Women can’t be having the sex

Without paying for it for the next 18 years:

Instead of focusing on job creation, congressional Republicans have spent their time passing socially conservative legislation like the “Let Women Die” bill that would allow hospitals that receive federal funds to deny women life-saving abortion procedures.

Now Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC), one of the most die-hard anti-choice lawmakers, has jumped on the bandwagon bysneaking a radical anti-abortion amendment onto a completely unrelated piece of legislation. DeMint’s amendment would ban women and their doctors from discussing abortion over the Internet:

Anti-choice Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) just filed an anti-choice amendment to a bill related to agriculture, transportation, housing, and other programsThe DeMint amendment could bar discussion of abortion over the Internet and through videoconferencing, even if a woman’s health is at risk and if this kind of communication with her doctor is her best option to receive care.

Under this amendment, women would need a separate, segregated Internet just for talking about abortion care with their doctors.

Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, said DeMint is essentially mandating “an abortion-only version of Skype.” She points out that a woman with high-risk pregnancy talking to her doctor through video conferencing would have to somehow switch to a separate communications system if abortion came up at all. “It is impractical, ridiculous, and, most importantly, bad for women in rural or remote areas who would not be able to discuss the full set of options with their doctor,” Keenan said.

4 Responses to Women can’t be having the sex

  1. montag October 19, 2011 at 6:37 pm #

    Absolutely disgusting the way Republican/Teabaggers publicly roll out their misogyny when they think they have the upper hand. And they can’t make it work without Big Government. Nice Republican/Teabagger values.

  2. jawbone October 19, 2011 at 7:26 pm #

    Uh…First Amendment and all that? Like, this would pass Constitutional muster?

    (Actually, under Roberts, Scalia, Thomas…who knows?)

  3. jawbone October 19, 2011 at 7:28 pm #

    Also, DeMint is demented.

  4. Allie October 20, 2011 at 11:28 am #

    That was my thought also – how could that possibly not be a violation of freedom of speech. But like you said – these daze anything could happen….

    And in typically twisted Repub logic – even a conversation denouncing abortion or a conversation urging the mother to come to term would be illegal – right?

Site Meter