#Center For Reproductive Rights

[dontmeantobepoliticalbut]

In two 5-1 opinions, the court built on a 2019 decision in which it said the state’s Constitution protects abortion rights and that lawmakers seeking to restrict abortion must meet a high “strict scrutiny” test. The decisions cement Kansas' role as a key abortion access point for patients across the broader region.

The Kansas Supreme Court struck down two laws restricting abortion on Friday, affirming its prior interpretation that ending a pregnancy remains a constitutionally protected right in Kansas.

In two 5-1 opinions, the court built on a 2019 decision in which it said the state’s Constitution protects abortion rights and lawmakers seeking to restrict abortion must meet a high “strict scrutiny” test. When Republican lawmakers asked voters, in 2022, to amend the constitution to stipulate that it does not protect abortion rights, Kansans overwhelmingly declined to do so.

“We stand by our conclusion that section 1 of the Kansas Constitution Bill of Rights protects a fundamental right to personal autonomy, which includes a pregnant person’s right to terminate a pregnancy,” wrote Justice Eric Rosen in one of the majority opinions.

A decision against abortion providers would have been monumental, not only for Kansans but for the thousands of women across the region who now travel to Kansas each year to get abortions that have been banned in their home states. A large majority of patients at Kansas abortion clinics now come from Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas and farther afield.

The court’s majority upheld lower court rulings that two laws restricting abortion — passed several years ago by Republican-controlled Kansas Legislature — were unconstitutional. One law, passed in 2015, banned an abortion method frequently used in second-trimester abortions called ‘dilation and evacuation.’ The second law, passed in 2011, imposed licensure restrictions on doctors who provide abortions that exceeded those imposed on other medical providers.

Neither law had been in effect because of permanent injunctions by lower courts.

In his decision striking down the dilation and evacuation ban, Rosen wrote that the State of Kansas does have a compelling interest in “promoting respect for the value and dignity of human life, born or unborn” but said that the law is not narrowly tailored to that interest.

The clinic restrictions “do not survive strict scrutiny and are constitutionally infirm,” Justice Standridge concluded in the second majority opinion.

The decisions were both 5-1, with Justice Caleb Stegall — the only justice to dissent from the 2019 decision — dissenting and Justice Keynen Wall not participating in the decision.

Stegall wrote that he dissented from the Friday opinions for the same reasons he dissented in 2019.

“The majority’s imagined section 1 of the Kansas Constitution Bill of Rights bears no resemblance at all — in either law or history — to the actual text and original public meaning of section 1.”

Stegall also criticized the majority’s use of the term “pregnant person” instead of “women.”

“I cannot help but notice that pregnant women have been quietly — decisively — evicted from this court’s abortion jurisprudence,” he wrote.

The Center for Reproductive Rights represented the Kansas doctors who challenged the laws. Nancy Northup, the organization’s president and CEO, commended the court’s opinions.

“This is an immense victory for the health, safety, and dignity of people in Kansas and the entire Midwestern region, where millions have been cut off from abortion access,” Northup said in a news release. “We will continue our fight to ensure Kansans can access the essential healthcare they need in their home state.”

Kansans for Life, the state’s leading anti-abortion organization, rebuked the decisions.

“Adding insult to injury, extremely liberal judges of the Kansas Supreme Court have now overturned basic health and safety standards for abortion facilities,” KFL spokesperson Danielle Underwood said in a press release.

“It hurts to say, ‘we told you so,’ to the many Kansans who were misled by the abortion industry’s assurances that it would still be ‘heavily regulated’ in our state if voters rejected the 2022 amendment,” Underwood added.

Several new abortion laws took effect in Kansas earlier this week, but one of them — a law requiring doctors to ask patients getting abortions their reason for doing so — is being challenged in court. A Johnson County judge said Monday that doctors could add the law to a larger lawsuit they brought against a handful of older state abortion restrictions, including a 24-hour waiting period. The judge agreed to temporarily block the older laws while the case proceeds.

The Kansas Department of Health and Environment told providers it will “not, for now” enforce the abortion reasons law, providers said Monday. The health department has not responded to requests seeking to confirm that.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Eleanor Klibanoff at Texas Tribune:

Two women have filed federal complaints against Texas hospitals they say refused to treat their ectopic pregnancies, leading both women to lose their fallopian tubes and endanger their future fertility. Texas law allows doctors to terminate ectopic pregnancies, a condition in which the fertilized egg implants in the fallopian tubes, instead of the uterus. Ectopic pregnancies are always non-viable and can quickly become life-threatening if left untreated. Despite these protections, these women say they were turned away from two separate hospitals that refused to treat them. The complaint alleges that the doctors and hospitals are so fearful of the state’s abortion laws, which carry penalties of up to life in prison when violated, that they are hesitating to perform even protected abortions.

The complaints were filed with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, or EMTALA, a federal statute that requires hospitals to provide stabilizing medical care to anyone who shows up. That rule has long been interpreted to include medically necessary abortions, which has run up against state bans, including in Texas. Typically, federal EMTALA complaints are investigated by state health agencies, but the Center for Reproductive Rights, which filed the complaint, is asking for it to instead be handled by the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, or CMS. “CMS should not rely solely on a state agency’s assessment of the facts in reaching its determination because of Texas state officials’ hostility toward interpreting EMTALA as requiring hospitals to provide pregnancy termination to pregnant patients experiencing emergency medical conditions,” they wrote in the complaints. The U.S. Supreme Court earlier this year declined to say that Idaho’s abortion ban trumps the EMTALA requirement, but a federal appeals court in New Orleans has found that Texas hospitals cannot be required under EMTALA to provide life-saving abortions.

Similar diagnoses, similar results

Kyleigh Thurman says in the complaint that she went to Ascension Seton Williamson Hospital in Round Rock, north of Austin, with a tubal ectopic pregnancy. She says the hospital initially discharged her without treating the ectopic pregnancy, but she returned three days later with vaginal bleeding and worsening symptoms. Despite her doctor’s orders, the hospital refused to give her methotrexate, a common treatment that stops an ectopic pregnancy from continuing to develop. “Infuriated, Ms. Thurman’s OB-GYN met Ms. Thurman at Ascension Williamson to plead with the medical staff to give her methotrexate,” the complaint says. They eventually agreed. But it was too late; the ectopic pregnancy had grown too large, and ruptured. Thurman nearly bled to death and had to have her right fallopian tube removed. A spokesperson for Ascension declined to discuss the specifics of the case, but said in a statement that they are “committed to providing high-quality care to all who seek our services.”

Kelsie Norris-De La Cruz had a similar experience at Texas Health Arlington Memorial Hospital, outside Dallas. An emergency room physician diagnosed her with a tubal ectopic pregnancy and said she should get an injection of methotrexate or have surgery to remove the pregnancy. She chose surgery, but once the on-call OB/GYNs arrived, the complaint alleges, the hospital refused to treat her and told her to come back in 48 hours. “Ms. Norris-De La Cruz’s mother asked if the hospital’s refusal to provide care had anything to do with Texas’s abortion bans but received no response,” the complaint says. “As the conversation became more heated, the OB/GYN confirmed it was possible that Ms. Norris-De La Cruz could rupture over the next 48 hours and subsequently stormed out of the room.” Texas Health did not immediately respond to request for comment.

Norris-De La Cruz eventually found an OB/GYN through a friend who agreed to perform an emergency surgery to remove the ectopic pregnancy. By then, the mass had grown so large that it required also removing her right fallopian tube and 75% of her right ovary. “I ended up losing half of my fertility and if I was made to wait any longer, it’s very likely I would have died,” Norris-De La Cruz said in a statement. “These bans are making it nearly impossible to get basic emergency healthcare. So, I’m filing this complaint because women like me deserve justice and accountability from those that hurt us. Texas state officials can’t keep ignoring us. We can’t let them.”

Two Texas women, Kyleigh Thurman and Kelsie Norris-De La Cruz, filed federal EMTALA complaints against 2 Texas hospitals over refusal to treat ectopic pregnancies as a result of Texas’s strict anti-abortion laws.

See Also:

The 19th News: Two women say Texas hospitals wouldn’t treat their ectopic pregnancies. Each lost a fallopian tube as a result.

Jezebel: Texas Women Denied Care for Ectopic Pregnancies Due to State’s Abortion Ban Take Legal Action

[ricardotomasz]

Such is life! Behold, a new Post published on Greater And Grander about Capturing Moments: Exquisite Photography for Sale!

See into my soul, as a new Post has been published on https://greaterandgrander.com/capturing-moments-exquisite-photography-for-sale/

Capturing Moments: Exquisite Photography for Sale!

This photo was taken of the Los Angeles Women's March, protesting for equal rights for women, and the power of Feminism. It was inspired by much more than that, including an apparatus made up of multiple non-profits, volunteers, and small-money donors from around the country, and even around the world. This is what our brighter tomorrow looks like, because the only thing that can give us hope for the future – is us.

This photo focuses on the bold nature of this protestor, fighting for a revolution. She holds her fist high in protest.

An example of Post Colonial art style. Profits from this project will go towards buying new equipment and supplies to launch a bold new series of works. All original sales are signed on the back and have a certificate of authenticity provided. Picture dimensions do not include an additional white matte border.

Buy Here

Do you want to be exposed to new thoughts and new ideas?  Do you want to explore Social Justice?  Sign up and get a free copy of our series of essays entitled BDSJW.

Do you have your own thoughts? Let us know in the comments! Or join our community of successful creators on Patreon!

#Art, #CenterForReproductiveRights, #Outdoor, #Photography, #Politics, #ReproductiveRights, #RicardoTomasz, #StreetStyle, #WomenEmpowerment, #WomenSMarch, #WomenSRights

[originalleftist]

Kate Cox flees Texas.

From a statement by the Center for Reproductive Rights:

"UPDATE: After a week of legal whiplash and threats of prosecution from Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, our client Kate Cox has been forced to flee her home state of Texas to get the time-sensitive abortion care needed to protect her health and future fertility."

I wonder if she, or anyone who assisted her, will ever be able to go back without facing a felony prosecution. And how many others don't have the resources to go to court or seek help out of state.

Everyone who sanctimoniously "refused to vote for the lesser of two evils" in 2016, and patted yourself on the back for your moral superiority- you did this. This, and so much more. Hope you're proud.

Ken Paxton- I hope you choke on your own undoubtably miniscule dick.

[hellyeahscarleteen]

How can you tell whether a clinic is a real health center or a crisis pregnancy center?

The FWHC offers this sound advice on how to find a reliable, bonafide clinic, no matter what choice a pregnant person is making:

• Select clinics that provide the full range of contraceptive alternatives. • Ask on the phone if they provide or refer for abortion services. Avoid centers that refuse to give a straightforward answer. • Do not use the ones listed in yellow pages under Abortion Alternatives. • Be cautious when surfing the web. Often you will find anti-abortion religious-based websites disguised as pro-choice information. Keep searching for reliable information. • Select clinics that have clearly established reputations. Avoid centers with ambiguous descriptions. Avoid clinics whose staff do not provide full, clear answers regarding their services. Ask friends or relatives you trust!

(From Crisis Pregnancy Centers: Harm, Not Help)

[socialjusticeinamerica]

☝️

Highly recommend. A glimpse into the right-wing network of conservative think tanks and non-profits working to promote a pro-business culture, weaken all social programs, and undermine democracy.

Everything from weakening child labor laws to writing Trump’s Project 2025, although the authors refused to use the term “Project 2025” in their description of it.

Republican politicians never come up with legislation on their own. All Republican policy is crafted and written by right-wing political associations and then handed to Republicans stooges to sign and introduce into Congress. It is this behind the scenes network of oligarch dark money funded think tanks that are waging war against us.

You protest individual Republican politicians and their policies but neglect the oligarchs like Koch, Walton, Crow, and DeVos that actually write those policies. Then you support those same oppressive oligarchs by buying Koch products, shopping at Walmart, and sending your kids to charter schools operated by DeVos.

Thousands of us have been calling for a boycott of Walmart since the 90’s but the majority refuse because it would be inconvenient. I don’t want to drive an extra few miles to the store or I don’t want to spend and extra dollar at another store. Common refrains whenever a boycott is broached. Walmart is the most obvious target because they are not diversified like other oligarch families. A short boycott would change their tune real fast.

You know what’s really inconvenient; black people being executed in the streets by cops and denied the right to vote. You know what else, trans people being eliminated and lgbt being stripped of legal rights as citizens. How about bounties being placed on women who have abortions and women who have to travel across country to have those abortions and often having lost the right yo safely return to their home state at all. Migrants being held in camps and being separated permanently from their children is also inconvenient as is the human trafficking of them. How about the re-introduction of child labor without parental consent being required. Maybe unions being busted, pensions and health insurance being stripped, minimum wage being reduced and full-time jobs arbitrarily being turned into part-time jobs. I could go on and on here.

STOP USING YOUR DOLLARS TO SUPPORT THE OLIGARCHS AND CORPORATIONS THAT OPPRESS YOU.

[fashionlandscapeblog]

Politics in the U.S. have shifted sooo much to the right that now there are only two competing political spectrums:

The far right drawing bills that would allow kids/ teenagers to work longer hours and perform some currently banned tasks, cutting taxes on the super rich (increasing them on the poor), criminalizing abortion (some states even want to implement the death sentence to women who have abortions), criminalizing trans people (by banning drag shows, or anything that 'sexualizes' children, without of course fobidding beauty competitions in little girls in bikinis), banning any books that talk about racism, trans people or homosexuality from schools, etc. There are people even talking about banning women's rights to vote.

Versus the center right, a.k.a. Democrats which are even more right than the CDU, which is Germany's center right party that widely endorses universal health care and many other social issues that the Democratic party rarely even talks about or would even dream in supporting ("Like why should I pay for other's peoples' wellbeing").

The center left, i.e. Bernie Sanders, is out of the panorama, since it is considered far left even by the Democrats in the U.S. of A. Bernie Sanders is by no means, a socialist. He'd be an average SPD member, which is Germany's current ruling center left party.

While the Evangelical right of the U.S. does not represent the majority, they have so much power, that they managed to succeed in drawing all these antisocial legislations. It's not only a democracy question, but the truly worrying thing is that they can be considered the Western Hemisphere's equivalent of the Taliban.

[odinsblog]

🗣️ Please read this !!

👉🏿 https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2023/05/crisis-pregnancy-centers-influence-post-dobbs-abortion-supreme-court.html

👉🏿 https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2023/05/alito-violates-supreme-court-ethics-rules.html

👉🏿 https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1660649551668150272.html

[dontmeantobepoliticalbut]

A Texas woman who had sought a legal medical exemption for an abortion has left the state after the Texas Supreme Court paused a lower court decision that would allow her to have the procedure, lawyers for the Center for Reproductive Rights said Monday.

State District Judge Maya Guerra Gamble last week had ruled that Kate Cox, a 31-year-old mother of two from Dallas, could terminate her pregnancy. According to court documents, Cox's doctors told her her baby suffered from the chromosomal disorder trisomy 18, which usually results in either stillbirth or an early death of an infant.

As of the court filing last week, Cox was 20 weeks pregnant. According to the Center for Reproductive Rights, which brought the lawsuit, Cox left the state because she "couldn't wait any longer" to get the procedure.

"Her health is on the line," said Center for Reproductive Rights CEO Nancy Northup. "She's been in and out of the emergency room and she couldn't wait any longer."

In response to Gamble's decision, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton warned a Texas medical center that it would face legal consequences if an abortion were performed.

In an unsigned order late Friday, the Texas Supreme Court then temporarily paused Gamble's ruling.

On Monday, after Cox left the state, the state Supreme Court lifted the pause and ruled against Cox's request, dismissing it as moot.

According to court documents, Cox's doctors had told her that early screening and ultrasound tests suggested her pregnancy is "unlikely to end with a healthy baby," and due to her two prior cesarean sections, continuing the pregnancy puts her at risk of "severe complications" that threaten "her life and future fertility."

The lawsuit alleges that due to Texas' strict abortion bans, doctors have told her their "hands are tied" and she would have to wait until the fetus dies inside her or carry the pregnancy to term, when she will have to undergo a third C-section "only to watch her baby suffer until death."

The lawsuit was filed as the state Supreme Court is weighing whether the state's strict abortion ban is too restrictive for women who suffer from severe pregnancy complications. An Austin judge ruled earlier this year that women who experience extreme complications could be exempt from the ban, but the ruling is on hold while the all-Republican Supreme Court considers the state's appeal. 

In the arguments before the state Supreme Court, the state's lawyers suggested that a woman who is pregnant and receives a fatal fetal diagnosis could bring a "lawsuit in that specific circumstance." 

According to the Center for Reproductive Rights, Cox v. Texas is the first case since the overturning of Roe v. Wade to be filed on behalf of a pregnant person seeking emergency abortion care. Last week, a woman in Kentucky who is 8 weeks pregnant filed a lawsuit challenging the state's two abortion bans. 

[rjalker]

Weaponized Femininity:

[ID: A digital graphic that reads across the top, in large text in light pink and deep pink, "Weaponized Femininity", with a chain of pink flowers beneath it, followed by two boxes:

The first box is pale yellow, and reads:

"What they say it is: Wearing high heels and fucking eyeliner"

The second box is lavender, and reads:

"What it actually is: Cis women telling trans men, nonbinaries, and genderqueers they're being misogynists for needing equal rights to pregnancy-related healthcare White women getting Black and brown people killed by pretending to be afraid of them or in danger from them

so much more!!!"

End ID.]

No, someone correcting you when you're a bigot is not misogyny. You do in fact need to learn to shut the fuck up when the discussion is not about you.

[ricardotomasz]

Such is life! Behold, a new Post published on Greater And Grander about Capturing Moments: Exquisite Photography for Sale!

See into my soul, as a new Post has been published on https://greaterandgrander.com/capturing-moments-exquisite-photography-for-sale/

Capturing Moments: Exquisite Photography for Sale!

This photo was taken of the Los Angeles Women's March, protesting for equal rights for women, and the power of Feminism. It was inspired by much more than that, including an apparatus made up of multiple non-profits, volunteers, and small-money donors from around the country, and even around the world. This is what our brighter tomorrow looks like, because the only thing that can give us hope for the future – is us.

This photo focuses on the bold nature of this protestor, fighting for a revolution. She holds her fist high in protest.

An example of Post Colonial art style. Profits from this project will go towards buying new equipment and supplies to launch a bold new series of works. All original sales are signed on the back and have a certificate of authenticity provided. Picture dimensions do not include an additional white matte border.

Buy Here

Do you want to be exposed to new thoughts and new ideas?  Do you want to explore Social Justice?  Sign up and get a free copy of our series of essays entitled BDSJW.

Do you have your own thoughts? Let us know in the comments! Or join our community of successful creators on Patreon!

#Art, #CenterForReproductiveRights, #Outdoor, #Photography, #Politics, #ReproductiveRights, #RicardoTomasz, #StreetStyle, #WomenEmpowerment, #WomenSMarch, #WomenSRights

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

In the new, post-Roe v. Wade world, for some anti-abortion forces, it is not enough to remove constitutional protection for abortion. They want to make criminals of women who seek abortions.

As if that weren’t enough, Republican legislators in four Southern states have proposed legislation that would make abortion a capital offense. Were such legislation to be passed, it would mark an unprecedented escalation of the right wing’s war on women.

As is true throughout America’s death penalty system, race and class will play a large role in who would be prosecuted, sentenced, and executed for getting an abortion.

National Public Radio quotes Dana Sussman, acting executive director of National Advocates for Pregnant Women, as saying that criminalization of abortion already falls disproportionately on “‘poor people, people of color, young people. Anyone who is experiencing a mental health crisis, anyone who has a substance-use disorder, those are the people that are gonna be most vulnerable to suspicion and the specter of law enforcement when they experience a pregnancy loss.”

The dangerous extremism of the death-penalty-for-abortion proposals is reflected in the fact that in at least one state’s bill there is no exception for rape or incest. Welcome to the world that some radical conservatives want to create.

At a time when the death penalty is under intense scrutiny for its injustice, unreliability, and cruelty, they want to double down on it. In their dystopian vision, women who once had a constitutional right to abortion would now be put to death for exercising that right.

To cite one example, Arkansas House Bill 1174 says that “all unborn children should be protected under the state homicide laws as all other persons.” In addition to the woman who aborts a fetus, friends, partners, medical providers, and anyone else who helped her decide to end a pregnancy would be liable for the death penalty as accomplices under the Arkansas bill.

The anti-abortion movement has never had a plausible claim to being “pro-life,” but the Republican legislators who are pushing death penalty plans are stretching hypocrisy to withering heights.

Make no mistake about the danger ahead. This is an organized effort.

Though none of these bills seem likely to pass in the near term, they are part of an effort to normalize the idea that a fetus is a person protected by state homicide laws so that, sometime in the future, women who exercise their right to make their own family decisions might find themselves on murder dockets.

It’s the boiling frog theory. Gradually raise the heat on the pot and the amphibian won’t jump out before the water’s bubbling and it’s too late. Those who believe in reproductive freedom need to jump on this latest escalating attack on it.

Like the Supreme Court majority that overturned Roe v. Wade last June, the death penalty-for-abortion legislators are bucking strong international trends. Even Catholic South American countries like Colombia and Mexico have decriminalized abortion. Over the last three decades, close to 60 nations have liberalized their abortion laws. Only one of the world’s 195 countries, El Salvador, treats abortion as murder.

Bad company to keep. Anti-women, anti-reproductive rights legislators in southern states seem to be feeding their religious frenzy and desire for vengeance against those who believe differently.

Of course there’s that old “eye for an eye” concept that originated in Babylon about proportional justice. Let’s put aside the fact that these elected officials are not advocating an embryo for an embryo. They purport to embrace the Judeo-Christian tradition, but its truer form is about tolerance, not revenge.

Politicians loudly proclaiming their Christianity with legislation proposing death for mothers having abortions seem to have forgotten that Jesus renounced Babylonian justice: “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ But I tell you . . . [if] anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well.”

Perhaps it’s too much to expect politicians seeking to stir up their base to follow the Bible. Pragmatically, however, they might want to notice that last June’s Supreme Court decision in Dobbs was the “driving force” that energized majorities of young people, women, and men who believe in reproductive freedom to cast their votes against Republicans in 2022.

Even in red states like Kansas and Kentucky, and in states like Michigan that went for Trump in 2016, post-Dobbs ballot measures that protected abortion won, and ballot measures meant to end it lost.

Maybe that wouldn’t be so in Arkansas, Texas, Kentucky, and South Carolina, the states where these new death-penalty-for-abortion bills have been introduced. But their proponents don’t seem to care about the 2024 political energy they may be handing Democrats in other parts of the country.

Such blindness to national political implications is also suggested by the extreme measures in Oklahoma, South Carolina, and Texas: The bills there also explicitly include abortion by medication. (A pill for a pill?) More than half the abortions nationwide occur by pharmaceuticals—at least pending the ruling in a fraught Texas case where right-wing groups have asked an anti-abortionist federal judge to invalidate a 22-year-old FDA decision that the pill is safe.

If that happens, the threat of legislation to make swallowing a pill murder may accelerate Democratic voters’ run to the polls nationwide in 2024. It may lead independents to steer clear of the fanatics for whom the end of Roe was just the beginning of the next stage of the anti-abortion crusade.

These Southern state legislators may think that imposing the death penalty will deter abortions. Think again. Legal restrictions on abortions don’t stop them but only multiply the numbers of unsafe, back-alley endings to pregnancy for women who can’t afford a baby or aren’t ready to have one.

Moreover, there is no reliable evidence in the familiar context of one person killing another that the death penalty really is a deterrent. Nearly two of three Americans doubt that it is.

In the end, as the Brennan Center for Justice rightly notes, “Criminalizing abortion and pregnancy upends lives, breaks up families, and disrupts entire communities.” And the idea of piling a possible death sentence on top of the painful choice to end a pregnancy is not just hypocritical and destructive, it is as cruel as it is unusual.

[atheostic]

[rapeculturerealities]

Minnesota, seen as abortion haven, still funds ‘crisis pregnancy centers’ | MPR News

Since 2005, Minnesota has given over $3 million in taxpayer money every grant cycle to 25 of these centers under the “positive alternatives grant,” a program created by former Gov. Tim Pawlenty to discourage abortion.

Now with a DFL hold on the state, Walz says he’s ready to end the program, citing misinformation.

“I think that there’s a lot of misinformation that came out of that … I think women deserve better than that, I think they deserve to have the whole picture,” he told MPR News in January.

This comes after Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison issued a consumer alert in August against “crisis pregnancy centers” based on a 2021 study of nine states including Minnesota. He defined them as “private organizations that seek to prevent people from accessing abortion care as well as contraceptives.”

“CPC is a term used to refer to certain facilities that represent themselves as legitimate reproductive health care clinics providing care for pregnant people but actually aim to dissuade people from accessing certain types of reproductive health care, including abortion care and even contraceptive options,” the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists says.

[bumblebeeappletree]

Michigan voters will determine the fate of abortion rights in the state during the November midterms. The upcoming race between Governor Gretchen Whitmer and her GOP challenger Tudor Dixon will very likely determine many abortion providers' ability to provide safe and legal abortions to Michigan residents, as well as patients from Ohio, Texas, Louisiana, and elsewhere, who have crossed state lines in growing numbers following the Dobbs ruling.

'Abortion does not have to be a complicated subject. Abortion is a medical term.' — Here's why one nurse from Scotsdale Women’s Center in Detroit is worried.

For more updates on abortion rights, subscribe to NowThis News.

#abortion #michigan #politics #News #NowThis

[darkdragon768]

"Don't listen to yourself, you do want to have kids someday!" SHUT UP "You do want to start a family on your own!" SHUT UP "You do want to-" SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP YOU DON'T KNOW HOW I FEEL AND YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT I WANT SO STOP SAYING I'M CONFUSED OR HAVEN'T FOUND THE RIGHT ONE (emphasis on a male partner specifically because gendered language) YET OR ACTING LIKE YOU KNOW HOW I WANT TO LIVE MY LIFE

AND STOP FUCKING SAYING HAVING KIDS IS A WONDERFUL THING WHEN YOU'RE A NO-UTERUS-HAVER

I NEVER AND NEVER WILL TELL ANYONE MY GENDER THOUGHTS AND FEELINGS IF ALL I GET IN RETURN IS GETTING CALLED CRAZY AND STUPID

SO WHY DO I STILL TRY TO MAKE THEM UNDERSTAND WHEN IT'S FOR NOTHING.