A Tribute: Dr. George Tiller in His Own Words

It is my fundamental philosophy that patients are emotionally, mentally, morally, spiritually and physically competent to struggle with complex health issues and come to decisions that are appropriate for them.

                                     --Dr. George Tiller (read the full transcript taken from Voices of Choice)

Dr. George Tiller, an ob/gyn who practiced in Wichita, KS, was fatally shot as he ushered services at his church this morning. A public supporter of women's reproductive rights, he carried through his belief that women hold sovereignty over their own bodies and lives by delivering their babies, assisting in their everyday gynecological needs, and also providing abortions when women sought them.

Targeted by right-wing anti-choice zealots as part of a systematic strategy of domestic terrorism involving decades of violent intimidation, he and his staff suffered numerous acts of harrassment. Those included vandalism, picketing, and even a non-fatal shooting of Dr. Tiller prior to this deadly attack. Dr. Tiller was especially singled out by anti-choice extremists because he offered women the option of late-term abortions for patients who needed them. (Go here to understand the circumstances that would lead women to need late-term abortions.)

I'm moved by his abiding courage and stubborn insistence that women should receive the care that's appropriate for them to control their reproductive lives. His family and supporters in his community have our eternal gratitude for courageously standing by him; surely they lent him strength to do his work and unfortunately, at times they shared the risks to his safety as well. We at MOMocrats send the Tiller family our deepest condolences upon the untimely loss of a generous, ethical, caring, empathetic person.

Dr. George Tiller: a father, husband, grandfather, member of his congregation and community--the pro-choice movement has lost a cherished ally and friend. We mourn your passing.

In memoriam messages here.

H/T to The Blue Ey'd Hag, @lizditz, Askew's DK diary

Cynematic believes every woman's life is a story, and all women should have the chance to write their own beginning, middle, and end. Determining if or when to have a family, and what size it should be, is a fundamental human right. She blogs at P i l l o w b o o k.

Guest MOMocrats Post by Miguelina: Calling Sonia Sotomayor a racist? Make sure you have the facts first.

The MOMocrats welcome guest poster Miguelina who has a few things to say about the nasty tactics the GOP is using to try to smear Sonia Sotomayor.  Playing the racist card? You better come correct.

To Understand Takes Time and Effort, Something that Not All People Are Willing To Give

I'm not even going to pretend that this a political blog (or I should more accurately say, a judicial watch blog) but the constant exposure to Sonia Sotomayor's "wise Latina" quote, taken out of context is -- to put it mildly -- disappointing to me.

Dirty GOP politics is nothing new, but that the mainstream media keeps repeating the quote out of context thus doing the GOP's dirty work for them is pretty scary.

Sigh.

Why such a sophomoric smear campaign? In Sotomayor's own words,

To understand takes time and effort, something that not all people are willing to give.

You could argue that those words are proven right by the storm brewing around her right now, but I'll let you decide on your own. I trust that my fellow Americans are capable to form an opinion based on facts, something that talk radio seems to think is impossible.

I'm not even going to pretend that this a political blog (or I should more accurately say, a judicial watch blog) but the constant exposure to Sonia Sotomayor's "wise Latina" quote, taken out of context is -- to put it mildly -- disappointing to me.

Dirty GOP politics is nothing new, but that the mainstream media keeps repeating the quote out of context thus doing the GOP's dirty work for them is pretty scary.

Sigh.

Why such a sophomoric smear campaign? In Sotomayor's own words,

To understand takes time and effort, something that not all people are willing to give.

You could argue that those words are proven right by the storm brewing around her right now, but I'll let you decide on your own. I trust that my fellow Americans are capable to form an opinion based on facts, something that talk radio seems to think is impossible.

Funny, G. Gordon Liddy Doesn't Look Like An Expert on Women's Health

This is G. Gordon Liddy.

Yesterday, G. Gordon Liddy said on his conservative talk radio show that SCOTUS nominee Sonia Sotomayor was a member of La Raza, "which means in illegal alien, 'The Race.'"

WOW. There's now a language called "illegal alien."

And then he said:

LIDDY: Let’s hope that the key conferences aren’t when she’s menstruating or something, or just before she’s going to menstruate. That would really be bad. Lord knows what we would get then.

Now, take a second look at the picture above. Does that look like a man who knows anything about Latinos, women, or Latinas? Female reproductive cycles? Common sense?

Obviously, no.

A few conservative politicians have issued tepid reprimands.

What I want to know is--where are the conservatives who howled that Sarah Palin was being treated in sexist fashion? Where are the conservative women--Republican Latinas, even, if such people exist--who are decrying this ridiculous Neanderthal racism and sexism as something that should crawl back to the stone age where it belongs?

Feel free to leave any examples of right-wing outrage at what Liddy said in the comments. I'm curious to see if there are any.

They don't even have to be wingnuts. They could be members of the media.

For example, if anyone sees Campbell Brown declaring "Free Sonia Sotomayor," like she did for Sarah Palin, please let me know.

So far?

I mostly hear crickets.

Cynematic blogs at P i l l o w b o o k.

TX Gov Perry threatens CHIP veto even as amendment dies fast death in Texas House, supporters rally to revive bill

The Children’s Health Insurance Program is designed to ensure that uninsured and lower-income children receive the health care they need. Advocates are excellent at invoking the true face of children who need, receive, and benefit from CHIP and SCHIP. Who doesn’t want to help children, especially sick children?

Governor Rick Perry and the Texas state representatives, that’s who.

Alleging that this, “is not what I consider to be a piece of legislation that has the vast support of the people of the state of Texas,” Perry was clear that he did not support the bi-partisan twice-passed Senate plan to get up to 80,000 more children into the government-subsidized Children's Health Insurance Program.

He is likely to veto the measure, if it manages to make it to his desk. Unfortunately, even that is in question after the antics this week in the Texas Legislature when House Democrats halted action to kill the controversial voter ID bill. As a result, unfortunately, the CHIP bill, among others, was endangered. With the session close on the horizon, the Texas Senate worked late to pass the Senate version of the CHIP expansion bill by a vote of 29-2. They attached the bill to a newborn screening bill and returned it to the House.

The House simply needed to pass the bill. This seemed possible, since earlier they had approved Rep Garnet Coleman’s version of the bill 87-55.

However, on Thursday evening, Speaker Joe Strauss ruled that the Senate’s CHIP amendment was not germane to the bill it was attached to, and that, as they say, was that.

We can question and speculate for days about why the Senate attached the bill to the newborn screening bill instead of to Coleman’s CHIP bill, whether Strauss was right, or even if this is moot since Perry would veto the bill on its own or as an amendment.

I think it’s more important, though, to talk about the bottom line and why it’s essential that all Texans contact their elected representatives, as well as the Governor and Speaker, to express support for CHIP. That means talking about the myths versus facts of CHIP.

Legislation Watch: Gender Equity in Health Premiums Act

Just a couple of days ago, Reps. Linda T. Sánchez (D-CA) – a brand-new Mom – and Ginny Brown-Waite (R-FL) – mom to three, grandma to five – introduced a bill (HR 2635) to prohibit health insurance companies from engaging in “gender rating,” a practice which charges women more for health insurance premiums than men. 

In a press release, they listed the “Top 5 Reasons Health Insurance Isn’t Fair to Women.”

5. Twenty-one million women and girls went without health insurance in 2007.  In addition to requiring reproductive health care – yearly pap smears, mammograms, and obstetric care – women are twice as likely to suffer from headaches, and more likely to experience joint, back or neck pain.  Women are also four times as likely to develop osteoporosis. 

Texas legislators shift money from family planning clinics, see rise in teen pregnancy

I listen with incredulity as conservative GOP talking heads pontificate about "liberal judicial activists" who "legislate from the bench."

It's a magic trick, that, as they gesture madly with one hand and quickly redirect funding and legislate morality behind their backs and ours with the other hand.

In a Dallas Morning News story released Friday, we find out that

"Clinics that have been providing family-planning services find themselves on the losing end of a fight over how the state can best provide birth control, screenings for sexually transmitted diseases and other services.

. . .
Over the last four years, lawmakers have diverted millions of dollars from the specialty clinics such as Planned Parenthood to expand family-planning services at community health centers, which provide a broader range of services. In the current legislative session, lawmakers may give back some money to the specialty clinics – but only what's left unused by the health centers."

On the surface, you might think, "It seems to make sense, to fund community health centers."

But let's look at some more information to show why this isn't the best use of funding, and how it's more morality restrictions that negatively affect women's health care.

Go Read It: LA Times Recap, California State Supreme Court Ruling Expected on Prop 8 Today

The California State Supreme Court's decision on Prop 8, the amendment to the California state constitution that formally added language identifying marriage as "between a man and a woman," will be made public at 10 am, May 26, 2009.

The LA Times has a good brief recap of the issues.

...the court is dealing with three different legal issues: whether Proposition 8 amounts to an impermissible revision of the state Constitution; the attorney general's challenge contending that marriage is an "inalienable" right that can't be taken away without compelling justification; and the fate of existing same-sex marriages.

18,000 people who married between May 2008 and November 2008 and their friends, families, and allies are anxiously waiting to see if their lives will come undone.

I'm hoping we join the ranks of Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, Vermont and Maine in recognizing marriage equality. Updates as they come.

Previous MOMocrats posts on marriage equality:

Vermont Fourth State to Okay Same-Sex Marriage; What Say You, California? Apr 2009

Iowa Says Yes to Love, No to Ban on Same-Sex Marriage, Apr 2009

Prop 8, With Jazz Hands, Dec 2008

Prop 8, Its Aftermath, and Minority Communities, Nov 2008

Activists Target People and Businesses Who Supported Prop 8, Nov 2008

No on Prop 8: Six Arguments in Favor of Marriage Equality, Oct 2008

California's Prop 8: The Battle Tightens, Oct 2008

Happy National Coming Out Day (Vote No on Prop 8), Oct 2008

Same-Sex Marriage: Liberty and Justice for All, Aug 2008

The Cost of Caring for Aging Parents, Another Issue to Consider for Same-Sex Unions, May 2008

California Supremes Overturn Gay Marriage Ban, May 2008

Cynematic blogs at P i l l o w b o o k.

Thank You

 

To all those who have served bravely and honorably to protect their fellow citizens, and to all those at home who have supported the men and women of our armed forces, we at MOMocrats thank you this Memorial Day.

Fem2.0-MOMocrats Live Chat: Feminism is Where You Are/What You Do

Moderators: Jaelithe Judy, Julie Pippert, Joanne Bamberger & Cynematic of MOMocrats

Fem2.0 Twittercast: Feminism is Where You Are/What You Do
Sunday, May 24, 2009, 10 PM EST
We'll be using Cover-it-Live to live chat (more than 140 characters allowed, hurray!) and also pull in tweets from Twitter tagged #fem2.

Today, we're joining up with the folks at Fem2.0 to continue the discussion from last week, which started with the discussion of feminism, moms who blog, the feminist blogosphere, and what intersection there is among all three.

To start the conversation, we have a beautiful post by a GrandMOMocrat (who happens to be MOMocrat Jaelithe's mother). Please read the lovely essay by Diana Harvestmoon-Stewart about combining motherhood, feminism, and activism.

It may shed new light on the previous Fem2pt0 conversation, which was framed here: "Mommies and Feminists: the Great Divide."

Here's how we've framed the Fem2pt0 chat for this week:

Cynematic says: No matter where we are in our respective life cycles–raising children or choosing to be childfree, a young adult or older woman, mother to boys or girls, caretaker of the generations before you–if you’re a feminist, you’ve probably brought that sensibility with you to your activism.

We want to turn the question on end a little. What are you active in, and how does that inform your feminism? Where are you geographically, so you can connect with others on the chat? What do you need to do your work? How would your work be different if there was a critical mass of feminists there? Or is that already the case?

Let’s move off labels, identities, and the preconceptions that can come attached to those. Let’s find as many different feminisms as we can through the kinds of way it’s practiced.

More food for thought: feminisms in the context of family or community, Naomi Wolf

On Motherhood and Feminism: A GrandMOMocrat speaks

I am the proud feminist mother of two grown feminist daughters and a teenage son who might be embarrassed at the moment to be referred to as a "feminist," but who has a finely honed sense of justice that fits the bill. One of those daughters has asked me to give some of my personal history and perspective on feminism and motherhood — so here goes.

Like a lot of women, I think, I was a feminist before I ever heard the word uttered, from the first time I was forced to act against my own inclinations and even my own best interests with no better explanation than "Little girls don't. . . should. . . can't. . . never. . . always. . ."  I wondered why, and learned to do so silently most of the time. Even as a very young child, I burned with indignation, disappointment, anger, fear and confusion over many, many contradictions.

Why was it OK for my father to be angry and loud and hit my mother, and why was she required to lower her eyes and her voice and take it? Why did the school rules demand that I walk to school in a thin dress and tights in the 20-below windchill of a Minnesota winter, while my brother was allowed to wear heavy jeans, thick socks, and boots with three times the insulation of my flimsy vinyl ones with the fake fur trim? Why was I redirected by the kindergarten teacher (first with kindness and finally intense irritation) every single time I tried to play with "the boys'" building blocks and wooden train set?  (She dragged me by the arm to play with plastic pots and pans and a box of grimy, hair-challenged baby dolls instead.)