Submitted by Elaine Magliaro, Guest Blogger
I have written a number of posts for the Turley blog about The GOP’s war on women and proposed extreme anti-woman legislation which has been sponsored by members of the Republican party (here, here, here, here, here, and here). In a piece for Mother Jones, Stephanie Mencimer said that Paul Ryan has a “long history as a culture warrior”—and that people are taking “a fresh look” at it since Mitt Romney named Ryan as his running mate. I thought I’d do some investigating of my own to find out more about the Wisconsin “culture warrior’s” position on women’s issues.
According to Laura Bassett, Rep. Ryan “voted to defund federal family planning programs, authored a budget that dismantles Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare, all of which disproportionately aid and employ women, and voted multiple times to prevent women in the military from using their own money to pay for abortions at military hospitals.”
Sylvia Casablanca, a medical doctor and holistic psychotherapist, wonders if Ryan will now “head the conservative war on women.” Casablanca wrote in a VOXXI article that Ryan “sounds, thinks, acts, so much like Rick Santorum!” She added that both men have spent much of their public lives “battling the things that matter most to women.” She continued, “He [Ryan] has been opposing contraception, eulogizing women who quit successful careers to be stay-at-home moms (like their own wives have done), and vowing to defund Planned Parenthood and repeal the Affordable Care Act. And, Ryan voted against the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act.”
Casablanca feels that Ryan’s stance on the issues mentioned above are “zilch” compared to his “support of a federal ban on abortion in all circumstances, including incest and rape.”
In her Mother Jones article, Mencimer also wrote the following:
What isn’t so well known about Ryan’s record, though, is that one piece of legislation he supported is so extreme that it would have turned Romney’s children into criminals.
The Sanctity of Human Life Act, which Ryan co-sponsored, would have enshrined the notion that life begins at fertilization in federal law, thus criminalizing in vitro fertilization—the process of creating an embryo outside of a woman’s womb. In IVF, doctors typically create multiple embryos and then only implant the healthiest ones in the woman. Some of them stick and become babies, and some don’t. The embryos that don’t make it to the womb are either frozen for later use or destroyed. The Sanctity of Human Life Act, if passed, would make all those embryos “people” in the legal sense, so if they aren’t used or don’t become babies after being implanted, they would essentially become murder victims under the law.
H.R. 212: Sanctity of Human Life/Personhood Bill
Sponsor’s Summary: To provide that human life shall be deemed to begin with fertilization.
Excerpt from the text of H. R. 212:
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
For purposes of this Act:
(1) FERTILIZATION- The term ‘fertilization’ means the process of a human spermatozoan penetrating the cell membrane of a human oocyte to create a human zygote, a one-celled human embryo, which is a new unique human being.
(2) CLONING- The term ‘cloning’ means the process called somatic cell nuclear transfer, that combines an enucleated egg and the nucleus of a somatic cell to make a human embryo.
(3) HUMAN; HUMAN BEING- The terms ‘human’ and ‘human being’ include each and every member of the species homo sapiens at all stages of life, beginning with the earliest stage of development, created by the process of fertilization, cloning, or its functional equivalent.
Link to MSNBC Hardball Video: Revisiting Ryan’s extreme pro-life positions: Chris Matthews talks with Kate Michaelman, former head of NARAL, and Politico’s Maggie Haberman about Paul Ryan’s extreme pro-life stance, and his support for a federal ‘personhood’ law.
In addition, Rep. Ryan is a cosponsor of some other “extreme” anti-woman legislation that has been introduced in Congress. To wit:
H.R. 3805: Ultrasound Informed Consent Act
Sponsor’s Summary: To ensure that women seeking an abortion receive an ultrasound and the opportunity to review the ultrasound before giving informed consent to receive an abortion.
H.R. 3: No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act
Open Congress Summary: This bill would make permanent and expand the Hyde amendment restrictions on the use of federal funds for abortions. It seeks to prohibit even indirect funding streams that may potentially come in contact with abortion services. For example, it would deny tax credits to companies that offer health plans that cover abortions and it would block anybody with insurance that covers abortions from receiving federal subsidies or medical cost tax deductions, even if the abortion portion is paid separately with personal funds. Women who use tax-free Medical Savings Accounts would have to pay taxes on the costs of abortions.
H.R. 358: Protect Life Act aka “Let Women Die” Bill
Open Congress Summary: Amends the new health care law so that no federal money could be applied to health insurance plans that cover elective abortions, even if the abortion coverage is paid for entirely with private funds. It also states that a federal agency can not force a health care provider that accepts Medicare or Medicaid to provide abortion services, even in cases when the mother’s life is endangered.
From Human Rights Watch:
US: House Vote Puts Women at Risk
Bill Would Permit Hospitals to Let Women in Need of Care Die
(Washington, DC) – The United States House of Representatives approved a bill on October 13, 2011, that would put women’s lives at risk, Human Rights Watch said today. The bill, if it becomes law, would reverse longstanding federal policy requiring hospitals to provide life-saving care regardless of expense, Human Rights Watch said.
The Protect Life Act, HR 358, would amend the healthcare reform law to grant hospitals far-reaching powers to deny patients abortion care, without any exception for emergency situations. US law currently requires hospitals receiving federal funds to provide emergency care to anyone in need up to the point at which they can be stabilized or transferred, if the original hospital is incapable of providing the care they need.
“The misnamed Protect Life Act is about allowing women to die if they need an emergency abortion,” said Meghan Rhoad, women’s rights researcher at Human Rights Watch. “It is a vicious attack on women’s rights and on the most basic right to life.”
The Paul Ryan Vision: Ban Abortion, Defund Contraception, Outlaw In Vitro Fertilization
What do you think about Paul Ryan’s position on women’s issues?
SOURCES
Paul Ryan: the ‘Personhood’ Crocodile? (Huffington Post)
Paul Ryan Sponsored Fetal Personhood Bill, Opposes Family Planning Funds (Huffington Post)
Paul Ryan, new head of the Republican war on women? (VOXXI)
Bill Press: The Paul Ryan-Mitt Romney ticket: trouble for GOP (Newsday)
Sandra Fluke: 8 Points on Ryan’s Voting Record on Women’s Issues (Politic365)
Rep. Paul Ryan Supported the “Let Women Die” Bill (Blog for Choice)
How Did Your Representative Vote on the “Let Women Die” Bill? (Blog for Choice)
See How Your Lawmaker Voted on the “Let Women Die” Bill, H.R.358 (Prochoice America)
Sandra Fluke: Paul Ryan on women’s issues — so bad it’s unbelievable … but true (Lean Forward/MSNBC)
Five Reasons Why Paul Ryan Is Bad For Women’s Health (Think Progress)
The Paul Ryan Vision of America: Ban Abortion, Defund Contraception, Outlaw In Vitro Fertilization (Democracy Now)
List of Bills Sponsored and Cosponsored by Paul Ryan (Open Congress)
Yes they are….. Now wheres that bread crumbs trail….
Point, Game Set…..
The gop convention.
idealist,
I’m not irritated–just curious. I was just asking you to back up the statement that you made about the “profile” of school teachers and librarians. Evidently, you have no answer to my question. You–like Tony–make a lot of incorrect assumptions about people…as well as their state of mind. You may believe what you choose to believe about me–and all school teachers and librarians–and make all the generalizations that you like about people. That’s your prerogative.
Some Less Obvious Reasons Why What Akin Said is SO Wrong
by Mark Throckmorton
8/20/12
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/08/20/1122168/-Some-Less-Obvious-Reasons-Why-What-Akin-Said-is-SO-Wrong?showAll=yes
We all seem to be on the same page about how horrifically stupid, sexist, and misogynist were Rep. Akin’s remarks about “legitimate rape”. No question that, on its face, there is a responsibility for him to unequivocally apologize and sincerely recant…however improbable or impossible that he could or would.
But if he were to do that in the next hour, the contamination of the discourse on rape has already occurred. Even men whom I know “know better” have fallen into lapses of language and judgment that unwittingly support erroneous myths about rape. One normally thoughtful fellow wrote me the following in response to some of my objections to Akin’s comment:
“I think Akins was trying to make a distinction between 1) an actual rape, as opposed to, 2) one of thousands of false claims of rape…”. (emphasis mine) I responded with the following:
“I would not disagree [that this may have been Akin’s intended distinction], but his comment suggests that perhaps he thinks that whether the incident results in pregnancy would be a post-facto way to determine which of those two options occurred (if she got pregnant, then she must have ‘wanted it’)
“Secondly, regardless of his intent, his careless statement opens up a whole language of rape denial by fostering a distinction between “legitimate” and “illegitimate” rape. “Legitimate” is a positive value-laden word, and its use suggests that the more that the act was a violation of the woman’s choice the BETTER the rape. For men who contemplate rape, this language lowers the bar to take action by suggesting to the unconscious mind that what he is thinking about is somehow “legitimate”. Twisted? Yes. But real: words shape thoughts, thoughts support actions. (Think “one more LITTLE piece of pizza won’t hurt!”)
“Thirdly, I wonder if a more fair presentation of the distinction presented in your comment (not an attack, but a lifting of consciousness) would be: “1, one of thousands of actual rapes, opposed to 2, one of thousands of false reports of rape…” The use of “thousands” in only scenario 2 implies that false reports overwhelmingly outnumber actual rapes. In fact, they do not. Every well-conducted study indicates that a far greater number of women keep a real rape experience secret than the number of those who falsely report; and a substantial number of those who do falsely report do on more than one occasion, skewing the statistics to make the number of women who falsely report appear more numerous.”
The friend then took a moment to reflect and realized that he knew of two women who had been raped, neither of which reported the attack for reasons of shame or fear; he had never known anyone who falsely reported rape, nor anyone who had been falsely accused of rape. Still, he had unconsciously adopted the good-ol’-boy way of framing the issue that perpetuates the lie that false (“illegitimate”) rape reports are rampant and far outnumber actual rapes.
A decade ago, I trained for the Sexual Assault Response Team in a major city in California. The process of reporting and documenting a rape is itself so traumatic that very few women would falsely report, and the vast majority of false claims fall apart in the process.
For fifteen years I have facilitated Violence Cessation groups for men who committed Domestic Violence. Even among this population, many more men admit to committing rapes and other unwelcome sexual acts than do claim that they are falsely accused. They will claim other false accusations were made against them, but very rarely that a rape of sexual assault charge was bogus.
I hope that this and the many other excellent postings on Kos, FB, Twitter, and other media will help provide some “mental floss” to help us keep our thinking and our talk on a higher, more progressive and less oppressive level. Free our speech, and we may just free our thoughts, too.
Elaine,
I’m not avoiding your question. But if you have to ask it, then you won’t understand the answer. And that will only cause more irritation in you.
If you have never heard that about teachers, et al professionals (including lawyers!!!), then you have lead a sheltered life. Sheltered by kind people.
Won’t say more. You are irritated enough now.
I tried to enlighten, not irritate.
So go back to your work. You have my respect for it,
and for your compassion. Nobody’s perfect, not you, not me. That is how it is.
AY,
I read about him on another thread–the one about the judge from Lubbock, Texas. Some of these guys are really scary, aren’t they?
Elaine,
Google up Frank Szabo, the Sherrif Canidate for Hillsborough, NH…… He gives new meaning to the extreme right…..
AY,
Have you ever heard John Kerry answering questions from the media?
I’m going to paraphrase comedian Lewis Black. He said something like this: The first time I heard John Kerry speak I knew I didn’t have enough breadcrumbs to find my way home.
AY,
A spokesperson for which party?
Actually, I find politicians of both parties do that. Feckless members of the media usually let them get away with evading questions.
I was listening to npr this morning and the spokesperson was following the party line…… She was very good at evading answering any questions…… I mean she was good….. As slippery as she was in don’t think she’d ever need to get an oil change……. Pennzoil should consider hiring her for her talents……
idealist,
I guess you are avoiding answering my question.
I have never heard that you could “spot a school teacher after five minutes of talking to them.” Why don’t you explain how one can do that?
Elaine,
Come on, Have you never heard that you can spot a school teacher after five minutes of talking with them? Really, never?
You must be kidding.
And I guess no other professions carry professional characteristics with them when they are on their own time.
Just the way you posed the question is proof of what I say.
And I like you for you. But that is not enough apparently.
House Republicans have real reason to fear Paul Ryan
by kos
8/22/12
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/08/22/1123001/-House-Republicans-have-real-reason-to-fear-Paul-Ryan
We already knew that Paul Ryan was coolly received by 18 percent of the most right-wing Republicans in the country. So if they couldn’t get 100 percent of their most reliable wingnuts, what did that portend for their chances with seniors who aren’t batshit crazy?
Now we know.
Even before Mitt Romney named Paul Ryan to the ticket, our Battleground polling results indicated an erosion of support for Republicans, largely based on Paul Ryan’s plans for Medicare and entitlements. The advantage Republicans held among seniors in 2010 has been completely decimated. Across these Republican districts, incumbents now hold just a two-point lead with voters over age 64—a group Republicans won by 18 points in 2010.
Not surprisingly, the leading factor in this shift away from the GOP is Paul Ryan’s war on Medicare. By a decisive six-point margin, voters in these districts now say they trust Democrats more than Republicans when it comes to Medicare. Among voters in the 27 most competitive Republican battleground seats, Democrats now hold an 11-point advantage on Medicare.
The GOP’s best hope to weather their votes for the Ryan budget was to make sure that Paul Ryan remained an obscure personality. Democrats could scream all they wanted about Politician X’s “vote for the Ryan budget,” but if the response was “Ryan who?”, they’d be in the clear.
Mitt Romney destroyed that hope. Everyone knows, or will soon know, who Paul Ryan is. That’s why Republicans panicked at first hearing the news about Ryan, and why they continue to have reason to panic today.
idealist,
“Being a schoolteacher or school librarian makes for certain profile…”
Pray tell, what is the profile of a school teacher or librarian?
Note to Paul Ryan and company: America is not going to roll back women’s rights
August 22, 2012
By: Leo Kapakos
http://www.examiner.com/article/note-to-paul-ryan-and-company-america-is-not-going-to-roll-back-women-s-rights
A new NBC/Wall Street Journal poll indicates that Mitt Romney’s selection of Paul Ryan as his running mate, made on Aug. 11, has had little impact on voters and less of an impact on voters than previous VP running mates have had. The latest Wall Street Journal poll shows that twenty-two percent say Ryan makes them more likely to vote for Mitt Romney while 23 percent say he makes them less likely to vote for Romney; and 54 percent say the pick doesn’t affect their vote either way. That margin of -1 is weak when compared with Joe Biden’s in 2008 of +8, Sarah Palin’s in 2008 of +9 percent, and Joe Lieberman’s in 2000 of+13. Moreover, in the poll’s feeling thermometer, Ryan’s favorable/unfavorable score stands at 33 percent/32 percent.
Romney’s pick of Paul Ryan is a loser compared to past VP picks because Ryan is part of this new group of hard-line right-wing extremists that have taken over the Republican Party. To get a feel for how radical the GOP has become consider the draft of this year’s GOP’s official 2012 platform that calls for a “federal ban on abortion with no exception for rape and incest survivors”. This belief of no exceptions for rape and incest except to save the life of the mother has gone from being a fringe position in the GOP to being a normative position held by Paul Ryan, Representative Todd Akin, House leaders including Speaker John A. Boehner and Eric Cantor, and many of the major speakers scheduled to speak at the Republican National Convention.
This is the same policy Akin was trying to defend when he said that victims of “legitimate rape” have a natural bodily mechanism that prevents them from getting pregnant. Of course most rational people understand that if a woman is ovulating she is ovulating, and the stress and trauma of being raped has absolutely nothing to do with anything – just ask the roughly 31,000 women who conceived as a result of rape last year. Akin’s remarks and the ensuing outrage from both parties forced Mitt Romney for political expediency to announce on Sunday night that the Romney/Ryan ticket supports abortion in cases of rape, even though Paul Ryan previously opposed it. Mitt Romney has been all over the place on this issue recently telling former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee that he supports “personhood” but back in 2002, as a candidate for governor, Romney claimed to support “the substance” of Roe v. Wade. So which is it Mitt?
One thing is clear. The pro-life movement of the Republican Party reflects the ideological radicalization of the Tea Party and their concept of “personhood” – the notion that a fertilized egg is entitled to the exact same legal rights as a human being as it disregards the right’s of the woman. Should the Ryan/Akin personhood agenda ever take effect as law, it would drastically reduce a women’s reproductive choice. The bill would basically declare that a human egg obtains all the legal and constitutional attributes and privileges of personhood the moment it merges with a human sperm. Thus, a “blastocyst” wouldn’t only enjoy the same rights as a fully grown adult; it would also enjoy any “legal” attributes so killing a fertilized egg would in effect be the same thing as homicide.
This federal ban on abortion with no exception for rape and incest survivors shows the GOP has gone from a party that in 2010 included a grassroots effort to become more conservative to a party that is now dominated by right-wing crazies who have no regard for the victims of a rape, or their families. At the end of the day, the Republican Party’s problem is that it includes these radical hard-liners like Ryan whose views are not popular with most Americans including the Independents and moderates whose votes they need.
The Ryan pick will keep the GOP War on Women front and center. Akin and Ryan have each voted in this Congress for “10” abortion-restricting measures as well as those that limited other family planning services. Women are tired of the likes of Paul Ryan and Todd Akin telling them how to live their lives. Moreover, as more voters get to know Ryan’s budget positions— the unpopular Medicare vouchers, trillions more in tax breaks that would reduce Mitt Romney’s tax rate to less than 1%, eliminating student loans and grants and the home mortgage interest deduction — voters will have plenty of reasons to dislike the Romney/Ryan ticket in addition to their war on women.
Guess you have to look for the good side and ignore the bad. Haven’t been able to for 75 years.
Shano’s good side is he is always riding his environmental horse. And I ride behind him whipping
the same horse. I think we will not survive this insanity we are bent on. You know the problem
As for interrupting, that is the best here. Nobody can.
Being a schoolteacher or school librarian makes for certain profile which follows IRL outside. We can consider other profiles. Like yours. Like mine. Like whoevers.
But it is irritating with people that think bonafides means getting respect.
As for your language, I’d say it came from working with reality on the right side of the law. Goes with the work and even from the other folks on the right side. Only a lawyer would say “I must and void my bladder” to a collegue. But they are funny that way.
You can correct that assumption if I am wrong. The ones who helped me were fine.
Just imagine that the mayor is listening when you write. That might help.
Again, who am I to say. Just between friends who can see the sh**pile on the floor, even if it has bows on it.
Paul Ryan Insults Women Voters, Calls Forcible Rape a ‘Side Issue’
By Sarah Jones
August 22nd, 2012
http://www.politicususa.com/paul-ryan-women-wont-fall-side-issue-forcible-rape-language.html
Excerpt;
Paul Ryan thinks it’s a side issue that he voted for the “Let Women Die” bill, that gives health professionals the right to deny women an emergency abortion if her life is in danger. If this bill had been passed when my close friend was rushed to the hospital with a life-threatening ectopic pregnancy, she would be dead now. Ectopic pregnancies as she had are not viable pregnancies, so this bill would not have been saving the life of a fetus. The only thing it would have done is let my friend die for no reason, in excruciating pain.
Medicine Net explains that before the 19th century (are Republicans blushing yet?), the major health risk of an ectopic pregnancy was rupture and thus the mortality rate exceeded 50%. But now that we have surgical intervention (called an abortion by Ryan et al), the mortality rate dropped to 5%. Ectopic pregnancies are the leading cause of pregnancy related death in the first trimester. Under Paul Ryan’s ideas, this mortality rate would explode back up to 50%.
“Statistics suggest with current advances in early detection, the mortality rate has improved to less than five in 10,000. The survival rate from ectopic pregnancies is improving even though the incidence of ectopic pregnancies is also increasing.”
As each hour of this surreal Republican ticket ticks by, women are recoiling in shock and horror. We knew Republicans were not the ticket for women’s rights, but to think that Mitt Romney picked as his running mate a man who advocated for my friend to die because of his religious beliefs is stunning.
My friend went on to have three healthy children. If Paul Ryan had had his way, she would have died at the hospital to which she was rushed via ambulance, writhing in terror and pain. She would have died when the ectopic pregnancy exploded inside of her.
This is the world Romney Ryan have in mind for the majority of the population, and Paul Ryan calls our lives a “side issue.”
Will Ryan ruin Romney with women over Akin remarks on rape, abortion? (Video)
By: John Michael Spinelli
August 22, 2012
http://www.examiner.com/article/will-ryan-ruin-romney-with-women-over-akin-remarks-on-rape-abortion
Excerpt:
If Tropical Storm Issac, now gaining power and fury as it plows across the warm waters of the Caribbean on a course that could strike Tampa, Florida in time to throw a meteorological monkey wrench into the Republican National Convention scheduled there next week, isn’t worrisome enough for the GOP and its candidates up and down the ticket, the tidal wave of controversy that’s crashing over the decks of Team Romney-Ryan in the wake of new discussions and revelations on rape and abortion should prompt Republicans to batten down the hatches with women so they don’t lose more ground with the nation’s largest voting block.
In the span of three days since Missouri Congressman Todd Akin said that victims of “legitimate rape” don’t get pregnant because “the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down,” Romney’s young, buff running mate, Paul Ryan, a 7-term Congressman who represents a rural Wisconsin district, has found his co-sponsorship with Rep. Akin of a bill titled the “Sanctity of Life Act,” that declares a zygote is a legal person with constitutional rights. The introduction of the term “forcible rape” into America’s lexicon will continue to be a problem that’s sinking in with women in ways Romney-Ryan and Republicans would rather avoid.
t when Romney-Ryan would rather talk about the economy.
This publicity stemming from Akin’s comments, that put the Akin-Ryan bill in the spotlight at a time when the Republicans want to campaign on the faltering economy instead of making it a referendum on abortion, couldn’t come at a worse time.
idealist, You are up w/ the birds! Here in Wisconsin you would be milking the cows. Again, thanks for your perspective. I plead guilty to talking like I’m in a lockerroom. I’m working on that here. You have touched upon a key point I’ve made several times. Some folks here really either can’t read well or just see what they want. Maybe a refresher course in diagramming sentences would be in order for a few.
You know idealist, my job was to interview people and get to the truth of matters. There are few more rewarding jobs then finding truth. The skills I developed allow me to detect bulls#$t from a mile away. I wish I could turn that off. It’s a bit easier in this forum because you can skip over a lot of the bull feces, it’s almost impossible in person. As you know, 80% of all communication is nonverbal and I just can’t ignore something in my face.
To be fair, I don’t put shano and Elaine together. shano has issues, I know you could see it in the venom she spewed about “selfish infertile women”. That’s the most judgemental comment I’ve read in awhile. shano is the type of person who doesn’t listen but just waits to talk. And, if engaged in a conversation w/ shano in a coffee shop, bar, etc. you or I would be constantly interrupted. One of my pet peeves. Elaine isn’t venomous, she’s manipulative and intellectually dishonest when cornered. As I said to her yesterday, she has that school marm tone that carried over into her retirement. As you know idealist, there is zero tolerance for outsiders who don’t toe the party line. What I know jumped out to you in this thread was I was agreeing w/ most of what they had to say. To constantly be called a right wing anti abortion guy when I said several times I believe it should be legal is insane..just plain hateful insanity. Enjoy your day, paisan!
Yes, the skies should piss upon them. Mine does not stretch that far. But the monkey in Tampa can be of help to us. He did on an officer, it is said.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/26/magazine/tampa-monkey.html?ref=us