HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » ShazzieB » Journal
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 20 Next »

ShazzieB

Profile Information

Name: Sharon
Gender: Female
Hometown: Chicago area, IL
Home country: USA
Member since: Tue Mar 26, 2013, 04:18 AM
Number of posts: 6,266

Journal Archives

January 6 Committee report to be published in September!

I was messing around at Amazon, and you know how they show suggestions of other books and stuff that you might be interested in? Well, this just happened to popped up:



The January 6th Report
by Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol
Publisher ‏ : ‎ Celadon Books
Publication date ‏ : ‎ September 13, 2022

On January 6, 2021, insurgents stormed the U.S. Capitol, an act of domestic terror designed to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power without parallel in American history. In a resolution six months later, the United States House of Representatives called it "one of the darkest days of our democracy," and established a special committee to investigate how and why it happened.

Celadon Books, in collaboration with The New Yorker, presents the committee's final report, the definitive account of January 6th and what led up to it, based on more than a year of investigation by nine members of Congress and committee staff with accompanying analysis by David Remnick, editor of TheNew Yorker and winner of the Pulitzer Prize.


https://smile.amazon.com/dp/1250877520?ie=UTF8&n=133140011

It looks like they are planning this so the report comes out hot on the heels of the hearings (and before the election), which makes a lot of sense to me.

I know some people will probably post to say none of this means anything, nothing is going to come of any of this, and all the other negative stuff people say in response to any post about January 6, the Committee, the investigation, etc. Whatever, you do you. I'm posting this for those who are interested.

I am really looking forward to the hearings myself, and I, pretty sure I'm not the only one.

After 30 Years of Turning Abortion Clinics Into War Zones, Now You Want "Civility"?

Protesting at her neighbor Brett Kavanaugh’s house has been a monthslong commitment for Lacie Wooten-Holway. The 39-year-old teaching assistant and mother of two had been showing up outside the justice’s home, with a sign, often alone, for the past few months because, as she told the Washington Post, she felt that Kavanaugh should know how his neighbors feel about abortion rights.

After it was revealed that the Supreme Court plans to overturn Roe v. Wade, many more people joined her. Protesters have also gathered outside the homes of Justices Samuel Alito and John Roberts. With the crowds came the press coverage, and with the press coverage came the blowback.

Jen Psaki, the White House press secretary, tweeted chidingly about the protests, attributing the scolding to the president himself. The Washington Post editorial board weighed in to say, “Leave the justices alone at home.” And many people tweeted similar sentiments to that of Bill Kristol, the neoconservative writer, who wrote: “Please don’t protest at people’s homes. Please don’t intrude on people attending their houses of worship. Organize politically, be civil civically.”

Demanding civility from those you seek to oppress is absurd. But considering the anti-abortion movement has, for decades, turned the front door of an abortion clinic into a war zone, it’s the height of hypocrisy.

After 30 Years of Turning Abortion Clinics Into War Zones, Now You Want "Civility"?

Protesting at her neighbor Brett Kavanaugh’s house has been a monthslong commitment for Lacie Wooten-Holway. The 39-year-old teaching assistant and mother of two had been showing up outside the justice’s home, with a sign, often alone, for the past few months because, as she told the Washington Post, she felt that Kavanaugh should know how his neighbors feel about abortion rights.

After it was revealed that the Supreme Court plans to overturn Roe v. Wade, many more people joined her. Protesters have also gathered outside the homes of Justices Samuel Alito and John Roberts. With the crowds came the press coverage, and with the press coverage came the blowback.

Jen Psaki, the White House press secretary, tweeted chidingly about the protests, attributing the scolding to the president himself. The Washington Post editorial board weighed in to say, “Leave the justices alone at home.” And many people tweeted similar sentiments to that of Bill Kristol, the neoconservative writer, who wrote: “Please don’t protest at people’s homes. Please don’t intrude on people attending their houses of worship. Organize politically, be civil civically.”

Demanding civility from those you seek to oppress is absurd. But considering the anti-abortion movement has, for decades, turned the front door of an abortion clinic into a war zone, it’s the height of hypocrisy.

Why abortion is health care

It’s not just about extreme cases—pregnancy can have a lifelong impact on well-being.

Tiffany was 17 weeks pregnant when her water broke while she walked to her car. The fetus wasn’t viable. Her OB-GYN team recommended an abortion—the standard of care, given the high risk of infection and death associated with her condition. While she considered her options, her blood stopped clotting properly—a possibly deadly complication. Doctors intubated her and rushed her to the ICU for a prolonged stay, where she had an emergency abortion. Without access to abortion, Tiffany would have died.

Tiffany, whose name we have changed, is an extreme example. In conversations around abortion rights, such extreme examples often come up as to why abortion is health care. And it’s true: Abortion can be an acutely lifesaving tool.

But carrying a fetus is inherently risky, even in normal pregnancies. The risk that something will go drastically wrong for the mother in pregnancy, or that there will be harmful lifelong health consequences, is unavoidable: Fundamental evolutionary forces have etched these risks into our genes. If you talk to five pregnant people in the USA, statistically one of them will experience a potentially serious complication, like high blood pressure or gestational diabetes.

Many of us are willing to take our chances, with the support of medical care, for the joy of childbirth. But if laws erase the choicdice to have an abortion, pregnant people will be legally required to put their health, and even lives, at risk. Biology makes sure of that.


Read the rest here: https://slate.com/technology/2022/05/abortion-access-health-care-pregnancy.html


The Horrifying Implications of Alito's Most Alarming Footnote

A “domestic supply of infants” is exactly what the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment intended to abolish.

One of the most arresting lines in Justice Samuel Alito’s 98-page draft opinion reversing Roe v. Wade is a footnote that didn’t really surface until the weekend. A throwaway footnote on page 34 of the draft cites data from the CDC showing that in 2002, nearly 1 million women were seeking to adopt children, “whereas the domestic supply of infants relinquished at birth or within the first month of life and available to be adopted has become virtually nonexistent.” In response to the outrage and some misinformation, the conservative legal industrial complex went to great lengths to downplay it as a trivial footnote in a draft opinion; that Alito was citing the CDC and not himself; and that the note appears in a roundup of “people are saying” type arguments against abortion.

True. But the footnote reflects something profoundly wrong with the new “ethos of care” arguments advanced by Republicans who want to emphasize compassion instead of cruelty after the Dobbs fallout. Footnote 46, quantifying the supply/demand mismatch of babies, follows directly on another footnote in the opinion approvingly citing the “logic” raised at oral argument in December by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who mused that there is no meaningful hardship in conscripting women to remain pregnant and deliver babies in 2022 because “safe haven” laws allow them to drop those unwanted babies off at the fire station for other parents to adopt.

Second only to the creeping chatter of state birth control bans, the speedy pivot to celebrating forced birth and adoption is chilling. It’s chilling not just because it discounts the extortionate emotional and financial costs of childbirth and the increased medical risks of forced childbirth. It’s chilling because it lifts us out of a discussion about privacy and bodily autonomy and into a regime in which babies are a commodity and pregnant people are vessels in which to incubate them. If this sounds like a familiar, albeit noxious, economic concept– it’s because it is.

The economics of chattel slavery itself reflects a long sordid history of using women’s bodies to incubate babies for the benefit of others, and it’s no exaggeration to say that the Fourteenth Amendment’s guarantees of “substantive due process” – much derided by Republicans and Alito – was an effort to put an end that practice. References to “safe havens” and the depleted domestic supply of adoptable babies are terrifying because this is exactly what the Fourteenth Amendment sought to curtail.


Read the rest here: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2022/05/the-alarming-implications-of-alitos-domestic-supply-of-infants-footnote.html

The Horrifying Implications of Alito's Most Alarming Footnote

A “domestic supply of infants” is exactly what the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment intended to abolish.

One of the most arresting lines in Justice Samuel Alito’s 98-page draft opinion reversing Roe v. Wade is a footnote that didn’t really surface until the weekend. A throwaway footnote on page 34 of the draft cites data from the CDC showing that in 2002, nearly 1 million women were seeking to adopt children, “whereas the domestic supply of infants relinquished at birth or within the first month of life and available to be adopted has become virtually nonexistent.” In response to the outrage and some misinformation, the conservative legal industrial complex went to great lengths to downplay it as a trivial footnote in a draft opinion; that Alito was citing the CDC and not himself; and that the note appears in a roundup of “people are saying” type arguments against abortion.

True. But the footnote reflects something profoundly wrong with the new “ethos of care” arguments advanced by Republicans who want to emphasize compassion instead of cruelty after the Dobbs fallout. Footnote 46, quantifying the supply/demand mismatch of babies, follows directly on another footnote in the opinion approvingly citing the “logic” raised at oral argument in December by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who mused that there is no meaningful hardship in conscripting women to remain pregnant and deliver babies in 2022 because “safe haven” laws allow them to drop those unwanted babies off at the fire station for other parents to adopt.

Second only to the creeping chatter of state birth control bans, the speedy pivot to celebrating forced birth and adoption is chilling. It’s chilling not just because it discounts the extortionate emotional and financial costs of childbirth and the increased medical risks of forced childbirth. It’s chilling because it lifts us out of a discussion about privacy and bodily autonomy and into a regime in which babies are a commodity and pregnant people are vessels in which to incubate them. If this sounds like a familiar, albeit noxious, economic concept– it’s because it is.

The economics of chattel slavery itself reflects a long sordid history of using women’s bodies to incubate babies for the benefit of others, and it’s no exaggeration to say that the Fourteenth Amendment’s guarantees of “substantive due process” – much derided by Republicans and Alito – was an effort to put an end that practice. References to “safe havens” and the depleted domestic supply of adoptable babies are terrifying because this is exactly what the Fourteenth Amendment sought to curtail.


Read the rest here: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2022/05/the-alarming-implications-of-alitos-domestic-supply-of-infants-footnote.html

So I went to a rally today.

There was a rally in my town today, to protest what SCOTUS is trying to do to Roe, and I was more than happy to attend. We all stood along a busy highway and held up our signs for passing drivers to see. We weren't a huge crowd, just a few dozen, but we were very visible and very enthusiastic.

Some people brought their own signs, but most of us used these signs that were provided by the local NOW chapter:



The best part was when people driving by would honk their horns to signify agreement. I'm happy to say we got lots of honks! Of course, others drove past us in silence, but we didn't encounter any outright hostility. All in all, it was a great feeling just to stand there with a bunch of people who all shared the same dismay about what's happening in this country and were ready to fight!

I hear there have been lots of events like this all over the country since the leak, and I hope they continue. The forced birthers need to be continually reminded that they do NOT own the bodies of American women and we're not going to take this lying down!

So I went to a rally today.

There was a rally in my town today, to protest what SCOTUS is trying to do to Roe, and I was more than happy to attend. We all stood along a busy highway and held up our signs for passing drivers to see. We weren't a huge crowd, just a few dozen, but we were very visible and very enthusiastic.

Some people brought their own signs, but most of us used these signs that were provided by the local NOW chapter:



The best part was when people driving by would honk their horns to signify agreement. I'm happy to say we got lots of honks! Of course, others drove past us in silence, but we didn't encounter any outright hostility. All in all, it was a great feeling just to stand there with a bunch of people who all shared the same dismay about what's happening in this country and were ready to fight!

I hear there have been lots of events like this all over the country since the leak, and I hope they continue. The forced birthers need to be continually reminded that they do NOT own the bodies of American women and we're not going to take this lying down!

Great article!

These 7 myths are just the beginning, though. There are many, many others.

This article debunks 10 abortion myths, only a few of which overlap with the NPR article: https://eastsidegynecology.com/blog/10-abortion-myths-no-one-should-believe/

A quick Google search for "abortion myths" will pull up many more articles on this topic. I highly encourage becoming familiar with these myths, in order to be able to ready to respond effectively when they come up (which I have a feeling is going to be happening more and more often as the battle lines over Roe are drawn in the coming months).

I like the way you think, Baitball Blogger!

Especially this:

"You see, no matter what happens next, this Alito case will be temporary because of how this all came together. They jumped the gun. Not only did they defy precedent, but their legal standing is weak. And for that we should thank the leaker for giving us time to see these flaws."

And this:

"The Alito case will not stand the test of time, because it is garbage in, garbage out."

You sound very knowledgeable, and what you've said makes a lot of sense to me. I'm going to hold on to the hope that this decision will indeed not stand very long, because of its flaws and flimsiness.

Thank you!
Go to Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 20 Next »