Francis: no and yes? March 20, 2013

From today’s NY Times:

This (see quote below) seemed to me very good news until I thought about, and wondered if his opposition to gay marriage would have undercut any support for civil unions. Still, it may be that he sees as separable dogma and behaviour: Leave the dogma in place but make it possible for people to act in more sensible ways.

That, it seems to me, could make a huge difference. Much like the difference between saying condoms help spread AIDS (John Paul) and allowing they can be used to prevent spreading an illness (Francis).

One question an orthodox person might have is whether fairly quickly dogma gets emptied of significance or at least current meaning, much like “I am sorry but she is not at home right now.” what do you think?

Argentina was on the verge of approving gay marriage, and the Roman Catholic Church was desperate to stop that from happening. It would lead tens of thousands of its followers in protest on the streets of Buenos Aires and publicly condemn the proposed law, a direct threat to church teaching, as the work of the devil.

But behind the scenes, Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio, who led the public charge against the measure, spoke out in a heated meeting of bishops in 2010 and advocated a highly unorthodox solution: that the church in Argentina support the idea of civil unions for gay couples.

The concession inflamed the gathering — and offers a telling insight into the leadership style he may now bring to the papacy.

Few would suggest that Cardinal Bergoglio, now Pope Francis, is anything but a stalwart who fully embraces the church’s positions on core social issues. But as he faced one of the most acute tests of his tenure as head of Argentina’s church, he showed another side as well, supporters and critics say: that of a deal maker willing to compromise and court opposing sides in the debate, detractors included.

More forced ultrasound measures February 26, 2013

This time in Indiana, with double the ultrasounds. 

“The bill, approved by the state Senate Health and Provider Services Committee on Wednesday, would require clinics to conduct trans-vaginal ultrasounds on women both before and after dispensing the abortion-inducing drug known as RU-486.”

Oh, and the “argument” against medically unnecessary trans-vaginal ultrasounds being too invasive? Sue Swayze, the legislative director of Indiana Right to Life, had this to say:

“I got pregnant vaginally.  Something else could come in my vagina for a medical test that wouldn’t be that intrusive to me.  So I find that argument a little ridiculous.”

I take it the natural reductio to this argument is obvious.

Catholic Hospital Argues Fetuses Are Not Persons January 26, 2013

A wrongful death lawsuit has been filed against St. Thomas More Hospital in Colorado. Lori Stodghill, who was pregnant with twins, died from a heart-attack shortly after she had been admitted. Her husband filed a suit in which his lawyers argue that a cesarean-section could have saved the twins, and so ought to have been performed.

Catholic organizations have for decades fought to change federal and state laws that fail to protect “unborn persons,” and Catholic Health’s lawyers in this case had the chance to set precedent bolstering anti-abortion legal arguments. Instead, they are arguing state law protects doctors from liability concerning unborn fetuses on grounds that those fetuses are not persons with legal rights.

You can read more here.

25th anniversary of abortion rights in Canada January 15, 2013

Next Monday, January 28 marks the 25th anniversary of the Supreme Court of Canada decision overturning that country’s abortion law. For 25 years, thanks to this decision, abortion has been legal in Canada.

The Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada has launched a great website to celebrate the anniversary. Check it out.

Here’s a taste:

In the 25 years since our Supreme Court struck down Canada’s abortion law, our country’s experience is proof that laws against abortion are unnecessary. A full generation of Canadians has lived without a law and we are better off because of it.

Canada is the first country in the world to prove that abortion care can be ethically and effectively managed as part of standard healthcare practice, without being controlled by any civil or criminal law.

Canada’s success is a role model to the world.

‘I am neither Irish nor Catholic’ November 14, 2012

The words of Savita Halappanavar, who died last month in Ireland. According to the Irish Times, after being told that she was miscarrying, she requested multiple times over the course of three days that her pregnancy be terminated. Her requests were denied. She was told, “This is a Catholic country.” She miscarried. A week later, she died of septicaemia.

GOP Rape Advisory Chart November 7, 2012

Need a break from awaiting election results? Have you seen the latest four column GOP rape advisory chart at Daily Kos?

If you liked “easy rape,” just wait until you see “buyer’s remorse rape”!
Thanks, KH!

Fetal personhood and criminalizing abortion: a prosecutor’s perspective November 4, 2012

In which Republican ruminations on exemptions for rape prompt an epic smackdown by a pro-choice prosecuting attorney.

I am a prosecutor and I prosecute people accused of crimes. So if we find ourselves in a situation where women who get abortions that don’t fall under one of those exceptions have committed a crime, then I’m going to be the one making the decisions about what happens next. That’s my job. And I have to say, I am more than a little bit uncomfortable about being legally mandated to prosecute other women because they have terminated a pregnancy when it is a bunch of non-pregnant people – many of whom are men who can’t even become pregnant – who don’t think her reason was “good enough” to be “legal”.

Thanks, DF!

Coates Responds to Mourdock’s Remarks October 25, 2012

Ta-Nehisi Coates reposted a piece he wrote two years ago in light of the comments Senate candidate Richard Mourdock made about pregnancy.  I really recommend checking it out.  I don’t know what Coates would think of the following comparison, but he and W. E. B. Du Bois make up the entirety of a an obviously very short list of writers who are men and whose writings on women I’ve found to be down right enlightening.

 

In regards to Du Bois, what specifically comes to mind is his chapter “The Damnation of Women” in Darkwater.  (Chapter starts on page 110.)

Only at the sacrifice of intelligence and the chance to do their best work can the majority of modern women bear children. This is the damnation of women. All womanhood is hampered today because the world on which it is emerging is a world that tries to worship both virgins and mothers and in the end despises motherhood and despoils virgins.  The future woman must have a life work and economic independence. She must have knowledge. She must have the right of motherhood at her own discretion.

That was written in 1920.

God intended what now? October 24, 2012

From the Indiana Senate debate between Richard Mourdock (R), Joe Donnelly (D), and Andrew Horning (L):

Asked whether abortion should be allowed in cases of rape or incest, Mourdock said during Tuesday’s debate, “I struggled with it myself for a long time, but I came to realize that life is that gift from God. And, I think, even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something that God intended to happen.”

Mourdock has said he regrets that anyone has interpreted him as implying that sexual violence is anything other than abhorrent, but:

 ”In answering a question from my position of faith, I said I believe that God creates life, and I believe that as wholly and fully as I can believe, that God creates life.”

 

Just let her die (but it’s okay because science!) October 19, 2012

Illinois congressman Joe Walsh has recently gone on record saying that “life of the mother” exceptions in abortion laws – you know, the ones favored by moderate (really?) Republicans – are unnecessary. But they aren’t unnecessary because we should just let the fetus-farm die. No, they’re unnecessary because, thanks to science, women just don’t die from trifling little things like pregnancy anymore. According to Walsh:

There is no such exception as life of the mother, and as far as health of the mother, same thing, with advances in science and technology.

Huffpost has more details here.

Walsh is, of course, utterly wrong. Not only do American women still die from pregnancy-related complications, maternal morality rates actually rose significantly in the period of 1998-2005 (when they were higher than they’d been at any time in the previous 20 years).