Update: Injunction, Injunction...

Judge Jordan ruled today to extend the injunction, keeping the Jackson abortion clinic open for now. It's a small victory, but definitely a step in the right direction.

For more information, check out this article written by Emily Wagster Pettus, who was also live-tweeting during today's hearing. Also, check out this video from Rachel Maddow's show (skip to 6:45 to see the Mississippi portion).

Maddow points out something that I hadn't noticed before but is so important to this whole debate. While the legislators of Mississippi have not been shy about saying that this law was an attempt to stop abortion of Mississippi, they have also occasionally thrown out, "Oh yeah, it's for the health of Mississippi's women." They say that doctors need to have admitting privileges to a local hospital in case of abortion complications. Rachel Maddow, quoting a medical expert, points out that doctors would have to admit 10 or more patients in a year in order to get privileges, but "A typical abortion provider would rarely admit more than one patient a year for abortion complications, and in many years would have no complications requiring hospitalization." Oh, how crafty, Phil Bryant and company! You say that these doctors need to have admitting privileges for the safety of the women, yet you know that they won't be able to get those privileges because abortions are safe and so rarely have complications!!

Maddow also points out that there are 4 other states in the country with only one abortion clinic, so the final decision in Mississippi could very well set a precedent for banning abortion without touching Roe v. Wade. Hopefully, today's small victory of upholding the injunction temporarily will turn into a much larger victory of ruling this TRAP law unconstitutional.

Injunction, Injunction, What's Your Function?

Recently in Mississippi, a law was passed in order to shut down the state's only abortion clinic. Of course, abortion, while controversial, is still legal in the United States, so Mississippi legislators can't just decide to close it because they are uncomfortable with a woman's right to choose.

But of course, that's exactly what they've been trying to do.

The TRAP law (while the acronym makes sense on its own, it actually stands for Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers) requires doctors performing abortions to be OB-GYNs with admitting privileges to a local hospital. The Mississippi clinic is staffed by OB-GYNs, but they have been refused admitting privileges at all the hospitals in the required range. Because of this refusal, the clinic would have to close once the law goes into effect.

However, today, the day the law should have gone into effect, US District Judge Daniel P. Jordan issued a temporary injunction to keep that from happening. A lawsuit has been filed, calling the new law unconstitutional and medically unnecessary.

The best part about this is that the extreme Republicans who have been so proud of this new law that they have really shot themselves in the collective foot. If they had been able to come up with some sort of medical or health-inspection reason for the clinic to be shut down, then it would closed, over and done with. But Governor Phil Bryant and others strutted around, boasting of making Mississippi "abortion-free" and, I'm sure, hoping to win (and probably succeeding) conservative votes for this. And now these quotes and boasts have been brought into the case against the new law as evidence that the goal of the law was simply to shut down the clinic without any medical reasons.

If Mississippi's legislators were actually concerned about the health of their state's women, they wouldn't have bragged so arrogantly about shutting down the state's abortion clinic (of course, if they really cared about women's health, they wouldn't work to shut it down at all, but that's wishful thinking it seems...). Their overblown pride over shutting down the clinic could now end up being the very reason it stays open.

The fight over abortion in Mississippi (or the US) isn't over, but this current turn of events has me feeling optimistic for at least a few more days.

Oxford Educated or Oxford Ignorant?

Today, the school board of my former school district, Oxford, will be voting on which type of sex education policy to adopt. They can choose between "abstinence-only" or "abstinence-plus" (comprehensive) courses. What will Oxford, Miss., choose? I'm not sure.

Growing up in Mississippi, I have learned to handle contradictions (though not always happily or easily). The personhood amendment was brought to Mississippi by Personhood USA precisely because we are considered to be the most conservative state, and they felt sure it would pass. Yet, we voted it down last November by about 14 points. But, we still voted for Phil Bryant as governor, who was directly involved with the personhood movement. (I don't understand it either.) We have the highest teen pregnancy rate, highest infant mortality rate, and our educational attainment rates are some of the lowest in the country, yet our politicians are mostly anti-abortion and anti-sex education.

So what do these contradictions mean for sex-education policies in our schools? Well, it's a little unclear. The Lafayette County School District (the county of which Oxford is the seat) has already adopted an abstinence-only education policy. But according to this article, "Mississippi parents are overwhelmingly in favor of age-appropriate, comprehensive sex education." One Oxford parent points out that those opposed to comprehensive sex education are "a minority of parents" who are "very passionate about their beliefs and are active in influencing their local school boards." So it seems very plausible that this minority could force their beliefs into policy, whether or not most of Oxford's parents actually agree with them.

So, it seems to me that all Oxford parents need to get their voices heard. I just e-mailed members of the school board about the vote. I don't know how much weight my opinion will hold, since I am not a parent of any Oxford students, but I did it anyway. If you want to write to school board members, go to the School Board website with names and e-mail addresses provided. If we want Mississippi's teen pregnancy rate to fall, we have to start educating Mississippians. It starts here.

*This post is cross-posted at Represent!

Videos to Keep You Going

I know I haven't been writing much lately, and as much as I want it to get better, I'm about to move out of my apartment and into a house, so the rest of this month will probably be just as spotty as the last one was. I promise to get back on track after the move, and to post as much as I can during this time, but here are a few videos on recent events to keep you going.

I'll start with the funny, before we get to the sad and too-very-real. The latest from Funny or Die, called Republicans, Get in My Vagina! Hilarious. 

 

This video is Rachel Maddow discussing how an extremely qualified doctor in, you guessed it, Mississippi was fired from the Board of Health because of a very remote connection to an abortion clinic. Ridiculous.

Here is more Rachel, this time discussing the problems with the wage gap in this country, after she argued with Republican Alex Castellanos who told her, quite simply, that women don't get paid less than men, or when they do, it's because they choose lower-paying jobs (totally ignoring facts like how we raise our daughters not to pursue fields like math and science, how societal pressure forces many women (instead of their husbands/boyfriends/partners) to drop out of the workforce to raise a child instead, or how overly expensive daycare often makes a parent dropping out of the workforce the cheaper option.) 

And last but not least, a little humor to brighten your day. This video was filmed in Oxford (I think, I'm not sure who made it), in response to Phil Bryant's recent claim that all liberals have one goal: to abort babies. Enjoy!

Really, Phil Bryant? REALLY?

I might be a little late, but I can't let Phil Bryant's recent comments go without mention. According to the Associated Press,

   "Mississippi's Republican governor had new harsh words for proponents of legalized abortion this week, saying, 'their one mission in life is to abort children, is to kill children in the womb.'"

  I'm so sick of this man ignoring what is right in front of him. We told him in November that we don't want personhood legislation. We voted no. (Somehow we also voted him into office at the same time; this still baffles me.) And we told him, loudly, why we said no. We want the right to abortion, yes, and safe access. We want the right, and access, to birth control. Women want the right to make decisions about our lives and bodies, and men want the women in their lives to have that right. Mississippi couples want to decide what's best for their families by discussing it together, and with a doctor if necessary--without legislation getting in the way.

  Yet good ol' Phil manages to distill this into all of us crazy liberals wanting to kill hundreds and thousands of unborn babies.

Sigh.

  I know it's all a political game. I know that in his position, he has to make the issue sound emotional, visceral and sinful in order to appeal to those moderate voters who may be unsure how they feel about "abortion" but definitely know how they feel about "murder." But this game is so exhausting. How can Mississippi's governor ignore the unintended pregnancy rate, the teen pregnancy rate, and the infant mortality rate in his state?! How can he ignore the studies that have shown that comprehensive sex education (not abstinence only eduation) is the best way to reduce teens having unsafe sex and to reduce unintended teen pregnancies?! How can anyone ignore that abstinence-only has been proven ineffective?!

Well, he can ignore it because it seems that is what so many Republicans are doing across the country. They've started down this extreme path, standing stubbornly against women (and against sex, basically) no matter what. And I don't think it's going to work out for them in this year's election. So, I'll end with a message to Phil Bryant (and all Republicans, since unfortunately we're stuck with Phil for a few years), my favorite quote from one of the many women-led protests this year:

Women will remember in November.

Women will remember in November.

To Mississippi Legislators: Represent Us!!!

Here's how the democratic system (supposedly) works. Every person in our country can't possibly voice their concerns to the government, so we elect people to do this for us. Our local, state and national government officials win their offices through elections. We the people vote for the candidate who best represents our interests and goals. The person with the majority of the vote, therefore, should represent the interests of the majority of the people.

This is NOT how this system is working, at least in Mississippi (and I'm guessing other places too). In November, Mississippi voters defeated the personhood amendment with 60% of the vote. 60% of Mississippians do not want personhood as a law. 60% of Mississippi voters do not think that personhood is the best way to reduce abortions, or unplanned pregnancies. 60% of Mississippians do not think that laws should get in between women, their doctors, and their personal decisions. 

Yet our representatives have introduced a personhood bill into the MS legislature, even with very vocal voting Mississippians screaming at the top of our lungs "This is not we want!! Represent OUR interests!" The problem here is that the majority of representatives are not representing our interests, they're representing their own. White, older, wealthy men are pushing their own agendas. And I have to say that I agree with my mother, who recently said: "I like men. I was married to a man. I would like to be married to another man in the right circumstances. But when it comes to pregnancy and abortion, I just don't think they have a right to open their mouths." I agree. I'm not usually a fan of separating the sexes, but when it comes to reproductive rights, health, and healthcare for women, I think women should be making the decisions. Because men don't get it. They can't. They can't get pregnant. They haven't lived in fear of getting pregnant at the wrong time. They haven't lived in fear of rape (most of them), or the added fear of pregnancy resulting from rape. They do not get it. And this is obvious when you look at the laws that they are trying to pass.

Of course, I'm not saying that men, in general, are the problem. There are female supporters of personhood too. But as this picture points out, men make up the majority of the pro-personhood, anti-abortion movement, and men make the majority of legislative decisions that deal with women and their health.

We need more women representing us in government. And we need everyone who represents us, male or female, to be tuned in to what their voters want. We need actual representation in government. 

To Mississippi legislators: Represent us!

Please sign this petition against the personhood bill in the MS legislature.

On a lighter note, campaigners from my own hometown of Oxford, MS made it into the latest issue of Ms. Magazine! Check out this picture!

This post is cross-posted on the blog Represent!

Personhood: Why MS's Victory is Important

First of all: Whooooooo!!!!! We did it!!!! I don't know if I've ever woken up singing and dancing, but I did today.

Ok. So why is this a big deal? We know that personhood initiatives are in the works in other states, and less than twelve hours after our victory, we know that personhood supporters are going to try to work this through our legislature (which is now even more Republican and anti-woman [not that Republican and anti-woman are synonymous, but in today's political climate, they are more than they aren't]). So how much of a victory is this?

A HUGE ONE! After failing twice in Colorado, Personhood USA handpicked Mississippi as the conservative and uneducated state that might just pass this initiative without taking the time to learn about it, or just by having strong anti-abortion feelings. They thought that we would just let them walk all over us, and we proved them absolutely wrong. We will not be condescended to as the dumb scum of the US in overalls and no shoes. We have shoes, we have brains, and we used them to get the word out about how dangerous Initiative 26 really was. As this article in the Huffington Post said,

The forces who brought Personhood before the public insulted the intellectual and cultural sensibilities of thousands of Mississippians. They assumed Mississippi would be a cake walk. They provided grandma's 1970's abortion language that didn't speak to many younger, yet conservative, Mississippians. They were sloppy in their organizing and flippant about their opposition; condescending. Their official Personhood website looks like my child's 4th grade class designed it.


Don't treat us like idiots, because we're not. We care, and we fought against this amendment in one of the most conservative states in the nation. If we can do it, other states can. Yes, the fight is just beginning, but our victory is huge (even the White House has commented on it), and I'm gonna take a day to celebrate and dance around with a song in my head because I am proud to be a Mississippian today, and tomorrow I can begin to fight for these rights in the rest of the country (as well as continuing the fight here). I'll end this post with my favorite quote from the article mentioned above:


There's a lesson here about showing up in Mississippi without your game face on.