne: (Farscape frell)
As mentioned earlier, I contacted my representative (a Republican) about HR3, otherwise known as the "Only some rape is real rape, and incest--really that bad?" bill.

Well, he got back to me. I find his response, um, infuriating to say the least.

Thank you for letting me know of your opposition to H.R. 3, the No Taxpayer Funding of Abortion Act. You can be sure that I share your interest in this regard and appreciate knowing of your thoughts.

As you know, H.R. 3 would prohibit the expenditure of funds authorized or appropriated by federal law, or funds in any trust fund to which funds are authorized or appropriated by federal law, from being used for any health benefits coverage that includes coverage of abortion.

H.R. 3 has been referred to various committees, including the House Judiciary Committee, where it awaits further consideration. Because of your interest in this regard, and in an effort to be of all possible assistance to you, I have taken the liberty of sharing your opposition to this measure with my colleagues on the committees. As they continue to review the No Taxpayer Funding of Abortion Act, please know that they will keep your thoughts in mind.

Again, thank you for taking the time to contact me regarding this matter of mutual concern. It is my hope that you will continue to keep me apprised of your interest in legislative issues important to you.


Now, reading that, can you tell where he stands on the issue? 'Cos if you were to skim, reading only the first paragraph with any real depth, you might even think he agrees with my opposition! I mean, he shares my interest, right?

...And then we come to paragraph two, which completely misrepresents the scope and fundamental purpose of the bill and neglects to so much as mention the Hyde Amendment.

Suddenly, close reading becomes a lot more important than it has been since, say, English class last year. Suddenly I understand why he shares my "interest" and not my concern. Suddenly that last paragraph and really this entire e-mail seem strikingly disingenuous.

Congressbro, and I mean that as condescendingly as possible, I would respect you a lot more if you weren't trying to hide your stance on this Bill by pandering to both sides, hoping I won't pay attention on any final vote. Hoping I wouldn't notice you're one of the fucking cosponsors, you cowardly piece of hypocritical misogynistic trash.

So unbelievably disgusted right now I can't even
salienne: (Default)
So the GOP wants to be really really sure that federal taxpayer money doesn't go towards abortions women don't get abortions. They are so concerned about this, in fact, that they've decided to legislate "forcible rape" as the only "real" kind of rape, the only one worthy of an exception to the Hyde Amendment.

The text of the relevant part of the Bill:

The limitations established in sections 301, 302, 303, and 304 shall not apply to an abortion--

(1) if the pregnancy occurred because the pregnant female was the subject of an act of forcible rape or, if a minor, an act of incest;


To put this into perspective (source):

"This bill takes us back to a time when just saying 'no' wasn't enough to qualify as rape," says Steph Sterling, a lawyer and senior adviser to the National Women's Law Center. [...] the new bill's authors are "using language that's not particularly clear, and some people are going to lose protection." Other types of rapes that would no longer be covered by the exemption include rapes in which the woman was drugged or given excessive amounts of alcohol, rapes of women with limited mental capacity, and many date rapes. "There are a lot of aspects of rape that are not included," Levenson says.

As for the incest exception, the bill would only allow federally funded abortions if the woman is under 18.

The bill hasn't been carefully constructed, Levenson notes. The term "forcible rape" is not defined in the federal criminal code, and the bill's authors don't offer their own definition. In some states, there is no legal definition of "forcible rape," making it unclear whether any abortions would be covered by the rape exemption in those jurisdictions.


If you're in the US and are horrified by this as I am, I urge you to contact your Congressional representatives.

In case anyone is interested, the letter I wrote can be found behind the cut:

Dear Congressman )
salienne: (Aeryn)
This one: http://www.prochoice.com/

Mainly because it's so misleading, and, as a consequence, able to hurt so many women.

Just look at this page: http://prochoice.com/abort_what.html

I mean you go here, looking at your options, expecting something pro-choice (because yes, that IS the terminology we use today), probably already in a delicate and sensitive state, and then you see that?

Bah it pisses me off... and has for the past year. -_-

And on a completely unrelated note, college is awesome. Can't go into much detail right now since I'm in the middle of Chem and it's almost midnight, but needless to say I'm having a blast.

Night, mates!

Profile

salienne: (Default)
salienne

July 2011

S M T W T F S
     12
3456789
10111213141516
1718 19 20 2122 23
24 2526 27 28 2930
31      

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags