COMMENTS: 55
Reproductive Regression
Sign up to stay up to date on the latest Civil Liberties headlines via email.
"Most commonly, they ingest a whole bottle of quinine pills, with castor oil…we try to get them to the ER before their cardiac rhythm is interrupted…Sometimes they douche with very caustic products like bleach. We had a patient, a teen, who burned herself so badly with bleach that we couldn't even examine her, her vaginal tissue was so painful…."
"Our local hospital tells me they see 12-20 patients per year, who have already self-induced or had illegal abortions. Some make it, some don't. They are underage or poor women mostly, and a few daughters of pro-life families…"If you assume the quotes above come from a veteran of the abortion rights movement, talking about the "bad old days" before Roe v. Wade, when desperate women suffered death and injuries because abortion was illegal, you'd be partly right. The speaker is a longtime worker in reproductive health, whose involvement with abortion started before Roe. But the situations she describes are occurring now.Â
Jen (not her real name) is administrator of a women's health clinic in the South that provides abortions. She has noted with alarm the recent rise in illegal abortion in her community. For some of the women she sees -- after their initial attempts at abortion fail -- whether Roe v. Wade is technically still the law of the land is beside the point. The combination of the procedure's cost, the numerous regulations that her state imposes and the stigma surrounding abortion is leading a growing number of women to choose self-abortion or an untrained practitioner over legal abortion. Finding accurate data about the number of cases is almost impossible.
However, Jen's abortion-providing colleagues in other parts of the country, who communicate their experiences through a listserv, share her observation of a recent perceptible rise in illegal abortion in their clinics as well. Indeed, in another eerie echo from the pre-Roe era, the increase in illegal abortion in Jen's area is so significant that a doctor from the hospital mentioned above contacted her. He asked for her help in setting up a special ward for the treatment of illegal abortions when Roe is overturned, because he knows the caseload will mushroom then. "He didn't say 'if' -- he said 'when,'" Jen said. "Chills ran down my spine."
Why is all this happening when abortion is still legal? Though the cost of abortion has remained remarkably flat since Roe -- the cost of a first-trimester abortion at Jen's clinic is $380, actually less than it was 20 years ago, adjusting for inflation -- it's still too much for a woman who, as she puts it, "is on assistance, has two or three kids already and has no money whatsoever." Teenagers in the state where Jen works also need parental consent before they can have an abortion. And for many teens and adult women alike, the overwhelming culture of shame that hovers around abortion prevents many from going to a clinic.
The physical tragedies we are witnessing due to the return of illegal abortion are compounded by the social ones. Recently, two teenage couples, one in Michigan and the other in Texas, faced unwanted pregnancies. Both states have parental consent provisions; in both cases, the young couples received misleading information (in one instance from an anti-abortion "Crisis Pregnancy Center;" in the other, from a private physician's office) about how to obtain a legal abortion. In Michigan, the young man, with his girlfriend's approval, hit her abdomen repeatedly with a baseball bat until she miscarried; in Texas, again with the girlfriend's consent, the male stomped on his girlfriend's belly, producing a stillbirth of twins. Both young men were arrested, and the Texan, Geraldo Flores, is now serving a life sentence for fetal homicide.
In America's heartland, abortion is both difficult to access and often ground zero in the culture wars. South Dakota and North Dakota, for example, share the distinction (along with Mississippi) of being the states with only one remaining abortion clinic. South Dakota in fact, is currently engaged in a contest with Indiana to become the first state to ban abortion outright. Legislators in each state have introduced bills that they hope might become the vehicles for a friendlier (i.e., featuring two Bush appointees) Supreme Court to overturn Roe altogether.
And if one needed any convincing of the level of stigma associated with abortion in some Midwestern communities, consider how the issue recently factored in the confirmation process for an assistant police chief in Fargo, N.D. The candidate for the job was "outed" by a local anti-abortion activist for having gone through a (legal) abortion some 15 years ago, at the age of 24, with his then-18-year-old girlfriend. The police officer publicly expressed his deep "regret and shame" over the incident, and the mayor of Fargo called the abortion an "error in judgment." Only then did the appointment go forward.
To add an element of absurdity to the tragedies mentioned above, the very policies that could reduce unwanted pregnancies -- and thus abortions, legal and otherwise -- are resisted at every turn by right-wing extremists and their allies in the Bush White House. Funds for family planning services are cut back while millions of dollars of federal funding are spent on "abstinence only" sex education.
Emergency Contraception (EC), a higher-than-normal dose of regular birth control pills that can prevent a pregnancy if taken within 72 hours of unprotected sex, sexual assault or birth control failure, is denied over-the-counter status by the FDA, even though the agency's own panel of experts voted overwhelmingly to make EC available without a prescription. Researchers estimate that EC prevented some 51,000 abortions in 2000 -- the last year for which such data is available -- and OTC status would make this option far more accessible. Â
The latest front in the abortion war is the pharmacy. There are increasing incidents of anti-abortion pharmacists who are refusing to dispense both EC and regular birth control pills. Even in liberal California, where recently 70 percent of the population supports legal abortion, these pharmacist refusals are taking place. And Wal-Mart pharmacies -- often the only pharmacy in rural areas -- have long refused to fill prescriptions for EC.  So, given the current realities of American society -- where teens take matters in their own hands to end a pregnancy, where anti-abortion lawmakers cut funds for contraception, where "pharmacists for life" lecture married women while refusing to refill their birth control prescriptions -- am I suggesting that American women really are in the same boat as they were before Roe? The answer, of course, is no -- or more correctly, not yet.
The number of illegal abortions in the United States -- and attendant injuries and deaths -- currently is nowhere near where it was in the 1950s and 1960s. Most unwanted teengage pregnancies obviously do not have as their outcome a life sentence in prison. Most public officials do not have to undergo humiliating questioning about past abortions in order to get a desired promotion. Rather, these incidents are cautionary tales. They are harbingers of what the American reproductive landscape could quite quickly become -- unless Americans demand a return to common sense and repudiate the madness that a powerful minority seeks to impose on us.Â
Stay up to date with the latest Civil Liberties headlines via email
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Nigelthebrit on Jan 24, 2006 2:53 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Oh, and I almost forgot - a family planning clinic in Harley Street!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: geming on Jan 24, 2006 6:29 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: I have the chills
Posted by: sln70
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Samantha Vimes on Jan 24, 2006 6:45 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Because female hormones are used to treat a wide range of problems from serious PMS, to ovarian cysts, not just for birth control. So obviously, these pharmacists have no interest in the health and wellbeing of females.
They probably have all the ethics of the pharmacist who was watering down chemotherapy and pocketing the money he saved. You can't be a health professional and be anti-health!
They can preserve their "morals" by getting a new career.
Would anyone support the "morality" of a white sumpremacy church member who was a fireman who refused to put out the fire in a synagogue or give CPR to a black man? Of course not. So why is it that woman's health is less important than a pharmacist's religious views?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: The pharmacists
Posted by: deha
» RE: The pharmacists
Posted by: beemadj
» Hippocratic Oath?
Posted by: benzene
» RE: Hippocratic Oath?
Posted by: Shehova
» RE: The pharmacists
Posted by: judithkrain
» RE: The pharmacists
Posted by: judithkrain
Comments are closed-
Posted by: pawprints on Jan 24, 2006 9:22 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: It is getting scary for girls
Posted by: sln70
» RE: It is getting scary for girls
Posted by: judithkrain
» RE: It is getting scary for girls
Posted by: Robba29
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Lizmv on Jan 24, 2006 11:04 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I never though we would return to those days.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: This article makes me sick.
Posted by: Gma1
» RE: This article makes me sick.
Posted by: judithkrain
Comments are closed-
Posted by: deeannef on Jan 24, 2006 11:05 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» that's a start...
Posted by: sln70
» RE: that's a start...
Posted by: Gma1
» RE: Where is common sense?
Posted by: judithkrain
» RE: Where is common sense?
Posted by: mkelley
» RE: Where is common sense?
Posted by: deeannef
» RE: Where is common sense?
Posted by: redjenny
» RE: Where is common sense?
Posted by: davidt
Comments are closed-
Posted by: CatDad on Jan 24, 2006 11:10 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I (and other progressives) are starting to question the very high price of keeping abortion legal in every square inch of this nation, especially in places like Alabama/Mississippi where it probably isn’t wanted, and ceding most of our core economic/social justice issues in the process. Has it been worth it? Have two decades of lost elections and the crushing of unions/the working classes been worth the price so that women in such places can have an abortion?
This article is the second fearful article to appear in as many weeks about how horrible the world would be without Roe v. Wade. The Roe v. Wade absolutists are starting to co-opt the same fear strategies as the Right. I’m not buying it. Lets’ overturn Roe v. Wade! Let’s take this golden baseball bat of a wedge issue way from the cesspool/corrupt “culture of life” Republicans....Throw the issue back to the states....(most would re-legalize the procedure right away)....Let the Repugs have to face the wrath of women voters in their district instead of having their current free-ride under Roe v. Wade....screaming/whining “culture of life” every election cycle then doing nothing to overturn their golden meal ticket.....
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RVW or none is not an excuse for failing to address the economic issues
Posted by: maxpayne
» RE: Hysteria from Roe vs. Wade Stalinists???
Posted by: aviendha36
» RE: Hysteria from Roe vs. Wade Stalinists???
Posted by: CatDad
» RE: Hysteria from Roe vs. Wade Stalinists???
Posted by: Gma1
» RE: Hysteria from Roe vs. Wade Stalinists???
Posted by: CatDad
» Abortion is an economic and social issue
Posted by: Kelly
» RE: Hysteria from Roe vs. Wade Stalinists???
Posted by: linden
» RE: Hysteria from Roe vs. Wade Stalinists???
Posted by: CatDad
» RE: Hysteria from Roe vs. Wade Stalinists???
Posted by: judithkrain
» RE: Hysteria from Roe vs. Wade Stalinists???
Posted by: linden
» RE: Hysteria from Roe vs. Wade Stalinists???
Posted by: redjenny
» RE: Hysteria from Roe vs. Wade Stalinists???
Posted by: judithkrain
» Right on! This is just what we need to recharge the movement!
Posted by: Kneel
Comments are closed-
Posted by: morticia on Jan 24, 2006 11:54 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
1.) They're ignorant of how it was when abortion was illegal, believing abortion was invented in 1973, or...
2.) They buy into historical revisionism, which says all those stories about coat hangers and raging infections and bleeding to death never happened, are mere propaganda, or weren't nearly as common as we say they were, or...
3.) They know how bad it was, and think the baby-murdering sluts deserved what they got.
Some of the Number Ones are possibly educable. The Number Twos at least have some sort of conscience--the idea of women and girls being met by strange men, blindfolded, poked with an umbrella spine or a catheter by a motorcycle mechanic or a hairdresser on a kitchen table or car seat actually does bother them, so they "deny" it. There's nothing you can do about the Number Threes. They're the full-on misogynists, an ugly breed who've been with us since the beginning of time and will always be with us. And not all of them are men.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: judithkrain on Jan 24, 2006 5:58 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: nding Roe
Posted by: Robba29
» RE: nding Roe
Posted by: davidt
Comments are closed-
Posted by: uncleboko on Jan 25, 2006 4:34 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The caption read (approximately - and in letters fully six feet high): Let us terminate your unwanted pregnancy! It's cheap! it's painless! It's safe - and it's easy! No overnight stay necessary!
I was the only person who batted an eyelid at that in a very busy shopping center.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: maxpayne on Jan 25, 2006 2:54 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Dear Mr. ... ,
It is not our business to actually stop people over there from having abortions there as they see fit because we like it if they control their population. However, in this country, for women to be given inalienable rights to carry out an abortion was itself a grave mistake and if God doesn't punish these evil women who kill babies and/or support babies, it is up to us to fight for bringing our justice to them no matter what. There is no excuse whatsoever for women to kill babies before they're born, period.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: The double standards on abortion
Posted by: morticia
» RE: The double standards on abortion
Posted by: maxpayne
» RE: The double standards on abortion
Posted by: morticia
Comments are closed-
Posted by: SDres11 on Jan 27, 2006 8:21 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: SDres11 on Jan 27, 2006 8:25 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: pomelight on Jan 30, 2006 11:41 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We are not in the same position as we were 30 years ago. There are ways of providing education and assistance that are cheap, easily accesible, and relatively low-risk.
Even in states with medical marijuana laws, it's still considered a federal offense. But that does not prevent people from helping those who need it.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: davidt on Feb 1, 2006 10:42 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think part of the nomination process for all male GOPers entering national politics should include this questionnaire:
Do you now or have you ever masturbated? Yes No
How many times during your lifetime have you
masturbated? Enter Number Here ________
Did you ever consider that while you were satisfying
your base lust you were violating the Biblical law that
states: "Thou shalt not spill thy seed on the ground"?
Yes No
Did you ever consider the "abortion implications" of
this particular unsavory habit? Yes No
Do you think that any members of the Christian
Coalition have ever masturbated? Yes No
How can you justify your qualification for public office?
I think the inclusion of this questionnaire will eliminate
the population of jerk-offs in DC.
Since we all now that Dems are inveterate masturbators
there is no need to supply this information from them
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Tara1978 on Mar 4, 2006 5:46 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Stupid people don't deserve rights
Posted by: J.R. Sanders
» RE: Stupid people don't deserve rights
Posted by: Tara1978
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Nigelthebrit on Jan 24, 2006 2:53 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Oh, and I almost forgot - a family planning clinic in Harley Street!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: geming on Jan 24, 2006 6:29 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: I have the chills
Posted by: sln70
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Samantha Vimes on Jan 24, 2006 6:45 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Because female hormones are used to treat a wide range of problems from serious PMS, to ovarian cysts, not just for birth control. So obviously, these pharmacists have no interest in the health and wellbeing of females.
They probably have all the ethics of the pharmacist who was watering down chemotherapy and pocketing the money he saved. You can't be a health professional and be anti-health!
They can preserve their "morals" by getting a new career.
Would anyone support the "morality" of a white sumpremacy church member who was a fireman who refused to put out the fire in a synagogue or give CPR to a black man? Of course not. So why is it that woman's health is less important than a pharmacist's religious views?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: The pharmacists
Posted by: deha
» RE: The pharmacists
Posted by: beemadj
» Hippocratic Oath?
Posted by: benzene
» RE: Hippocratic Oath?
Posted by: Shehova
» RE: The pharmacists
Posted by: judithkrain
» RE: The pharmacists
Posted by: judithkrain
Comments are closed-
Posted by: pawprints on Jan 24, 2006 9:22 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: It is getting scary for girls
Posted by: sln70
» RE: It is getting scary for girls
Posted by: judithkrain
» RE: It is getting scary for girls
Posted by: Robba29
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Lizmv on Jan 24, 2006 11:04 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I never though we would return to those days.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: This article makes me sick.
Posted by: Gma1
» RE: This article makes me sick.
Posted by: judithkrain
Comments are closed-
Posted by: deeannef on Jan 24, 2006 11:05 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» that's a start...
Posted by: sln70
» RE: that's a start...
Posted by: Gma1
» RE: Where is common sense?
Posted by: judithkrain
» RE: Where is common sense?
Posted by: mkelley
» RE: Where is common sense?
Posted by: deeannef
» RE: Where is common sense?
Posted by: redjenny
» RE: Where is common sense?
Posted by: davidt
Comments are closed-
Posted by: CatDad on Jan 24, 2006 11:10 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I (and other progressives) are starting to question the very high price of keeping abortion legal in every square inch of this nation, especially in places like Alabama/Mississippi where it probably isn’t wanted, and ceding most of our core economic/social justice issues in the process. Has it been worth it? Have two decades of lost elections and the crushing of unions/the working classes been worth the price so that women in such places can have an abortion?
This article is the second fearful article to appear in as many weeks about how horrible the world would be without Roe v. Wade. The Roe v. Wade absolutists are starting to co-opt the same fear strategies as the Right. I’m not buying it. Lets’ overturn Roe v. Wade! Let’s take this golden baseball bat of a wedge issue way from the cesspool/corrupt “culture of life” Republicans....Throw the issue back to the states....(most would re-legalize the procedure right away)....Let the Repugs have to face the wrath of women voters in their district instead of having their current free-ride under Roe v. Wade....screaming/whining “culture of life” every election cycle then doing nothing to overturn their golden meal ticket.....
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RVW or none is not an excuse for failing to address the economic issues
Posted by: maxpayne
» RE: Hysteria from Roe vs. Wade Stalinists???
Posted by: aviendha36
» RE: Hysteria from Roe vs. Wade Stalinists???
Posted by: CatDad
» RE: Hysteria from Roe vs. Wade Stalinists???
Posted by: Gma1
» RE: Hysteria from Roe vs. Wade Stalinists???
Posted by: CatDad
» Abortion is an economic and social issue
Posted by: Kelly
» RE: Hysteria from Roe vs. Wade Stalinists???
Posted by: linden
» RE: Hysteria from Roe vs. Wade Stalinists???
Posted by: CatDad
» RE: Hysteria from Roe vs. Wade Stalinists???
Posted by: judithkrain
» RE: Hysteria from Roe vs. Wade Stalinists???
Posted by: linden
» RE: Hysteria from Roe vs. Wade Stalinists???
Posted by: redjenny
» RE: Hysteria from Roe vs. Wade Stalinists???
Posted by: judithkrain
» Right on! This is just what we need to recharge the movement!
Posted by: Kneel
Comments are closed-
Posted by: morticia on Jan 24, 2006 11:54 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
1.) They're ignorant of how it was when abortion was illegal, believing abortion was invented in 1973, or...
2.) They buy into historical revisionism, which says all those stories about coat hangers and raging infections and bleeding to death never happened, are mere propaganda, or weren't nearly as common as we say they were, or...
3.) They know how bad it was, and think the baby-murdering sluts deserved what they got.
Some of the Number Ones are possibly educable. The Number Twos at least have some sort of conscience--the idea of women and girls being met by strange men, blindfolded, poked with an umbrella spine or a catheter by a motorcycle mechanic or a hairdresser on a kitchen table or car seat actually does bother them, so they "deny" it. There's nothing you can do about the Number Threes. They're the full-on misogynists, an ugly breed who've been with us since the beginning of time and will always be with us. And not all of them are men.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: judithkrain on Jan 24, 2006 5:58 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: nding Roe
Posted by: Robba29
» RE: nding Roe
Posted by: davidt
Comments are closed-
Posted by: uncleboko on Jan 25, 2006 4:34 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The caption read (approximately - and in letters fully six feet high): Let us terminate your unwanted pregnancy! It's cheap! it's painless! It's safe - and it's easy! No overnight stay necessary!
I was the only person who batted an eyelid at that in a very busy shopping center.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: maxpayne on Jan 25, 2006 2:54 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Dear Mr. ... ,
It is not our business to actually stop people over there from having abortions there as they see fit because we like it if they control their population. However, in this country, for women to be given inalienable rights to carry out an abortion was itself a grave mistake and if God doesn't punish these evil women who kill babies and/or support babies, it is up to us to fight for bringing our justice to them no matter what. There is no excuse whatsoever for women to kill babies before they're born, period.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: The double standards on abortion
Posted by: morticia
» RE: The double standards on abortion
Posted by: maxpayne
» RE: The double standards on abortion
Posted by: morticia
Comments are closed-
Posted by: SDres11 on Jan 27, 2006 8:21 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: SDres11 on Jan 27, 2006 8:25 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: pomelight on Jan 30, 2006 11:41 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We are not in the same position as we were 30 years ago. There are ways of providing education and assistance that are cheap, easily accesible, and relatively low-risk.
Even in states with medical marijuana laws, it's still considered a federal offense. But that does not prevent people from helping those who need it.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: davidt on Feb 1, 2006 10:42 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think part of the nomination process for all male GOPers entering national politics should include this questionnaire:
Do you now or have you ever masturbated? Yes No
How many times during your lifetime have you
masturbated? Enter Number Here ________
Did you ever consider that while you were satisfying
your base lust you were violating the Biblical law that
states: "Thou shalt not spill thy seed on the ground"?
Yes No
Did you ever consider the "abortion implications" of
this particular unsavory habit? Yes No
Do you think that any members of the Christian
Coalition have ever masturbated? Yes No
How can you justify your qualification for public office?
I think the inclusion of this questionnaire will eliminate
the population of jerk-offs in DC.
Since we all now that Dems are inveterate masturbators
there is no need to supply this information from them
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Tara1978 on Mar 4, 2006 5:46 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Stupid people don't deserve rights
Posted by: J.R. Sanders
» RE: Stupid people don't deserve rights
Posted by: Tara1978
Starbucks' Cop-Out to Gun Nuts: Customers Served Coffee While Strapped
ACORN Smear Collaborator Claims Persecution to Raise Money for Her Legal Troubles
Bad Policies Are Really What's Driving California's Huge Prison Costs




