#defund Planned Parenthood

[traditionaldream]

I see people saying that abortion is healthcare and shouldn't be stigmatized and it breaks my heart....

Knowing that in a small country such as mine, 14 babies were aborted EVERYDAY in 2022 in just one clinic makes me so sad. I can't even image the numbers worldwide.

We have been normalizing the abnormal and we will soon pay the price. And, wake up call, a "uterus owner" is a woman.

Sometimes I feel ashamed of myself for having been pro-choice at one point in my life.... I was so blind, believing what everyone believed. I wasn't happy, I was a raging feminist full of hatred and thought the patriarchy was some beast going after me and designed to oppress every woman in the world.

Abortion doesn't just kill the baby, it also kills the mother, maybe not physically in most cases, but mentally and spirituality.

You can still be successful and have your baby. ♡

"There is no saint without a past, no sinner without a future." - St. Augustine.

[wornoutedges]

[inthegardenofprayers]

Female ancestors learned to not have sex when they were ovulating to avoid burdens of pregnancy; gradually they were eliminated from the gene pool. Concealed ovulation evolved because females unaware of pregnancy odds were more likely to have children.

"No temptation has overtaken you that is not common to man. God is faithful, and He will not let you be tempted beyond your ability, but with the temptation He will also provide the way of escape, that you may be able to endure it." - 1 Corinthians 10:13

[yummytiger]

if jon stewart cares so much about black lives, then why isn’t he anti abortion?

[waydowntheriver]

WHAT WORLD IS THIS WOMAN LIVING IN?!?

Where in America is there proof of “the patriarchy” purposely suppressing information about safe sex, or contraception? There are Planned Parenthood and other clinics all over the country that give out condoms and said information for free. And if I might add, said clinics often terribly pressure women to have abortions, not because they are medically necessary, but because Planned Parenthood profits immensely off these procedures and even the selling on fetal organs; P.S. Millions of those aborted babies, those fetal organs are from women yet to be in the world. How the hell can anyone deny the hypocrisy of that fact- that so called women’s advocates are killing millions of very small, very innocent women every year?!?

what amazes me about the “pro-abortion only for rape” argument is that it’s so tone-deaf and flat out ridiculous. the context of an unwanted pregnancy is nearly ALWAYS occurring under coercion. why else would teenage girls be pregnant if they were not already failed by a patriarchal system that withheld information for safe sex, products for safe sex, or access to healthcare? if girls were not groomed, pressured, bullied into “losing their virginity” by entertainment, peers and culture? if girls were not groomed from day one to be feminine, that is, submissive and passive? what child willfully got out of their way to get pregnant without being thoroughly brainwashed? or forced?

do you honestly believe that sally, 14, raised in the Bible Belt, forced into frilly dresses by age two, fed “how to be a good, subservient woman” from age four, is going to understand or value her own consent?

everyone who has ever deliberately wanted to have a child ends up at an abortion clinic because it risks their fucking life.

unwanted pregnancies, however, are occurring under an inherently coercive system. one that herds women and girls into abuse, neglect, and exploitation.

people who use this argument sound like pro-prostitution propagandists. most women and girls are not in that situation by choice. even if they say so. like do y’all not understand anything about what living in a patriarchal regime means? or a capitalistic economy?

in what world does someone who didn't want/was afraid of pregnancy, deliberately and willfully get pregnant????!

be so fr right now

TLDR: The context of unwanted pregnancies is always coercive. Whether systemically, or interpersonally. Usually both.

[deklo]

just drove by the walk for life 🤢🤢🤢 i hate them

[agrebel18]

can't believe that lots of parts around the internet have given me more accurate health and sex education than what my school(s) gave me and even my parents ever did

[wyrmfedgrave]

Yes, tRump was flip-flopping on female healthcare.

But, that was for the TV cameras.

In truth, he's just a disgusting Rapist Con Man who likes to control women.

And, Rump will do whatever it takes to gain his dirty objectives.

Including defunding Planned Parenthood & any other female health organizations...

But, there's an easy way to get rid of this ass.

Vote him out - by voting Democrats in.

All the way down the ballot!

Don't leave one of these misogynists in power & you protect yourself!!

You're the one with the power here.

You're the one who gets to decide.

Slavery or freedom?

What's it going to be?!

End?

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Mira Lazine at LGBTQ Nation:

On Thursday, the United States House of Representatives passed a bill that would give authority to the Treasury Department to revoke a 501c non-profit’s tax-exempt status if they’re believed to support terrorism.

House Resolution 9495, also known as the “Stop Terror-Financing and Tax Penalties on American Hostages Act,” was sponsored by Rep. Tenney Claudia (R-NY) and passed through the house in a 219–184 vote. It has gone through multiple different forms since it was initially introduced in response to pro-Palestine organizers in the wake of the October 7, 2023 attack on Israel. According to anthropologist and legal scholar Darryl Li, who spoke to Democracy Now, this bill exists exclusively as a means for the right-wing to crush their political opponents, especially those who advocate for the rights of Palestinians, who were recently found by the International Criminal Court to be victims of war crimes enacted by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. “This bill is essentially a civil rights disaster, that … would allow the government to shut down nonprofits on the smear of being terrorist-supporting organizations…. This law requires an accusation with no evidence, but a tie-in. It’s an accusation that nonprofits are supporting a group on one of the existing international terrorism lists… The bill is essentially discriminatory by design,” he said. “Initially, it did have significant bipartisan support, because, of course, anti-Palestinian racism is one of the great bipartisan unifiers in Congress.��

Rep. Jason Smith (R-MO) justified the bill as a plain way to defund terrorism. “We, as members of Congress, have the duty to make sure that taxpayers are not subsidizing terrorism. It’s very, very simple,” he said on the House floor.  Smith didn’t provide evidence that any major U.S. non-profit group has ever supported terrorism. Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), the only Palestinian-American in Congress, said of the bill, “I don’t care who the president of the United States is. This is a dangerous and unconstitutional bill that would allow unchecked power to target nonprofit organizations as political enemies and shut them down without due process.” The bill doesn’t just pose a danger to advocates for war refugees trapped in Gaza, but also possibly to LGBTQ+ nonprofits as well. As the Trump-Vance campaign spent record numbers on anti-trans ad spending, it is increasingly likely that they could use this bill as a pretense to attack the many nonprofits that advocate for LGBTQ+ individuals. Li details that this could be the case for just about anyone who is a political opponent of the ruling administration.

[...] “Right-wingers and white supremacists in Congress can support this bill, with the assurance that their allies, right-wing extremist groups, are highly, highly unlikely to ever be targeted by this bill, because there isn’t going to — it’s much less likely that they will be smeared with an accusation of being tied to an international terrorist organization that’s already on one of the government lists,” Li said. Groups that could be on the chopping block with this bill include the American Civil Liberties Union, Planned Parenthood, the Human Rights Campaign, as well as nonprofit news outlets like Mother Jones or ProPublica.

HR9495 is an attack on nonprofit organizations, and Donald Trump and his allies can twist the definition of “supporting terrorism” to not only include pro-Palestinian groups, but also pro-abortion access and pro-LGBTQ+ groups (or any group that opposes the MAGA movement).

It’s time to kill this immoral bill in the Senate.

[mariacallous]

Recently, Planned Parenthood released a statement on the Oct. 7th attacks and the broader conflict between Israel and Palestine. Their statement condemned Hamas’s attacks on civilians, and specifically condemned sexual assaults committed against Israeli women during the violence. They also noted how thousands of Palestinian women and children had been killed in Israel’s counteroffensive, stated the need for Palestinian women to maintain access to reproductive and maternal healthcare, and condemned both anti-Semitism and Islamophobia.

The social media reaction to such a balanced and empathetic statement? Furious, unrelenting anger.

The statement was quote-tweeted thousands of times by social media users outraged by the statement. Planned Parenthood was accused of spreading Israeli propaganda, ignoring Palestinian deaths and fabricating rape claims, and enabling genocide. These outraged users aren’t conservatives who always oppose Planned Parenthood—they’re progressives furious that an organization they normally support put out a statement they hated. Now there are calls to end donations and Planned Parenthood staffers are fighting with donors. Their own employees, affiliates and organizers are making public statements against them.

This outcome was predictable to anyone with even a cursory knowledge of social media dynamics. And it raises an obvious question—why release a statement at all?

Metastatic social justice

It’s actually quite common for organizations and activists to get into hot water these days by addressing areas outside their expertise. Trans activists in Vancouver loudly insisted there can be no Trans Liberation without Palestinian Liberation, which caused pushback all over Canada. Two years ago, New York City’s Pride organizations courted controversy by excluding LGBT police officers from the city’s Pride parade in the name of racial justice. There are YIMBY housing organizations taking a stand on abortion rights and climate organizations demanding a Federal Job Guarantee.

There’s a common theme here. Organizations that appear to be single-issue advocacy groups are increasingly commenting and taking stances on issues outside of their narrow focus. Activism is becoming more global in nature—if you are an activist for one cause, you’re expected to speak up about all causes now. It’s not enough to ‘stay in your lane’, you need to be protesting and advocating for all forms of social justice. Pro-choice advocacy is now part of your racial justice non-profit. Jobs packages are in your environmental bills. Your LGBT organization has a stance on ‘Defund The Police’ and your housing group has a stance on Israel/Palestine. Social justice is metastasizing.

This phenomenon has happened on the right as well—see the NRA transitioning from being a somewhat non-partisan group to essentially being an arm of the GOP—but it’s especially striking in the current progressive movement. There’s a real sense in which NYC Pride is no longer an LGBT advocacy organization, but rather an overall progressive social justice organization. That may sound like an exaggeration, but they kicked out a gay organization (the Gay Officers Action League) to accommodate another form of social justice. It’s the internal logic behind a LGBT Pride march excluding LGBT people.

This also explains the online fury at Planned Parenthood. Their statement was thoughtful and balanced, but deviated from the dominant and overwhelmingly pro-Palestinian progressive narrative. Their donors expect them to advocate not just for progressive goals in women’s health, but progressive goals everywhere.

This type of activist mission creep risks stunting the progress on the core issues that social justice advocates care about.

The downsides of missions creep

The urge towards mission creep comes from a reasonable place. If you care so deeply that you spend your free time (or your career!) as an activist for a particular issue, the odds are that you also have strong feelings on many other issues. You’re also likely to live in a bubble of activists and people who think like you, and so your conversations professionally and socially may often center around all sorts of political issues. But as an activist it’s important to remember that most people you’re trying to reach are not like you and don’t think like you.

The typical voter is over 50 and does not have a college degree. They also don’t think about politics all that much. They are far, far away from the mindset of a typical activist. And when they do have political opinions, those opinions are far more varied and haphazard than a committed political partisan would guess. I think a few minutes scrolling the twitter feed of the American Voter Bot is invaluable to understand how voters think. This bot takes real voters and profiles them in brief tweets. While some look as expected—a Democrat who supports gun control, for instance—many look like this:

Most people are a confusing mix of demographic signals, issue positions and partisan identification, and they rarely fit squarely within one political tribe. That’s the danger of turning a single-issue advocacy group into a generalized progressive messaging group—you’ll end up alienating a far wider group of potential allies than you realize.

If Issue Group X declares loud progressive positions not just on Issue X but also on gun control, abortion, Palestine, Medicare For All, trans rights, free trade and school prayer, they won’t attract a large diverse group of people who care about Issue X. They’ll end up attracting a narrow slice of progressive activists who are ideologically pristine enough to agree with them on every issue.

The ultimate result of activist mission creep is that your issue ceases to be something that people across the ideological spectrum can work together on. It becomes coded as a red tribe vs blue tribe issue, gets swallowed by the general culture war, and progress grinds to a halt as partisan warfare starts.

The most likely outcome of Planned Parenthood voicing an opinion on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict is not that they make any difference at all towards that conflict. It’s that they alienate their own supporters with differing views on Israel/Palestine. They’ve undercut their own ability to make progress on reproductive care and reproductive rights for no gain.

One thing at a time

None of this is to say that individuals shouldn’t care about many issues at once—they obviously should. And general purpose ideological organizations can and should tackle many policy areas. But it’s a poor strategy for single-issue groups to try to become general purpose organizations. There are real benefits to staying in your lane.

One example of a movement that has done a reasonable job at this is the pro-housing YIMBY movement. While there are some instances of YIMBY groups straying from their purpose, for the most part they’ve done a good job staying narrowly focused, and that that focus has allowed them great success.

YIMBYism is a far more ideologically diverse movement than many people realize. There are conservative YIMBYs, neoliberal YIMBYs, Democratic YIMBYs, libertarian YIMBYs, and many left or socialist YIMBYs (although in true socialist tradition, some want to break away from the YIMBY label and create a sub-label PHIMBY). This isn’t just a feel good story about how conservatives and liberals can be friends—this has a real impact on YIMBYs getting things done. It’s part of why you see both Republican and Democratic officials at the local level working towards YIMBY solutions in different cities, and why those solutions can often pass without bitter partisan warfare. It’s why the YIMBY Act in Congress had Republican and Democratic co-sponsors. It’s why YIMBYs are scoring victories in blue states like California and red states like Montana.

This sort of thing matters. YIMBYs are a big tent and they’re getting things done. It’s hard enough to make real change happen on a single policy or a single issue. Whole movements try for years and still sometimes fail. Single-issue groups trying to address every issue at once aren’t going to succeed. The urge towards mission creep is strong, and too many groups are weakening their core strengths to address problems they can’t solve. Single-issue organizations shouldn’t burden themselves with having the answer to every question, with having a stance on every issue, and with having to be all things to all people. It’s ok not to comment. It’s ok to stay in your lane and just work on one problem. It’s ok to try to change the world just one issue at a time.

[yummytiger]

[justinsentertainmentcorner]

Alaina Demopoulos at The Guardian:

Madelyn Ritter expected to leave the St Louis date of Olivia Rodrigo’s Guts Tour with merch – she didn’t expect to also go home with some free emergency contraception. But that’s just what she saw upon entering the stadium. There, right by the women’s bathrooms, was a table where concertgoers could donate to abortion funds and pick up free condoms and morning-after pills, also called Plan B. “We noticed it immediately,” said Ritter, who is 25 (and, as she jokes, “too old” to love the 21-year-old pop star). “I was like: ‘What’s this about?’ They told me it was free, so my sister, her friend and I all took some. I personally don’t need it, but I’m going to save it in case something bad happens.”

Last month, in conjunction with her world tour, Rodrigo launched the Fund 4 Good campaign, which aims to protect women’s and girls’ reproductive rights. A portion of sales from the tour will go toward the fund. As part of the initiative, Rodrigo paired with the National Network of Abortion Funds, which connected her with local chapters at various stops on the tour. “There are plenty of singers making a stand about social issues, but I’ve never seen anything like this,” Ritter said. Abortion is illegal in Missouri. (It is only permitted in the case of an emergency that threatens the life of a pregnant person.) Missouri Republicans are also trying to defund Planned Parenthood, which provides reproductive healthcare like STI screenings and contraception in the state. Activists who staffed the table Ritter stopped by came from Right by You, a youth-focused text line that connects Missouri teens to abortion care out of state, birth control and information about their rights, and the Missouri Abortion Fund, which helps people cover the cost of an out-of-state abortion.

God Bless Olivia Rodrigo! Glad to see her taking a stand against Missouri's oppressive anti-abortion laws by giving out free emergency contraception items.

See Also:

PinkNews: Olivia Rodrigo hands out free Plan B tablets at Missouri tour, where abortion has a total ban

[darkmaga-returns]

10 shocking stories the media buried today.

The Vigilant Fox

Dec 09, 2024

#10 - A new study demonstrates, “Something is being shed from the COVID-19 vaccinated population to the unvaccinated population.”

The “conspiracy theorists” were right again.

The study revealed shocking findings: women who were around vaccinated people daily (within 6 feet) had a 34% higher risk of heavy menstrual bleeding, a 28% higher chance of their period starting over a week early, and a 26% higher chance of menstrual bleeding lasting more than seven days, compared to those with little close contact.

One of the authors of the study wrote: “After more than a year of censorship from the medical journals, our landmark study and manuscript has been published demonstrating significant circumstantial evidence that something is being shed from the COVID-19 vaccinated population to the unvaccinated population. It is far beyond time for these toxic injections to be withdrawn from the market.”

Reacting to the study’s alarming findings, esteemed physician Dr. Pierre Kory wrote on X: “The most puzzling thing we’ve seen with the vaccine is its ability to ‘shed’ and harm those who never got it. A peer-reviewed study just validated the thousands of shedding reports sent to us.”

(See Sources and 9 More Revealing Stories Below)

Source 1 - New Study Finds Concerning Evidence of COVID-19 'Vaccine' Shedding

Courageous Discourse™ with Dr. Peter McCullough & John Leake

New Study Finds Concerning Evidence of COVID-19 'Vaccine' Shedding

by Nicolas Hulscher, MPH…

Read more

17 hours ago · 148 likes · 39 comments · Nicolas Hulscher, MPH

Source 2 - Newly Published Study Shows Shedding Of Covid mRNA Vaccine Products

Pierre Kory’s Medical Musings

Newly Published Study Shows Shedding Of Covid mRNA Vaccine Products

As many of my readers know, about a year ago I spent months researching and writing on the topic of “shedding” of gene therapy medicinal products (GTMP), a class of therapies which the Covid vaccines are categorized under. That effort was first inspired by patients reporting to me and my partner…

Read more

13 hours ago · 104 likes · 31 comments · Pierre Kory, MD, MPA

#9 - Elon Musk Considering Giving Reform UK $100 Million To Help Farage Become Prime Minister: Report

The Telegraph and others are reporting that X owner Elon Musk is mulling heavily investing in Reform UK, the political party headed by Nigel Farage in order to help him compete with the two establishment parties in Britain.

“Elon Musk is reportedly considering giving Reform up to $100 million, or around £79 million, after cementing a friendship with Farage at Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home in Florida,” the outlet notes.

Read More: https://modernity.news/2024/12/09/elon-considering-giving-reform-uk-100-million-to-help-farage-become-prime-minister-report/

#8 - Speaker Mike Johnson Says He Supports Defunding Planned Parenthood

“Planned Parenthood and PBS are in congressional control. Are you planning to axe both of those?” Fox News host Martha MacCallum asked Johnson.

“I would like to. That’s for sure,” Johnson replied.

Read More: https://www.infowars.com/posts/speaker-mike-johnson-says-he-supports-defunding-planned-parenthood-i-would-like-to/

#7 - UN Deploys Investigators as Mysterious "Disease X" Continues to Spread

In the Democratic Republic of Congo, international health officials have been deployed to help stave the spread of a mysterious respiratory disease.

Dubbed “Disease X,” DRC health authorities have already recorded 406 total cases and 31 deaths, and the disease is disproportionately affecting young children.

Read More: https://futurism.com/neoscope/un-team-disease-x-congo

#6 - NYPD Identifies 'Strong Person Of Interest' In United Healthcare CEO Murder Case

While you’re here, don’t forget to subscribe to this page for more daily news roundups.Subscribe

#5 - US Military Begins Launching Strikes as Assad Flees Syria

#4 - Joe Biden Voted as Worst President in Modern History

#3 - Rand Paul Warns Musk & Ramaswamy About The Swamp’s Upcoming DOGE Dodge

#2 - Ex-Secret Service Agent Warns of Major Attack on Trump Before Inauguration

#1 - Judicial Bombshell: Federal Judge Forces FDA to Release Over a Million Pages of Pfizer’s COVID-19 Trial Documents They Wanted to Keep Hidden for 75 Years

BONUS #1 - Stephen A. Smith Delivers Unexpected Knockout Blow to Joe Biden

BONUS #2 - Alarming Levels of DNA Contamination Found in COVID Vaccines

BONUS #3 - How to Get Ivermectin, Z-Pak and More

BONUS #4 - Fed-Up Liberal ERUPTS on Democratic Party in Epic Rant

BONUS #5 - The Shocking Truth About Skin Cancer: What You’re Not Being Told About the Sun

[rapeculturerealities]

How Todd Akin’s “Legitimate Rape” Debacle Previewed the Abortion Agenda of Today’s GOP – Mother Jones

Republican rhetoric from a dozen years ago has transformed into a workable legal and legislative roadmap. And while Akin’s comments were extreme, they were not an aberration: as a congressman, Akin had signed onto a 2011 bill backed by a majority of the Republican caucus that would have rewritten the definition of rape and limited federal abortion funding to a narrower range of victims. That followed the party’s attempts to block an Obama administration mandate that insurers cover contraception. Presidential candidate Rick Santorum, who won the first in the nation Iowa caucus that year, argued states should be able to ban contraception. Romney ran on defunding Planned Parenthood.