NEWS: Congress Repeals Global Gag Rule

CULTURE: Congress Repeals Global Gag Rule

Hurrah! Feministing announces that Congress has voted to repeal the Global Gag Rule, which banned U.S. family planning money to international organizations that so much as mentioned abortion internationally.

First passed in Reagan's second term, the Gag Rule stayed in place under Bush senior, was abandoned under Clinton (hurrah), and then reinstated, of course, by baby Bush. So this vote is the first time since 1993 that Congress has stood up for international women's reproductive rights. And, by the way, for actual science: there's no evidence that the Gag Rule reduces the incidence of abortions (especially since it withholds funding from the very organizations that are most likely to provide birth control), and plenty of evidence that it undermines women's health all over the world.

Who do we have to thank? In the Senate, Barbara Boxer (D-CA), and Olympia Snowe (R-ME). Wanna tell me again that getting women into office doesn't matter? In the House, the original amendment was sponsored by Nita Lowey (D-NY) and Christopher Shays (R-CN). Wanna tell me again that being pro-women in office necessarily means being anti-man? (Hint: it doesn't--good on you, Rep. Shays).

Bush, of course, being a complete asshole, promises a veto--even if doing so means vetoing the entire $34 million foreign assistance bill that the amendment is attached to. Gotta love a man of principle: if women are gonna get to hear about abortion, no one is going to get any help!

Hang on, world. We'll be getting rid of this jackass next year, we promise.

Bitch_PhD apologizes for the lack of image on this article--my laptop's died, the computer I'm using doesn't have graphic imaging software, and no one's in the office what with it being Sunday and all.

Small, tentative steps forward.

But forward. So I'm pleased.

Don't be so sure. He may bring forth yet some sort of constitutional amendment that ends term limits *shudder*

I first read this as "repeats." So the second take was a pleasant surprise.

Not with approval ratings in the low thirties, he won't. Frankly, I doubt he could even engineer an outright coup.

The only way he could manage a coup is to have enough political flunkies inside the army, doing political work, instead of representing the actual armed forces. Fortunately for us, that'll never happen.

Exactly - though I don't know that I'd call what's happening to our military right now "fortunate," except specifically insofar as it reduces the possibility of dramatically extraconstitutional shenanigans from The Decider.

No he won't. Constitutional amendments take more than a decade to be made law. And by that time we'll have some other jackass president we don't want around for any longer.

Ditto. He's been visiting Sydney this last week.

Hence we've been living with traffic restrictions and incessant helicopter noise.

This little breach of security was somewhat amusing, in the middle of it all.

It's my understanding that the WH is writing the speech for Patraeus, no script will be available (except for what is transcribed), and that Patraeus will follow up with an exclusive interview on Fox. It's dangerous that Bush needs to co-opt military voices to support unpopular political measures.

Back to the topic, it's a positive thing that the good fight goes forward, even if Bush vetoes it. It shows the rest of the world that all isn't lost, and there's still forward-thinking people in the US government.

It's not a Bush issue. It's not even exactly a Republican issue. This is the number one priority Christian conservative issue. Bush, claims he is a born-again Chrisitan, but he's hardly an authority in the religion. He is simply serving his religious base. And they are not satisfied with simply preaching against abortion to their believers. It is their intent to force everybody to live by their religious standards. Powerful Christian conservatives have even setup law schools, Liberty University for one example, where the priority is to educate conservative Chrisitan lawyers to repleal Roe Vs. Wade.

Prepare to be dealing with this issue for the long haul people. I'd say decades, at least. I really doubt the ability of self-proclaimed 'moderate' Chrisitans to check their right-wing fellowships.

I don't suppose you could talk him into staying? ... lol

Seriously Please

Sorry guys, but he's alread left his mark for the next ten years at least. Hasn't he appointed three members to the supreme court? I fear that our children will be reading about the bible rather than exploring the universe

Two actually. While the court seems to be leaning more conservative now, it's still pretty split.

The major damage may come if there is another Republican elected in '08. Ginsberg is 74 and can't hold out forever.

I know we don't always agree, Bitch_PHD, but I'm w/ya wholeheartedly on this one. And I, for one, have enough of a morbid curiosity to wonder what would happen if W. had the stones to veto.

-TM

this is good news

Certainly GW will be gone in a little more than a year, but what happens if he's replaced by another Republican? Is there anyone in the GOP that you would trust to do right by women? I'm just curious.

Check out Presidential Directive 51. Essentially gives the President the authority to take control of the Legislative and Judicial branches of the government in the event of a "catastrophic emergency" ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD. Who decides what a catastrophic emergency is? Why the Prez of course...

Check out bewareofwar.com.

Oh yeh.

When the next 9/11 (an inside job) is carried out, be ready for Bush to take over as the 1st U.S. Dictator. And war with Iran.

Check out bewareofwar.com.

P.S. Sorry this is way off the original topic.

It's always a good day when something in the newswire other than a bitterly sarcastic FTR joke can bring a smile to my face. Bipartisan co-operation to strike a blow for women's rights. Without Hillary Clinton. Epic.

Rock the fuck on. A woman's body is her own fuckin' business.
*insert foot into Bush's ass here*

Currently running? No.

Seriously.

It's possible to be a conservative with some feminist values, but in the current climate it's damn near impossible to be a Republican with any feminist values whatsoever and be prominent in the party.

AAAAAHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!
Don't even SAY that...