Promises, Promises - Part 1: The Republican Attack On Abortion

Do you remember during the elections when the Republicans and Tea Party said its jobs, jobs, jobs. So what was one of the first bills that they introduce this year? Abortion rights. Please tell me what that has to do with jobs? There are a number of bills that have been introduced so far dealing with abortion and the meanest one is a bill that redefined rape as only being forced (Which the Republicans have since withdrew under overwhelming pressure).

The House GOP's Plan to Redefine Rape
Mother Jones
By Nick Baumann
Fri Jan. 28, 2011

Rape is only really rape if it involves force. So says the new House Republican majority as it now moves to change abortion law.

For years, federal laws restricting the use of government funds to pay for abortions have included exemptions for pregnancies resulting from rape or incest. (Another exemption covers pregnancies that could endanger the life of the woman.) But the "No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act," a bill with 173 mostly Republican co-sponsors that House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) has dubbed a top priority in the new Congress, contains a provision that would rewrite the rules to limit drastically the definition of rape and incest in these cases.

With this legislation, which was introduced last week by Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.), Republicans propose that the rape exemption be limited to "forcible rape." This would rule out federal assistance for abortions in many rape cases, including instances of statutory rape, many of which are non-forcible. For example: If a 13-year-old girl is impregnated by a 24-year-old adult, she would no longer qualify to have Medicaid pay for an abortion. (Smith's spokesman did not respond to a call and an email requesting comment.)

Given that the bill also would forbid the use of tax benefits to pay for abortions, that 13-year-old's parents wouldn't be allowed to use money from a tax-exempt health savings account (HSA) to pay for the procedure. They also wouldn't be able to deduct the cost of the abortion or the cost of any insurance that paid for it as a medical expense.

How could the Republicans and the Tea Partyers even conceive of the idea that rape is only rape if it is forced and to make it their top priority in Congress!

It gets even worst; the second meanest bill that they introduced was…

New GOP Bill Would Allow Hospitals To Let Women Die Instead Of Having An Abortion
TPM
By Evan McMorris-Santoro
February 4, 2011

The controversy over "forcible rape" may be over, but now there's a new Republican-sponsored abortion bill in the House that pro-choice folks say may be worse: this time around, the new language would allow hospitals to let a pregnant woman die rather than perform the abortion that would save her life.

The bill, known currently as H.R. 358 or the "Protect Life Act," would amend the 2010 health care reform law that would modify the way Obamacare deals with abortion coverage. Much of its language is modeled on the so-called Stupak Amendment, an anti-abortion provision pro-life Democrats attempted to insert into the reform law during the health care debate last year. But critics say a new language inserted into the bill just this week would go far beyond Stupak, allowing hospitals that receive federal funds but are opposed to abortions to turn away women in need of emergency pregnancy termination to save their lives.

Do you believe that, the Republicans and the Tea Party want allow a hospitals to be able to turn away a dying woman!

You don’t think that their craziness could get much worst, well you are wrong! Georgia state representative Bobby Franklin (R-Marietta) introduced a bill that

Georgia State Lawmaker Seeks To Redefine Rape Victims As 'Accusers'
Huffington Post
Amanda Terkel
February 4, 2011

WASHINGTON -- A Republican state legislator in Georgia doesn't like the term rape "victim." In fact, he has introduced a bill mandating that state criminal codes refer to these people as, simply, "accusers" -- until there's a conviction in the matter.

According to the legislation introduced by state Rep. Bobby Franklin (R-Marietta):

To amend Titles 16 and 17 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to criminal law and criminal procedure, respectively, so as to change the term "victim" to the term "accuser" in the context of a number of statutes making reference to circumstances where there has not yet been a criminal conviction; to provide for related matters; to repeal conflicting laws; and for other purposes.

[…]
Jennifer White, attorney for legal programs at the Family Violence Prevention Fund, said that even when victims do come forward, prosecutions and convictions are still often incredibly difficult to get.

"Changing, just for these particular crimes, the word 'victim' to 'accuser' really buys into an outdated and disproved myth about victims who come forward with these kinds of allegations," said White. "I think it's a sad reality that for some reason, it's easier for society, in some respects, to believe that a victim would fabricate this type of crime than to believe that a person is capable of committing certain atrocities. And it really has a chilling effect for victims who already have an extremely difficult time coming forward."

What is it with these Republicans and the Tea Partyers? They get up on their campaign soapbox boxes and say it is the “Economy and Jobs” and the first thing that they do is push their secret rightwing Christian agenda. They are just like all the other politicians they will say anything to get into office.