GOP Women stop National 20 wk abortion ban

[mominatrix]

Congressman Attacks GOP Congresswomen’s Stand On Abortion: ‘It Sent The Entirely Wrong Message’



BY TARA CULP-RESSLER POSTED ON JANUARY 27, 2015 AT 5:17 PM UPDATED: JANUARY 28, 2015 AT 10:06 AM


339Share This 465Tweet This "Congressman Attacks GOP Congresswomen’s Stand On Abortion: ‘It Sent The Entirely Wrong Message’" Share: facebook icon twitter icon
Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX)
Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX)
CREDIT: AP PHOTO/J. SCOTT APPLEWHITE




Last week, a proposed 20-week abortion ban didn’t get a vote in the House after a group of Republican women expressed concerns about its narrow exception for rape victims. And days later, the political conflict — which amounted to an embarrassing setback for Republicans on the same day that thousands of abortion opponents flooded the nation’s capital for the annual March for Life — is still simmering.

On Tuesday, Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) lamented the fact that “Republican females” sent “entirely the wrong message” by raising objections about the legislation, which ultimately resulted in its removal from consideration in the House on the 42nd anniversary of Roe v. Wade.

On a conference call with E.W. Jackson — a pastor and conservative activist who ran for lieutenant governor of Virginia two years ago — the Texas congressman encouraged pro-life groups to keep pushing the Republican Party to bring anti-abortion bills to a vote. He also suggested that the group of Republican women who had issues with the 20-week ban should have spoken with GOP leadership before the bill came to the House floor.

“Before it had even gone through committee, our leadership was so anxious to show people, ‘Look, we are standing firm on these issues you care about,'” Gohmert said on the conference call, in comments that were first reported by Raw Story. “I’m told that they’re still going to bring it back, but because there was such division among our Republican females, they pulled the bill that day. And that was extremely unfortunate, and it sent the entirely wrong message.”

According to multiple news reports, the GOP congresswomen who derailed the legislation were working behind the scenes for weeks to get the language changed on the bill’s rape exception. They say the leaders of the House did not take those concerns seriously. “Why leadership did not initially listen to the women still baffles members of the conference,” the National Journal reported.

Nonetheless, Gohmert is hardly the only conservative man who’s frustrated with Republican women right now. The lead sponsor of the 20-week abortion ban, Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ), said the decision to withdraw the legislation last Thursday was “one of the most disappointing moments of my life.” Rick Santorum, a former senator from Pennsylvania and a potential presidential contender in 2016, also called the move “a disappointment.” And Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who’s spearheaded a companion bill on the Senate side, implored pro-life activists to help “find a way out of this definitional problem with rape” so the party can advance a national abortion ban.

Abortion opponents outside of Congress have had even stronger words about the last-minute decision to drop the bill. “I am disgusted by this act of moral cowardice,” Russell Moore, the president of the Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, said in a statement. Right-wing blogger Erick Erickson has referred to Rep. Renee Ellmers (R-NC), the lawmaker at the center of the dispute over the rape exception, as “two-faced” and a “liar.” Pro-life activists protested outside of Ellmers’ office on Thursday.

Despite the controversy over the 20-week abortion ban, the GOP-controlled House has still advanced plenty of abortion restrictions during its first weeks in session. In place of the proposed ban, the House instead passed the so-called “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act,” an arguably equally far-reaching piece of legislation that seeks to prevent women from using their insurance coverage for abortion care. Other bills have been filed to defund Planned Parenthood, allow health care professionals to refuse to provide an abortion, and impose unnecessary and burdensome regulations on abortion clinics.


It remains to be seen whether gender divides will influence future fights over proposed anti-abortion bills. At the end of last week, a group of 11 male Republicans introduced a bill that would require women to review a mandatory ultrasound before being allowed to proceed with an abortion. “When you can’t find a single woman to support a bill that affects only women, that bill is probably a terrible idea,” Jess McIntosh, a spokeswoman for EMILY’s List, pointed out in an interview with the Huffington Post.

thinkprogress.org/health/2015/01/27/3616176/gop-men-abortion-ban-disappointed/

[cville]

Them wimmens thinkin' for themselves.

Trouble!

[pixy0stix]

Oh noes! Not the wrong message!

[cattledogkisses]

"Females." Ugh.

[mominatrix]

Jan 28, 2015 12:04:10 GMT -5 cattledogkisses said:

"Females." Ugh.

I'm with you, but I really don't understand why that word bothers me so much.

[ESF]

This entire story is just amazing. I can't believe the way it is unfolding.

[meshaliuknits]

Jan 28, 2015 12:06:38 GMT -5 mominatrix said:

Jan 28, 2015 12:04:10 GMT -5 cattledogkisses said:

"Females." Ugh.

I'm with you, but I really don't understand why that word bothers me so much.

Possibly because you rarely, if ever, hear men referred to as males.

[cville]

Jan 28, 2015 12:06:38 GMT -5 mominatrix said:

Jan 28, 2015 12:04:10 GMT -5 cattledogkisses said:

"Females." Ugh.

I'm with you, but I really don't understand why that word bothers me so much.

It's so other-ing.

Only acceptable in Baby Got Back.

[downtoearth]

I know that Republican women get a bad name b/c of oddballs like Joni Ernst, but I have to say that I do think that most women, prolife or prochoice, do want women to have some autonomy over their own health care decisions and are empathetic to rape and other violence to women.  I applaud the house Repub Congresswomen for standing up to their own majority with some of these concerns, but I still think they are looking to get a ban, just not this one. 

Plus, the name of the bill was just inflammatory "Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act!"  I mean, if you want to make a statement that you don't give a F*@& as to what the democrats want now that you're in control, then that is precisely the type of bill title you should go with, but if you really want to get ish done, at least attempt to get a more professional title than "pain capable...."

Oh and this bolded statement I copied below from the article you posted makes me feel icky... "find a way out of this definitional problem with rape?!?!"  There isn't a definition problem with rape, it's a real act of violence and violation and Graham's callousness and imploring the pro-life activists to find a solution to the definition of rape is pretty disgusting.  He easily could have said, "We are having a hard time defining instances where the 20-week termination would be allowed to alleviate concerns of fellow Congresspersons, especially when trying to be compassionate about instances of rape and violence against women." Is that really that hard, Grahamster?

And Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who’s spearheaded a companion bill on the Senate side, implored pro-life activists to help “find a way out of this definitional problem with rape” so the party can advance a national abortion ban.

Read more: pandce.proboards.com/thread/414411/gop-women-stop-national-abortion#ixzz3Q8XXM8BH

[heyjude]

The GOP "females" killed it because they didn't like the fact that a woman who was raped would have to file a report first with the police before she could seek an abortion. It was not killed because the GOP "females" think the concept of a 20 week abortion ban is abhorrent. They like it. They just didn't like the rape exception.

[emilyj]

"Nonetheless, Gohmert is hardly the only conservative man who’s frustrated with Republican women right now. The lead sponsor of the 20-week abortion ban, Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ), said the decision to withdraw the legislation last Thursday was “one of the most disappointing moments of my life.” Rick Santorum, a former senator from Pennsylvania and a potential presidential contender in 2016, also called the move “a disappointment.” And Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who’s spearheaded a companion bill on the Senate side, implored pro-life activists to help “find a way out of this definitional problem with rape” so the party can advance a national abortion ban."

[meshaliuknits]

Jan 28, 2015 12:18:40 GMT -5 Stan said:

Jan 28, 2015 12:14:26 GMT -5 @majorwife said:

doesnt the military use female instead of women? i picture a drill Sargent when i hear it and i bristle 

Yes. We say females and males because otherwise it's girls and guys which pisses me off because they're not equivalent.

May I ask why not men and women?

[WOT?*]

I truly wish there was a way to impregnate the occasional white male Congressperson, if only to get them to think out of their tiny white-male-privileged teeny-tiny box. If one of THEM got pregnant, you can bet it would put the fear of God into them and they'd certainly start thinking about ramifications of pregnancy by rape or violence on the MAN rather than the fetus.

[NewOrleans]

I want to be impressed. I really do. I want to say, "These women stood up for other women and women's rights or maternal rights. Go, you!" And I want to celebrate these women for thinking in terms of "maybe our voters don't want extremism" for a change, catering to the moderates instead of the extremists for once.

But tbh, I am not impressed. First, because all they did was say an extreme bill was extreme. Congratulations? Did they do anything about other anti-choice maneuverings? Second, it feels staged. I think it is just an outreach move / a move to make the party seem less extreme when the party IS extreme. And I suspect these women will continue to take all kinds of anti-choice positions, most of which are also extreme. I might just be too cynical. I am open to hearing about their voting records or other statements that show that they really are trying to change the direction of GOP status quo and not just trying to show the GOP loves women, too.

 at the language of possession ("our") and animalism ("female").

[heyjude]

Jan 28, 2015 13:14:32 GMT -5 NewOrleans said:

I want to be impressed. I really do. I want to say, "These women stood up for other women and women's rights or maternal rights. Go, you!" And I want to celebrate these women for thinking in terms of "maybe our voters don't want extremism" for a change, catering to the moderates instead of the extremists for once.

But tbh, I am not impressed. First, because all they did was say an extreme bill was extreme. Congratulations? Did they do anything about other anti-choice maneuverings? Second, it feels staged. I think it is just an outreach move / a move to make the party seem less extreme when the party IS extreme. And I suspect these women will continue to take all kinds of anti-choice positions, most of which are also extreme. I might just be too cynical. I am open to hearing about their voting records or other statements that show that they really are trying to change the direction of GOP status quo and not just trying to show the GOP loves women, too.

 at the language of possession ("our") and animalism ("female").

And in the end they still support an extremely extreme bill. One that will hurt women. So no love from me.

[sushi]

Jan 28, 2015 12:14:26 GMT -5 @majorwife said:

Jan 28, 2015 12:06:38 GMT -5 mominatrix said:

I'm with you, but I really don't understand why that word bothers me so much.

doesnt the military use female instead of women? i picture a drill Sargent when i hear it and i bristle 

Yes.

To me female is an adj, not noun. The military feels otherwise

[mrsdewinter]

Jan 28, 2015 12:06:38 GMT -5 mominatrix said:

Jan 28, 2015 12:04:10 GMT -5 cattledogkisses said:

"Females." Ugh.

I'm with you, but I really don't understand why that word bothers me so much.

Because it sounds like you are talking about animals instead of capable grown adult people.

[msmerymac]

“Why leadership did not initially listen to the women still baffles members of the conference,” the National Journal reported.

Uh, well, they are trying to push a misogynist bill, so...

[ESF]

The bill is shit and the fact that they will ultimately support it if the rape provision can be removed sucks.

But I find the fact that they are willing to take a stand on rape pretty damn significant. I mean, the bill on paper has a rape exception, and they are fighting to make it actually meaningful. The way it's written now, it's a victim blaming exception, and it's bullshit. But the right knows that abortion bans that prevent rape victims from getting them are never popular, so a victim blaming exception allows them to throw a bone to the public, while really just advancing the misogynistic myth at the center of all abortion bans: rape victims are liars.

Fighting that myth is incredibly important.
Maybe they aren't fighting for abortion rights, but they are absolutely fighting for rape victims.

The base is frothing at the mouth. The males in the party are embarrassed. They are having to make all sorts of contortions. Their sexism and disdain for women and rape victims is obvious. And yet, these women are standing up to that assholery, fighting for rape victims, and in turn, women.

The bill will fail, because when you believe there's no such thing as a rape baby from legitimate rape and that women are lying whores, any rape exception that doesn't come with the risk of prison time for the perjury they believe the women will commit to get an abortion means the bill doesn't do shit.

[saz]

Glad to see them getting to work to fix the economy! (that's the platform they ran on right? I can't remember since I didn't pay attention)

[NewOrleans]

Jan 28, 2015 14:11:29 GMT -5 ESF said:

Maybe they aren't fighting for abortion rights, but they are absolutely fighting for rape victims.

The base is frothing at the mouth. The males in the party are embarrassed. They are having to make all sorts of contortions. Their sexism and disdain for women and rape victims is obvious. 

For the first, eh.  I'm unconvinced that they are.  I read earlier this week that on FB, the one lady said she'd still vote for it because life!!! And the other lady would not give her specific concerns when asked by the press, instead running off saying, "I can't."   Also, that the one lady said that millennials don't think about the social issues, so she was trying to protect the GOP, not the rape victims.  I haven't read anything indicating their outright defense of rape survivors.  Again, fill me in if they've said something.

As for your second point, I love it.  I always revel in seeing 1) the GOP for what it really stands for now; and 2) the GOP self-destruct by its own extremism.

[jln]

Jan 28, 2015 14:11:29 GMT -5 ESF said:

The bill is shit and the fact that they will ultimately support it if the rape provision can be removed sucks.

But I find the fact that they are willing to take a stand on rape pretty damn significant. I mean, the bill on paper has a rape exception, and they are fighting to make it actually meaningful. The way it's written now, it's a victim blaming exception, and it's bullshit. But the right knows that abortion bans that prevent rape victims from getting them are never popular, so a victim blaming exception allows them to throw a bone to the public, while really just advancing the misogynistic myth at the center of all abortion bans: rape victims are liars.

Fighting that myth is incredibly important.
Maybe they aren't fighting for abortion rights, but they are absolutely fighting for rape victims.

The base is frothing at the mouth. The males in the party are embarrassed. They are having to make all sorts of contortions. Their sexism and disdain for women and rape victims is obvious. And yet, these women are standing up to that assholery, fighting for rape victims, and in turn, women.

The bill will fail, because when you believe there's no such thing as a rape baby from legitimate rape and that women are lying whores, any rape exception that doesn't come with the risk of prison time for the perjury they believe the women will commit to get an abortion means the bill doesn't do shit.

I agree with the bolded, and I do see this as a little victory.  It's not much, but it's something that can lead to more significant changes.  Plus, changing the mindset that rape victims aren't liars is huge, especially for the pro-life crowd. 

[Deleted]

Jan 28, 2015 12:06:38 GMT -5 mominatrix said:

Jan 28, 2015 12:04:10 GMT -5 cattledogkisses said:

"Females." Ugh.

I'm with you, but I really don't understand why that word bothers me so much.

It's the only acceptable terminology in the military. You can't say women or anything else.

[Nonny]

Did this bill have any exceptions for the life of the mother, or exceptions for severely disabled fetuses? Because if abortion gets banned at 20 weeks and you can't find out about a life threatening chromosomal disorder until 22-24 weeks, you are still fucked.

I hate that men who don't know science and don't know any given individuals circumstances can shove their ideas into a woman's uterus. Fuck them all.

[NewOrleans]

Jan 28, 2015 16:25:04 GMT -5 Nonny said:

Did this bill have any exceptions for the life of the mother, or exceptions for severely disabled fetuses? Because if abortion gets banned at 20 weeks and you can't find out about a life threatening chromosomal disorder until 22-24 weeks, you are still fucked.

I hate that men who don't know science and don't know any given individuals circumstances can shove their ideas into a woman's uterus. Fuck them all.

LOL x infinity.  Life, not health, and specifically excluding mental health.  Fuck their health, amirite?   <)  

[heyjude]

Jan 28, 2015 16:25:04 GMT -5 Nonny said:

Did this bill have any exceptions for the life of the mother, or exceptions for severely disabled fetuses? Because if abortion gets banned at 20 weeks and you can't find out about a life threatening chromosomal disorder until 22-24 weeks, you are still fucked.

I hate that men who don't know science and don't know any given individuals circumstances can shove their ideas into a woman's uterus. Fuck them all.

Keep in mind, women are behind this too. Those good GOP women staging a "revolt."

It's only a victory if we redefine victory.

[Nonny]

Jan 28, 2015 16:35:12 GMT -5 NewOrleans said:

Jan 28, 2015 16:25:04 GMT -5 Nonny said:

Did this bill have any exceptions for the life of the mother, or exceptions for severely disabled fetuses? Because if abortion gets banned at 20 weeks and you can't find out about a life threatening chromosomal disorder until 22-24 weeks, you are still fucked.

I hate that men who don't know science and don't know any given individuals circumstances can shove their ideas into a woman's uterus. Fuck them all.

LOL x infinity.  Life, not health, and specifically excluding mental health.  Fuck their health, amirite?   <)  

I meant life or health, but yeah, I can't say I'm surprised they excluded health, because you know, continuing an unsafe pregnancy is just "best" for society.

[Nonny]

Jan 28, 2015 16:36:51 GMT -5 heyjude said:

Jan 28, 2015 16:25:04 GMT -5 Nonny said:

Did this bill have any exceptions for the life of the mother, or exceptions for severely disabled fetuses? Because if abortion gets banned at 20 weeks and you can't find out about a life threatening chromosomal disorder until 22-24 weeks, you are still fucked.

I hate that men who don't know science and don't know any given individuals circumstances can shove their ideas into a woman's uterus. Fuck them all.

Keep in mind, women are behind this too. Those good GOP women staging a "revolt."

It's only a victory if we redefine victory.

Oh, I know women are behind it too. But it always feels like the men get more press for saying the asshole things about "legitimate" rape and women needing help in decision making because our tiny lady brains are just too dumb to know what an abortion actually is.

[heyjude]

Does the bill stil require a woman to carry to term and birth a baby that will die upon birth? If so, that these women support that concept? Rage. NO LOVE.

[NewOrleans]

Jan 28, 2015 16:48:17 GMT -5 heyjude said:

Does the bill stil require a woman to carry to term and birth a baby that will die upon birth? If so, that these women support that concept? Rage. NO LOVE.

Yes." It does.   Remember, "that's the woman's problem."