This is the number for Ohio Governor John Kasich’s office:
He is literally the only chance we have left of getting the anti-choice, anti-women amendments removed from the Ohio budget. If he doesn’t exercise his line-item veto to remove them:
i don’t really have much hope here, but i’ve called. please, if you can spare a few minutes, do the same to help out your sisters in ohio.
Sticking to his campaign promise, French President François Hollande and the French state will now pay for 100 percent (!) of the cost of abortions. Not only that, teenage girls between the ages of 15-18 will have the option for free and anonymous birth control.
Prior to April 1st, French women over 18 could receive only 80% of the cost of an abortion covered, an operation that can cost up to 450 euros. This medical change is part of the 2013 social security budget, and France also hopes to increase the sharing of free contraceptives in an effort to cut down the total number of abortions in general — as there were close to 12,000 abortions performed in France last year.
- by Zach Sokol
A Good News Story About A Guy Who Is Not A Douche
france, je t’aime
Yes because when you regulate a MAN’S body it’s suddenly unacceptable and invasion of their rights by the government.
When it’s women…well…women can go fuck themselves because don’t you wimminz know your bodies are government property and totally up for government regulation?
Papers are refusing to run this week’s Doonsbury. It should be seen.
It’s good to know that there are newspapers that have carried it.
Like I said yesterday. I love Doonesbury. I love that they are not afraid to take on big topics. I was impressed with how they handled MST. That papers won’t run this is shameful.
“That dot there could be a lung, but don’t take my word for it.”
THESE ARE AMAZING. FAIL-Y NEWSPAPERS, YOU SUCK.
Here you go, arliss. This was what was in that bad link.
In a significant decision, the Punjab and Haryana High Court last week ruled that the right to abort a pregnancy in a marriage rests with the wife and not husband.
“A woman is not a machine in which raw material is put and a finished product comes out. She should be mentally prepared to conceive, continue the same and give birth to a child. The unwanted pregnancy would naturally affect the mental health of the pregnant woman…” said the court.
Stressing that marital intimacy between a couple does not automatically translate to the woman’s consent to child bearing, Justice Jitendra Chauhan said, “Mere consent to conjugal rights does not mean consent to give birth to a child for her husband.” Welcoming the judgement, Jagmati Sanwan, All India Democratic Women’s Association national vice-president said, “If the family conditions are unsuitable, no woman would like to give birth to a child because after all, she is the one who takes care of the children for all practical purposes. We see around us that fathers often desert their families after a couple of deliveries. But children become a part and parcel of the mother’s physical and emotional world. She invests much into their well being and she alone suffers. Hence, the rights of whether to give birth or not, should be with her.”
Take note, America.
The only person who has any say as to what goes on with their body is the person with something growing inside them.
End of story.
I love this maaaaan.
gotta admit, i’m on happyheathen’s side here. if i’m in a committed relationship and i decide to have an abortion, i would talk with them and let them know about my decision. ultimately it would be up to me, but i would like to maintain a degree of trust with my spouse/significant other. it may be my body and my choice and i certainly don’t need his permission, but i like to think i can maintain a level of communication and trust with my partner
just my opinion tho!!!!!!!