R-E-S-P-E-C-T, Find out what it means to me
-
flickr/KCIvey
Girlfriend, we need to talk. These guys in your life– they’re no good for you. It’s time to cut them loose. Remember what Maya Angelou said about people like this? “When a man tells you who he is, believe him.”
If he wants to put up obstacles between you and your birth control method, or if he says you were not legitimately raped because you ended up pregnant after the assault, then ask yourself: Is this the man for me?
Okay, I get it. You go along with this stuff because he says he’s real religious. That he doesn’t believe in birth control. Fine for him and his life. But what about your life? What does this say about his plans for you?
If barefoot and pregnant isn’t the future you had planned for yourself, it’s time to set yourself free.
I know, he apologized for the “legitimate rape” comment, but don’t they always apologize after they insult you or knock you around? “I’m sorry, baby! I didn’t mean it.” And then come the flowers. But it’s too late. He has already told you– shown you– who he is. Are you paying attention?
Our own Governor McDonnell has shown us who he is as chairman of the GOP platform committee. The platform plank about abortion, which– hello!– is the same as it has been since 1984, makes no exception for women and girls who have been raped or suffered incest.
Congressman Todd Akin’s medieval misconception that rape cannot result in pregnancy was, of course, ludicrous. And his candy-and-flowers apology is meaningless. But do you think he’s the only one of these guys who holds that opinion?
Think again. There was loud criticism of Akin by his fellow Republicans, but did they rush to change the GOP platform to allow abortion for victims of rape? Hell, no.
And then there’s George Allen, who’s been sniffing around, hoping to come back into your life and be your senator again. Don’t you let him.
Back in 2003, Allen voted to confirm James Leon Holmes to a federal judgeship. I know what you’re thinking: So what?
Here’s what: Before he was up for this life-long appointment as a federal judge, Holmes had this to say about the need for a rape exception in the restriction of abortion: “Conceptions from rape occur with approximately the same frequency as snowfall in Miami."
Ha, ha. Humor, at whose expense? Of course, when this moment of candor came to light during the confirmation process, it was all “Oh, baby, I’m so sorry” time.
And while we’re on the subject of creepiness in the guys you’ve been putting up with, may I remind you of that jaw-dropping, hands-on-hips, oh-no-he-di’n’t! moment from George Allen’s campaign the last time he was sweet-talking you into keeping his senator shoes under your bed?
When a young Indian-American man named S.R. Sidarth, a Virginia native, was filming a George Allen campaign appearance in 2006, here’s what Allen had to say to him, “This fella over here in the yellow shirt, Macaca or whatever his name is, he’s with my opponent. […] Let’s give a welcome to Macaca here. Welcome to America and the real world of Virginia.”
Allen’s mother grew up in Tunisia, where “macaca,” which means “monkey,” has been used as a racial slur. Kind of like the n-word in English.
If you were looking for confirmation of George Allen’s reputation as a bully, this was it.
Ah, but you had the good sense to show him the door last time!
Before you go pushing buttons and pulling levers behind the curtain on November 6th, think about what’s best for you. Think about keeping the freedom to direct your own life, about keeping the bullies and control freaks out of your business.
Stay strong, sistah!
~
It doesn't sound like Free Union resident Janis Jaquith will be pulling many R-levers in the voting booth this fall.
32 comments
Ladies can we talk?
I see that Ms. Jaquith is something of a sexist while see complains about sexist. She must think that only men are republicans. That no women could believe that abortion is morally wrong. She seems to believes that Republicans are really in a war with woman. Is Akin to be shunned ?- sure but everyone including the Republican leadership denounced him but let's pretend he represents all Republicans.
Trotting out George Allen gaffe that he paid dearly for while ignoring Kaine cowardly attempt to let Jens Söring slip out of the country as a favor to his german diplomat father shows a stunning lack of proportion. Söring killed two Virginians in cold blood and Kaine has NEVER explained this travesty to circumvent the decision of a jury to please the German government. Being a perceived bully is somehow worse to her then allowing a rightfully convicted killer to escape Virginia's justice.
And lastly Ms. Janquith, never wanting to let the facts get in the way of a good rant, conveniently forgets the R-E-S-P-E-C-T was written by Otis Redding about a woman- the version by Aretha Franklin is a great cover but flips the original songs essence.
Think for yourselves ladies!
Huh?
Commenter "The Flaw in Your Logic"makes little if any sense.
Todd Akin does, in fact, represent the Republican Party policy on abortion. The only reason some of his comrades "denounced" him (wink) is because he called serious attention (again) and scrutiny to Republican abortion policy. One need only think back to the effort by Virginia House Republicans to impose trans-vaginal ultrasounds on all women seeking legal abortions in the Commonwealth. There was a reason that Lil Bob McDonnell was placed in charge of the platform committee.
And speaking of that platform, it specifically prohibits abortion, without any exceptions. Watch the Daily Show clip below as Republican delegates scramble to explain their official platform vis-a-vis Mitt Romney's rehearsed statement that there should be exceptions for "rape, incest, and the life of the mother." Republicans, true to their hypocrisy, think Romney should be free "to choose."
Women, however, should not.
What, pray tell, is there to "think" about?
oops....the Daily Show clip:
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-august-29-2012/rnc-2012---the-road...
The Supreme court ruled that abortion is legal within certian limitations, so until that changes women have the right to an abortion. Period.
My personal opinion is that women should have the right to an abortion, especially in cases of rape or incest. Most conservatives think this despite the rantiongs of Democrats.
The sheer number of abortions that occur in this country is astonomical and inexcusable. The number of women who have repeted abortions is inexcusable. To even imply that these pregnancies were all "unpreventable" is beyond the pale.
Women in America not only want the right to drive thru abortions they want their fellow taxpayers to pay for them. So it is not unreasonable for the person helping to pay the bill to expect the person who wants the money to at least be careful. The numbers PROVE otherwise. If we were all compelled to fix our neighbors cars after every "accident" no one would think that having them attend driving school would be out of line.
You have the right to abortions. That is your decision and would not be an issue if taxpayer funds were out of it. So if the majority of americans want to support it then let individuals donate to planned parenthood and get it out of politics altogether.
This is not a war on women. This is both men and women who think there are a lot of careless people out there who are so selfish they think an hour of sex with a few strangers is worth the one out of ten times it comes back to bite them in the private parts.
By the way, I am all for handing out birth control for free since its obvious that too many parents don't teach thier daughters that their vaginas are not community property.
It does not go unoticed by men that the women holds all the cards here. If a man inseminates a woman she can kill it or keep it and give him the bill for 18 years. He has ZERO say in what is geneitcally half his. Address that.
If women want to continue making the case that all abortions are such a hard decision and all woemn anguish over them then back it up with some real studies because just about every therapist will tell you that their clients often have little remorse for what they did and are more concerned with why the guy never bothered to call them back after they had sex with him at the frat house while ten people were on the other side of the door listening.
The reason the platform has not changed since 1984 is because despite all the feminist rantings to the contrary the people in 1984 were right when they preditced " in 25 years just imagine how many abortions will be performed if we don't at least try and make a stand"
Once again the sheer numbers of abortions are unjustifiable. It may or may not be a human but it we all know its not just an egg yolk either.
Women should fear more about getting to retirement age with no money because of liberal consume all the money policies.
When women police themselves and recduce abortions by half by being more careful then people on the other side will stop hounding them to be responsible.
The Daily Show clip is quite funny but does nothing to address the reason for my post. I'm not here to debate if abortion should be legal- it very clearly is and I don't spend any time trying to change that. If posters want to think that's what I'm saying then fine but it's not. I'm sure it's easier to pretend I'm intolerant to other women's personal sovereignty then debate the merits of Macaca vs. Söring in Virginia's US Senate race.
Jaquith's rant is little more than a preamble to the next week's convention in Charlotte and I hope since it so clearly political that the Hook might want other perspectives that aren't so slavishly democrat.
Once again Bill Marshall proves himself virtually impenetrable to facts.
Marshall insists that "Women in America not only want the right to drive thru abortions they want their fellow taxpayers to pay for them." Sorry, Bill, that statement is as inaccurate as the Romney/Ryan lie that more supply-side, trickle-down, laissez-faire economic policy will improve the American economy.
According the the Guttmacher institute, which studies and keeps records on abortion, "Congress has barred the use of federal Medicaid funds to pay for abortions, except when the woman’s life would be endangered by a full-term pregnancy or in cases of rape or incest." Moreover, while "Seventeen states use public funds to pay for abortions for some poor women, only four do so voluntarily; the rest do so under a court order."
Marshall asserts that "The sheer number of abortions that occur in this country is astonomical and inexcusable." But "Fifty-four percent of women who have abortions had used a contraceptive method (usually the condom or the pill) during the month they became pregnant," and the number of abortions in the US has been dropping since 1981. And, in fact, "publicly funded family planning services helped women avoid 1.94 million unintended pregnancies, which would likely have resulted in about 860,000 unintended births and 810,000 abortions." But Republicans want to cut family planning services (especially Planned Parenthood) too. And they want to curtail sex education courses.
Guttmacher reperts that "unintended pregnancy increased 50% among poor women, while decreasing 29% among higher-income women." And the reasons for abortion are clear: " 61% of abortions are obtained by women who have one or more children. The reasons women give for having an abortion underscore their understanding of the responsibilities of parenthood and family life. Three-fourths of women cite concern for or responsibility to other individuals; three-fourths say they cannot afford a child; three-fourths say that having a baby would interfere with work, school or the ability to care for dependents; and half say they do not want to be a single parent or are having problems with their husband or partner."
What women should truly fear is more Republican economic policy that hands public treasury money over to the private bank accounts of robber barons, and Republican social policy that undermines reproductive choice for women.
Some readers evidently think that the existence of a "plank" in the party platform, or the platform itself, accurately represents the opinions and values of all members of the party (no matter which party). This kind of thinking is illogical at the outset, but logic aside, one need only consult enough partisans to discover, wonder of wonders, that views vary widely. I, for one, am a registered republican because I live in a republic. But this is no predictor of how I shall vote, and never has been, nor is it an indication of my support for any particular party rhetoric.
I personally think that abortions of convenience are an abomination and a demonstration that life is very cheap. I might want to suggest (if I were asked) a different course of action. But the decision to kill her issue is entirely hers and nothing in government should stand in the way of it.
In my opinion, no government at any level should have anything at all to say about voluntary abortion, meaning the voluntary and willful termination of a fetus at the direction of the host for reasons other than medical necessity. It is none of the government's BUSINESS. As to medical necessity, there is no reason not to fund the procedure exactly as one would pay for any other. If the unwanted pregnancy is the result of rape (however characterized) then the assailant quite obviously should be brought to justice; rape is a form of battery. And the victim should be compensated. In exactly the same way as a bullet might be removed from a lung, a fetus may be removed from the womb. There is a cost for that, and the assailant should be the one who pays. If it was just "one of those things," an accident, then let the host pay for the correction. There certainly is no reason for ME to pay for it. Or let the child be born and delivered to parents who want to adopt. Or let voluntary organizations operate clinics - what should I care?
Whether the willful killing of human life before birth is immoral or sinful or simply a preference may arouse many voices. But it does not lie with government to resolve it, simply because it can NOT be resolved, so long as people are so bitterly divided on the matter.
With the Republican Platform set, and Personhood to be an Amendment to the Constitution - this would mean women who have ectopic pregnancies would die. Period, there is no exception.
No one who is pro-choice is pro-abortion, we would like to see women take control of their reproductive lives be it abstinence, birth control and planing for their future. The number one organization that helps all women with this is Planned Parenthood, without judgement and it has helped more women have what is considered "standard care" appointments but the goal of most of the Republican's on tickets this November is to destroy Planned Parenthood (only 3% of all funding raised - not from government grants - goes to abortion care or services).
Our country was founded for religious freedom. Groups came to this nation to escape the fact that in their home countries, they couldn't practice their religions freely. They could here. Each group, family and individual has their own views on mortality and when life begins.
There are also situations where a unborn baby may have a deadly defect or disease that will prevent them from living outside the womb or for a short period of time outside the womb and during that time millions spent to keep them alive and unknown how much pain and suffering that child will endure. No one wants their child to suffer. The Pro-Lifers will say it is a "partial birth abortion" those who work with these families state "compassionate birth".
They wanted these babies, it was just a twist of fate they have a condition that is very often fatal. These families take hand foot prints, pictures and mourn their children. But our state wanted to pass laws that disallowed insurance companies from covering such procedures? They wanted to disallow medicaid from covering this procedure that may cost $5K but having these babies go to term (if they make it) would cost millions for each. In 5 years only 2 such procedures had been done in the Commonwealth under these circumstances under Medicaid. $10K vs. $2 million - that is what caused our legislators to reverse this. It came down to MONEY.
The point I am making is one that wasn't touched on above in comments, there are all sorts of reasons for families and women to decide they can not raise that child or they don't want that child to suffer. It is an individual choice, not our government's choice. We should have that freedom and we should trust women and families to make those choices, even though many suffer.
Now you might hear from some who state abortion is murder, that some use it as a form of birth control. Well, we have some on the welfare rolls, disability rolls that also abuse the system. Truly we should also put in checks and balances and if some woman has gone through "x" number of abortions in "x" number of years, perhaps we should suggest sterilization. It is obvious they don't want children. That would also prevent abortion from happening.
Perhaps that is what the Pro-Life organizations should target, instead of those who for whatever reasons made that choice once due to circumstances beyond their control? They definitely don't want to raise these children or take care of the millions in foster care. They just want more born into this world who are unwanted or impoverished. But instead they just want to scream at women entering clinics or at protests in DC or Richmond that the father has no say in their unborn child. That they should have more say and it is murder.
I like the latest that states any sperm "spilled" where it will not bring life, should also be considered murder too!
The social conservative base controls the Republican Party. That is why the platform says what it does on abortion. And on gay marriage.
Today's Republican conservatism is NOT that of Barry Goldwater, who was pro-choice and pro gay rights.
1) if government funding is only 3% of planned parenthoods funding then how can removing government funding be seen as an attempt to "destroy" it? Maybe they just don't want to particiapte with a group that provides what many see as an easy way out of irresponsible behavior and ends up promoting that behavior with their attiudes and guilt free accesiblity.
2)If spilled sperm were labels as such then I guess the gay male sex would become illegal and the demes would have thier heads explode.
3) There are plenty of "legitamte " reasons for an abortion... being fast and loose with your sex life is actually a valid one because most of the women who act like that shouldn't be mothers anyway. But the point remains that there are simply too many abrtions and feminsists never ever discuss that very important part of the equation...We as a society discuss drunk drivers as a segment of the driving community because they are the cause of too many deaths yet the drunk drivers in the back seats who are responsible for the deaths of unborn children are given a pass. If the woemn on the left would address that then perhaps there would be more empathy on the right.
4) Not all parents are like the Obamas who said that if their daughter makes a "mistake" she should be able to "take care " of is as if she banged the car and not the driver...There are a lot of mothers who council their daughters to be responsible.
"The social conservative base controls the Republican Party" if that was true, Mitt Romney would not be the nominee.
And nice use of the Akin strawman here, but I don't think many of the Hook readers will be voting in Missouri.
Yeah, so this needs to be in the opinion/editorial section, not essay. Alas, the liberal elite just will not understand that all the stats in the world does not much change the mind of someone who holds personal and moral beliefs that do not bow to studies coming out of the ivory tower institutions.
Some people just don't think they should be responsible to pay for the poor choices of someone else with their own hard work.
Tim Kaine wants to raise taxes- he wants more and more regulation. It's time to replace him with George Allen. The only way we're going to get an Audit on the Federal Reserve is if we've got a GOP majority in the Senate. This nation has been in need of an Audit on the Fed since its founding a century ago. We need the GOP now- the Dems won't do it
donkeys frolicking
fast and furious are they
death becomes a game
im a republican yea! im a demacract yea! i feell so much better about myself. The president is going to solve all my problems. i just hope he is a democrat! oh whait i mean republican.
oh! who the hell can tell the difference
dumb ass
20+ years Obama sat in Wright's congregation and had to have heard his racist rantings and it took his nomination before he denounced Wright. He just recently said he was alright with Gay marriage after never having stood up for it before. Trying to get elected in the first instance and trying to get re-elected in the second. You want to bring up past GOP gaffes so I'm bringing up 2 for the Dems to balance the playing field. You people are just like Al "Tawana Brawley" Sharpton and his one sided sniping.
pro bowl green bay linebacker BJ rajii was here with barry, shocker.
Abortion isn't gonna be outlawed if Romney gets in just like it wasn't outlawed when Bush was in for 8 years because the eugenicist establishment wants as many abortions as possible and they are in control of both Romney and Obama, they always control both sides, everyone knows this, the whole debate will be nothing more than divide and conquer tactic until the establishment is uprooted. Moreover everyone knows Romney has said he's pro choice as many times as he's said he's pro life, he needs to go walk on some hot beach sand.
CarrboroPete says that Mitt Romney would not be the Republican nominee if, in fact, the conservative base controlled the Republican party. Pete, where have you been? The conservative crazies DO control the party. Just look at what goofy ideas are in their platform. And Mitt Romney has pledged allegiance to them all (instead of liberties and justice for all).
Jimi Hendrix says that people should not "be responsible to pay for the poor choices of someone else with their own hard work." What? Huh? How many people have been killed, wounded or otherwise tragically affected by the Bush administration war in Iraq, a war that we have yet to pay for? How many people have lost houses and savings and jobs because of Bush's disastrous laissez-faire economic policies? Typically, Jimi Hendrix blames the "liberal elite" for conservative dogmatism and resistance to facts. Instead, conservatives might just peek in the mirror to find the source of their affliction.
Bush was there to give conservatism a bad name, to cause more division in the country, to get Christians and non-Christians fighting more, as part of a bigger agenda for America by the establishment who poses as liberal so they can get away with the things they do like slaughtering 52+million babies. When trying to get abortion going in the early 1900's they openly discussed how they would pose as liberal and hire black people to promote their cause so as to get the abortion agenda started on people who, if they knew who their black and fake liberal Judas goats worked for, would do everything in their power to stop them. It worked because they had the top psychologists and analysts like Edward Bernays and Betrand "Mutton Chops" Russell working for them
Bill Marshall - the funding isn't the sole way the Republicans are attempting to target Planned Parenthood, it is the ridiculous laws they are passing within states that are doing this too.
For example, requiring clinics that perform 5 or more 1st trimester abortions to adhere to hospital standards. Well, if that be the case, shouldn't any OB/GYN who performs D&C (for various reasons, miscarriage, and more) should no longer perform these procedures in their offices but refer their patients to hospitals where it will cost more.
And what of plastic surgery? That could prove to be dangerous so that should also have the same stringent guidelines too, don't you think?
Appears to me that the Republicans want to deregulate business and government but regulate women! Why is that?
"Appears to me that the Republicans want to deregulate business and government but regulate women! Why is that?"
.... because the feminist movement in this country has created an envrionment where women can get drunk, sleep with a pig, get knocked up, and get the fetus cut out like getting a hair cut all guilt free and without so much as a raised eyebrow from the entire left side of the political spectrum and the results is millions of abortions that could have been avoided by these "liberated" women simply being a little more responsible with "their" bodies....
If thats what they want to do then the supreme court has given them the right within boundaries... The states have the right to negotiate that boundary and I would imagine that the reason for the overzealousness on the part of poliiticains to do this is because there are too many abortions for them to stomach and they feel a need to stem the tide because it is obvious that loudmouth hollywood sluts are certainly going to continue to champion the "my body my right" side until you can get an abortion at the wal mart clinc with a coupon.
".... because the feminist movement in this country has created an envrionment where women can get drunk, sleep with a pig, get knocked up, and get the fetus cut out like getting a hair cut all guilt free and without so much as a raised eyebrow from the entire left side of the political spectrum and the results is millions of abortions that could have been avoided by these "liberated" women simply being a little more responsible with "their" bodies...."
It's all about the women for you isn't it Bill? What about the guy? I guess it's easy to ignore him because he isn't the one carrying it is he? Feminism has little to do with it.
The guy is the TRUE victim under current law....
If he wants the baby the woman can have an abortion without even consulting him
If he doesn't want the baby she can keep it and send him the bill(for 18 years)
If they both want the baby and are unmarried then he has to go to court to sue for visitation
Its not all about women for me... its all about the twisiting the laws and personal responsibility. If abortion were a little more difficult to get than a teeth cleaning and women actualy got "judged" by their peers for their reasoning we could probably cut the number of unwanted pregnancies in half in a decade....But as long as women want to not be judged for their part in it(but want to "judge" mens roles in it) then we will continue to have the battles over the restrictions.
It is not that difficult to fathom.... if women accepted some more responsvility to not get knocked up and to teach thier daughters that an unwanted pregnancy is a pretty stupid and irresponsbile thing to do than people who are for the right to abortion but dislike the current state of affairs would switch side and protect the women who have a damn good reason.
We judge drunk drivers who wreck thier cars when their are zero injuries but we are not alowed to judge drunken accidental intercourse that kills a fetus....
"my body my right" sounds good .. even to me ,but I still have an obligation to society to not get hep c and give my fellow taxpayers the bill.... and if I do then they have the "right" to think I was a careless irresponsbile person....
As a man I have to laugh at Bill's comment about seeing men as the victim in these cases. I wonder how loud he would howl if women managed to pass a law dictating to men about what gets done with their semen, and women. Pretty loud I would imagine.Women's Lib is hardly responsible for more or less sex out of wedlock, and the man shares equal responsibility in creating the baby. The idea that somehow he automatically has to sue for visitation rights is bullox. The woman has to carry that fetus for nine months, lose time at work, and a number of other additional burdens that the man simply does not face, so i think giving her a bit more weight in the decision is appropriate.
But lets get it straight that men are not victims in the case of unwanted children Bill. Or out of wedlock sex.
Geek, You know not of what you speak. If a woman has a child out of wedlock and denies the man visitation then he must file in court for visitation.
and there ARE laws on the books dictating what gets done with a mans semen. If he fertilizes an egg then he has to pay. (which is fine)
I don't think the accusation was that womens lib caused more or less sex it was that its agenda was to allow women to do what they want without recourse, (which somehow included having society pay for their "mistakes")
Why do I get the impression that so many of these comments were posted by men?
Women have far more to lose if they are sexually active: a strong double standard which labels sexually active women in very negative terms; women are the ones who get pregnant and bear the ultimate responsibility for the well-being of their babies and children; and, physiologically, women are more likely to get sexually-transmitted infections.
Let's do what we can to insure that all babies are born planned, wanted, and loved, and take care of the many neglected and abused children in our midst!
"I don't think the accusation was that womens lib caused more or less sex it was that its agenda was to allow women to do what they want without recourse, (which somehow included having society pay for their "mistakes")"
As per usual, this statement totally neglects the man in the picture. It takes two to tango Ponce. Women's Lib was about letting women having the same rights an opportunies as men. Your statement indicates they don't;
You are holding women completely responsible for the event, simple because they can't walk away from an unwanted pregnancy.
Bill,
I think it is about women for you. If it weren't, you would actually talk about the men. Instead it's the women that are loose, the women who aren't using protection, the women who aren't being careful, the women who are being fast and loose. Where is the man in this?
You know, when a guy is fast and loose, he can just walk away, and historically, most of them have. But you still blame the woman. So now women just might be exercising their biological drive like men have for thousands of years, and it's all about the women not taking responsibility and expecting the taxpayer to bail them out. How about the guy who was the other half of the act bailing her out? What about fathers teaching their sons?
Silent on that, aren't you?
Personally I think one abortion is too many. I think one unwanted pregnancy is too many. I think one unwanted child is too many. I think one abused child is one too many. But because I think that doesn't mean that I should just rant and rage and pretend that it doesn't happen, or try and have reasonable solutions after the fact.
Yes Bill, responsible women using birth control with safe sex with responsible men get pregnant accidently. Do you know what happens to women when they are on birth control and take anti-biotics? Do you? Most women don't and I bet you don't but I can tell you one thing; as a well degreed person I found out the hard way. In that case nature aborted it, pretty early on, and she came out of it alright. But it doesn't always turn out that way, and a hard choice might need to be made, and YOU don't have the right to dictate what that choice should be. Nor do you have the right to judge either.
When I start reading you rant on this forum about foolishness of loose men, and they way they are just pack of scoundrals, I might start taking seriously. Until then, you read just like another angry white male mad that the world doesn't let his value set dictate society anymore. Ward Cleaver ain't the only voice anymore.
Sorry, but it is time for you to pay the bill for other people's mistakes for a change. God knows women have been paying for white men through their tax dollars for generations.
The establisment wants women to dominate men in the dumbed down society and have gone to every effort through years of propaganda and bpa to make it a reality. Men ruled by women cannot threaten the male-dominated establisment.
"First, you get the women, then you have the children, and so follow the men." -Adolf Hitler
1. hey Janis, let's compromise: I'll give you the 1% of abortions resulting from rape & incest if you give me the 99% resulting from convenience. 1.5M lives saved per year.
2. Women's issues do not equal abortion. Democrats don't own women; they certainly don't speak for my mom, my wife, or my daughter.