Friday, July 29, 2011

Judge orders circumcision ban off SF ballot

Now why is it that men--particularly misogynistic men who feel as if the empowerment of women is causing undue discrimination for them, will always come up with a way to inappropriately equate their cause with that of human/civil rights? To say that male circumcision reduces the man's pleasure in the same way female circumcision is ridiculous. How ANY MAN can equate the dangers of female circumcision with the dangers of male circumcision is insane.


http://news.yahoo.com/judge-orders-circumcision-ban-off-sf-ballot-175443534.html

SAN FRANCISCO
(AP) — A judge on Thursday struck a measure from the city's November ballot that called for a ban on most circumcisions of male children, saying the proposed law violates the U.S. Constitution's guarantee of religious freedom and a California law that makes regulating medical procedures a function of the state, not cities.

The ruling by Superior Court Judge Loretta Giorgi confirmed a tentative decision she issued a day earlier and came after she heard arguments from proponents of the ban, which would have made San Francisco the first U.S. city to hold a public vote on whether to outlaw the circumcision of minors.

Michael Kinane, an attorney for the proponents, told Giorgi that circumcision was not usually performed as a medical procedure. He also said the ballot measure included an exception in cases where circumcision was needed for health reasons.

"If you bring in your son and say my custom, my religion requires circumcision of this little boy, the state hasn't said anything on the issue, so there is not a matter of pre-emption," Kinane argued.

Giorgi, while acknowledging that "there is legitimate debate on the benefits and harms of circumcision," was not swayed and ordered San Francisco's elections director to remove the measure from the ballot.

"I don't think there is any debate ... that this mater relates to issues of statewide concern," the judge said.

The ban's sponsor, anti-circumcision activist Lloyd Schofield, said afterward that he was considering an appeal.

"We will not stop until all men are protected from this damaging and harmful surgery," Schofield said.

The citizens' initiative, which qualified for the ballot in May, would have made the practice a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of up to $1,000 or up to one year in jail. The measure did not offer exemptions for religious rituals such as the Jewish bris or Muslim khitan.

The city attorney's office had joined several Jewish organizations and Muslim parents in challenging the ban in court.

"It is up to parents to make the choice whether or not to have their baby boys circumcised," said Abby Michelson Porth, associate director of the Jewish Community Relations Council. "We did not want to have Mr. Schofield legislating our religious traditions."

Backers had argued the ban was necessary to prevent circumcisions from being forced on children. Kinane pointed out Thursday that the federal government bans female circumcision.

"The U.S. government has said when you are looking at little girls we don't care if it's a matter of custom or ritual, you can't circumcise them unless there's a matter of medical necessity," he said.

Critics contended the initiative posed a threat to families' privacy and to constitutionally protected religious freedoms. They cited comic books and trading cards distributed by the measure's proponents that carried images of a blonde, blue-eyed superhero and four evil Jewish characters.

Outside the courthouse, anti-circumcision activists carried signs with slogans like "I did not consent to male genital mutilation" and a leaflet claiming that circumcision diminishes men's sexual pleasure.

San Francisco parent Jenny Benjamin, a plaintiff in the lawsuit to overturn the ban, said seeing people compare circumcision to child abuse made "my stomach churn."

"I don't know about you, but some of the decisions my parents made for me I wasn't thrilled about, but I didn't take it to voters," Benjamin said. "It seems a little extreme. It seems a lot extreme."

Texas Planned Parenthood Clinic Attacked With Molotov Cocktail

So let me see if I understand....now, even if a clinic does NOT provide abortions, it will still be attacked by right-wing christian terrorists? This does not sound at all like people who care about the health and well being of the "unborn". Rather, it screams of individuals who want nothing more than to curb the rights of women to make decisions for themselves regarding their health--which is a very personal matter.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/28/texas-planned-parenthood-_n_912710.html
Planned Parenthood

A McKinney, Texas, Planned Parenthood clinic that does not provide abortions was attacked with a Molotov cocktail late Tuesday night, causing a small fire at the entrance of the building. The device, consisting of diesel fuel in a glass bottle with a lit rag fuse, did not cause any injuries, but a Planned Parenthood official said it did cause "serious damage" to the facility.

"It didn't penetrate the health center office and none of the staff or patients were there, which is great," Holly Morgan, director of media relations and communications for Planned Parenthood in Dallas, told Star Local News. "It scorched the outside of the door and I believe there was a little scorching to the retail locations on either side of it."

Tait Sye, spokesperson for the Planned Parenthood Federation of America told HuffPost that, while this incident marks the first attack on the McKinney clinic, Planned Parenthood locations around the country have experienced similar attacks over the years because of the organization's association with abortion. A 37-year-old man threw a Molotov cocktail at a clinic in Madera, Cali., in September 2010 that shut the clinic down for two days, and another clinic in Raleigh, N.C., was vandalized earlier this month with the spray-painted message, "you shall not murder."

According to the most recent statistics from the National Abortion Federation, there were a total of 96 incidences of violence -- including murder, death threats, vandalism, arson and bombing -- against U.S. and Canadian abortion clinics in 2010.

Despite the attack on the McKinney clinic, the police cleaned up the damage quickly enough that the Planned Parenthood staff were able to continue providing pap smears, STI screenings and contraceptives to patients the next morning.

"We’re open for business today in McKinney," Planned Parenthood of North Texas tweeted on Wednesday, "b/c our patients depend on us & our resolve to serve the community is strong as ever."

Tuesday, July 19, 2011

Rape is rape

In a recent speech at the University of New Hampshire, Vice President Joe Biden recounted the story of a college freshman he called Jenny.

Jenny was raped after a party on campus. She tried to pursue a case against her rapist only to be asked if she had been drinking, what she was wearing, and whether she was dancing. The university never took action against her assailant.

As Biden said, "Rape is rape is rape."

Yet each year the FBI omits hundreds of thousands of rapes from its Uniform Crime Report (UCR) because it’s using an 80-year-old definition of rape.

The FBI’s outdated definition of rape is limited to "the carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will."

Sign the petition to tell the FBI to update their definition to include all forms of rape.

The FBI’s flawed definition of rape excludes any form of sexual assault that falls outside of the narrowest understanding of heterosexual sex, including the rape of men and boys as well as transgender people.

The emphasis on "forcible" rape also means that the rape or assault of women with physical or mental disabilities and those who were unconscious or under the influence of drugs and alcohol – like Jenny -- are often excluded.

The FBI’s 2007 Uniform Crime Report listed 91,874 "forcible rapes," but some estimates suggest the actual number may be 24 times higher.

The FBI's underreporting of rapes translates to less federal funding for police departments nationwide to test rape kits -- and fewer investigators bringing rapists to justice.

Sign here to tell the FBI to update its definition of rape to address and end sexual assault:

http://www.change.org/petitions/tell-the-fbi-rape-is-rape

Thanks for taking action,

- Shelby and the Change.org team

Breaking: Big step forward for no-cost birth control

Women are so close to no longer having to spend money on copays at the pharmacy counter.

But we haven't crossed the finish line yet. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) soon will decide whether to turn this recommendation into law and require insurance plans to cover a full range of Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved contraceptives as part of health-care reform.

Sign our petition to HHS today in support of no-cost birth control.

For women who can't afford rent or groceries, paying for birth control is just out of the question. Covering birth control at no cost means that women won't have to choose between paying bills and skipping a month or two of their contraception.

The good news is that today's recommendation shows that science and medical experts are on our side. After months of research and debate, experts concluded that, yes, birth control is prevention.

Let's show HHS that Americans agree. Sign our petition right now.

Improving women's access to birth control is positive in so many ways. A woman who can plan when to have a family is able to participate in society more fully. Allowing women to plan and space their pregnancies contributes to healthy childbearing. And ultimately, fewer unintended pregnancies can reduce the need for abortion.

Unfortunately, some anti-choice groups don't share our views. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops even said that birth control is not health care, but a "lifestyle choice."1

Our opponents are just flat-out wrong. Birth control is nearly universal: 98 percent of women use birth control at some point in their lives.

Medical experts agree that women need birth control for prevention, and that it should be available to every woman, regardless of how much money she earns.

Add your support to this monumental step forward for women. Sign our petition today.

Thanks for supporting women's access to birth control.

My best,

Nancy Keenan

Nancy Keenan
President, NARAL Pro-Choice America


1 - "Contraception Could Be Free Under Health Law," Associated Press, October 31, 2010

Issa's witch hunt flops - demand accountability

House Government Reform and Oversight Committee Chairman Darrel Issa has led one partisan witch hunt after another since his party became the majority and he became committee chair. But his latest grasping-at-straws attempt to shame Democrats has blown up in his face.

Rep. Issa accused Democratic appointees on the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission (FCIC) -- the independent commission established in 2009 to investigate the causes of the financial crisis -- of financial mismanagement, disclosing confidential information, conflicts of interest and unethically pursuing a partisan agenda. But the documents produced in this investigation not only failed to substantiate these claims, they actually demonstrated improprieties by some of the Republicans on the Commission.

Now, Chairman Issa wants to brush it all under the rug and look the other way. We can't let him!

Join PFAW's petition to the Government Reform and Oversight Committee now demanding that they investigate improprieties by Republican members of the FCIC.


Outrageously, upon canceling a committee hearing on the FCIC accusations, an Issa staffer was quoted as saying, "they had found some documents at the last minute that didn't fit the narrative." A report by committee Democrats, based on 400,000 internal FCIC emails, memos and other documents, shows that those documents didn't just "not fit" Issa's narrative, they outright refuted them!

Issa's allegations of financial mismanagement, inappropriate disclosure and partisan conflicts of interest on the part of Democratic commissioners all turned out to be bogus -- frivolous charges not based on evidence of any impropriety. HOWEVER, the same could not be said of Republican members of the Commission.

There is evidence that Republican FCIC Commissioners Peter Wallison and Bill Thomas violated ethics guidelines and shared confidential information about the commission's work with political insiders and Republican consultants. And contrary to the FCIC's mission, Republican Commissioner Wallison repeatedly urged his GOP colleagues on the FCIC to use their positions on the Commission to help Republicans in their efforts to repeal the Dodd-Frank financial reform bill.

Don't let Chairman Darrel Issa get away with this blatant hypocrisy. His witch hunt failed, but now he, and his committee, MUST investigate evidence of improprieties and conflicts of interest by Republicans on the FCIC. Sign here now if you agree!

Thanks for standing up for justice and accountability -- the American Way.

-- Ben Betz, Online Strategy Manager

P.S. It's hardly a surprise that partisan and corporate conflicts of interest have been found among Republican FCIC members -- these are the same people who insisted on issuing a minority report of the Commission's findings that whitewashed the findings of phrases like "Wall Street" and "deregulation" in an attempt to rewrite the history of the financial meltdown. But Chairman Issa decided to open this can of worms with his own ideologically driven attacks on the Commission's Democratic members. Now, it's his responsibility to do the right thing and hold the real culprits accountable. Sign our petition now.

Tuesday, July 12, 2011

Respect, Protect, Reject 2012

Respect, Protect, Reject 2012
take action

Join us in calling for Congress to RESPECT women, PROTECT Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, and REJECT any budget plans that threaten the economic security of women.

Sign Our Petition! http://respectprotectreject2012.org

Very soon, members of Congress will reach an agreement on how to reduce the federal deficit. As much as $4 trillion could be cut from the federal budget over the next decade. These cuts will touch upon virtually every program that serves and employs women. Currently, some negotiators are refusing to accept new taxes to raise revenues as part of the package, which could result in deep benefit cuts to Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and an array of other critical safety net programs. The economic well-being of women, communities or color, persons with disabilities, low-income earners and their families are at stake.

Negotiators have a deadline to create an agreement and then to raise the debt ceiling by Aug. 2. We have a deadline, too; we have to step up the pressure on Congress now. We also have to make sure that Congress does not sell us out in a bad deal. We are not willing to allow women to be robbed to pay for the vacation homes and multi-million dollar bonuses for millionaires and billionaires.

The National Council of Women's Organizations (NCWO) and its allies are making sure that women are respected in these negotiations. We must assure that programs which disproportionately serve and employ women are protected. Any effort to undercut these programs must be rejected.

Here's what you can do NOW:

Sign our petition by clicking on this link http://respectprotectreject2012.org

  1. Send the petition via e-mail to your friends, colleagues and contacts - ask them to sign on.
  2. Tweet and retweet the RPR2012 tweet of the day; be sure to use the #RPR2012 hashtag.
  3. Re-post to your Facebook and tell all your friends to sign the petition.
  4. Take it a step further: write a letter, call, or meet with your elected representatives to tell them to reject cuts that threaten women's economic security.
  5. Visit the RPR2012 Campaign website for talking points, fact sheets, and more important information.
  6. Call Your Senators (1-866-251-4044): Thursday, July 14 and Friday, July 15 are National Call-In Days to encourage senators not to sign onto a bad deal.
  7. Questions? Contact NOW Field Organizer Anita Lederer at fieldorg@now.org or call 202-628-8669 x134.
take action and then donate

Friday, July 8, 2011

Tell the President to Reconsider Bad Deal Tell President Obama... take action After taking action, please support our work! Take Action - Urge P

If you are having trouble viewing this email, please read it online.

NOW Action Alert

Tell the President to Reconsider Bad Deal

Tell President Obama...
take action

After taking action,
please support our work!

Take Action - Urge President to Reconsider Bad Deal
Congressional Republicans are already on record supporting the destruction of Medicare and Medicaid as well as accelerated cuts to Social Security benefits. We must stop President Obama from conceding to their unreasonable demands!

Today it was reported that President Obama will agree to deep cuts in Social Security and Medicare in order to get agreement from Republicans to increase taxes. NOW strongly objects to these harmful concessions and urges the president to reconsider. The changes being discussed involve a switch to a Cost-of-Living (COLA) adjustment (for a slower inflation rate), which would result in substantial benefit cuts for the oldest retirees -- mostly women -- and possibly a hike of the full retirement age to 69 -- another serious benefit cut. Without question, many millions of elderly women will fall below the poverty line as a result.

Call and Email White House Today - The comment line for the White House is 202-456-1111 - please call today and send an email using our formatted message below or write one of your own.

Additionally, reductions in funding for the federal Medicare program will mean that senior women -- who have more health care needs than senior men and substantially less income -- will have to pay more. NOW says that these changes represent a serious threat to the most vulnerable among us and urges activists to call and email President Obama objecting to these harmful concessions. Call and email NOW!

Background

New CPI Means Cumulative Benefit Reductions - The COLA change would be based on a new measure of inflation called the "chained" Consumer Price Index (CPI), which seems slight at 0.3 percent, but it gets deeper every succeeding year, and that's where the pain comes in. According to an analysis by the National Women's Law Center, this will mean that a woman who gets a benefit of $1,100 per month (the current median) at age 65 will lose $672 a year, and by age 90 will have $1,000 less per year -- equal to 20 weeks worth of food!

Don't Make Poor Seniors Pay for Republican Leaders' Demands - As the president and his aides have repeatedly acknowledged, Social Security benefit cuts will not reduce the federal budget deficit. The balance (currently $2.7 trillion) in the Social Security Trust Fund by law cannot be spent on other government programs. But seniors, disproportionately women, people of color and people with disabilities, will suffer if the chained CPI takes effect, reducing the Social Security COLA. And these individuals are already stressed. Almost one in four women 65 and older, along with 40 percent of older African American and Hispanic women, have incomes below 150 percent of the poverty level, according to the Women's Institute for a Secure Retirement.

Voter Support Base Threatened - Many congressional Democrats have urged that Social Security benefit cuts should not be part of any budget deal, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has said that Social Security will "not be on the table." President Obama's apparent willingness to trade away the Democrats' most valued promise to their base -- despite consistent polling data showing large majorities of voters from every walk of life, across age, gender, race, ethnicity and even party affiliation lines, oppose Social Security benefit cuts -- is likely to be political suicide.

Democrats lost a substantial chunk of older voters in 2010 when the Republicans carried out a deceptive ad campaign in senior communities saying that the president had slashed Medicare funding; actually the Affordable Care Act identified $575 million in waste, fraud and abuse savings over 10 years. But if Democrats actually vote to cut Social Security and Medicare as part of a budget deal, the political ads attacking them will be devastating.

New CPI Will Increase Your Tax Liability - In sum, these are just plain bad concessions that will hurt seniors -- the poorest ones, in particular. In addition, if the chained CPI is adopted and applied widely, the result would mean an increase in tax liability for middle- and low-income taxpayers, according to the Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT). Within 10 years, the JCT says, the increased tax liability for persons with annual incomes of $10,000 to $20,000 would be 14.5 percent, while for those with incomes above $1 million, the increased liability would only be 0.1 percent!

President Obama must hear from us -- take action NOW!

take action and then donate

Dominique Strauss-Kahn: So Much for Us to Learn

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eve-ensler/dominique-strauss-kahn-so_b_891643.html
The Strauss-Kahn case is not about winning or losing, but opening a dialogue on rape, violence and gender.


The events unfolding in the case of Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the former head of the IMF accused of sexually assaulting a hotel chambermaid, are both surprising and surprisingly not surprising. The New York Times first reported claims that there were serious problems with the prosecution relating to the credibility of Strauss-Kahn's accuser, who is originally from Guinea.

On Friday allies of the one-time French presidential hopeful welcomed this speculation, expressing hope for his swift return to the political scene. But the collapse of this case is not the worst thing that could happen: that would be for us all to retreat into our corners, to retrench our polarized positions. What is important is what we learn from this global episode, and what dialogue it leads us to.

This is a stream of the questions running in my head all morning.

How do you fight a rape case if you have lied in your past? How do you fight a rape case if you have been sexually active? How do you fight a rape case as a woman who wants a future in journalism, politics, banking, international affairs? How do you fight a rape case and ever hope to be taken seriously again or be perceived as anything other than a raped victim?

How do you fight a rape case as a woman in places like Congo where there are no real courts and no one is held accountable? How do you fight a rape case as an illegal immigrant with no rights in that country?

How do you fight a rape case if you still believe rape is your fault, if you don't even know what rape is, if you are afraid of upsetting your boyfriend/husband, or afraid of getting him in trouble because he will be more violent to you?

How do we get men to stop raping lesbians or independent or highly sexual women as a "corrective act" rather than addressing the forces and powers they are truly angry at? How do we get men to understand the impact of rape: how the external bruises are internalized and remain for ever?

How do you speak out against rape and not be called a man hater, a gold digger, a slut? How do you convince women to speak out when their character is called into public question?

How do you speak out against incest or childhood sexual abuse if your mother is sleeping with the man who is abusing you, and you know she loves that man or will not believe you?

How do you speak out against the adored, handsome, powerful, charming company president/caring psychotherapist/honored history professor/visionary film director when you risk being despised by those around him? How do you speak out against the charismatic leader of the party or country when to do so jeopardizes the standing of the party, the country itself, and could let the opposition take power?

How do you press charges for sexual harassment and not worry about losing your job, or being seen as weak or unable to protect yourself or hang with the guys and "take a joke".

When do we stop separating how we treat women from our vision of a free, equal, just world -- ie how do you call yourself a socialist, an intellectual, a leader, a freedom fighter, an anti-apartheid, anti-racism, pro-earth champion, and not make honoring women a central part of that equation?

How do we create a real dialogue between men and woman about violence: what it does, how it hurts? How do we stop saying that women who are opposed to violence hate sex? When do we stop seeing them as the same thing?

The DSK scandal has rocked the world: it has brought into question issues of sex, power, race, class and gender. It is not simply a matter of winning or losing this particular case. The stakes are much higher. This case is a defining moment, a signifier of the direction we move in -- towards transformation or more abuse and loss.

This post originally appeared in The Guardian on Friday, July 1st and has been republished in many publications around the world.

Follow Eve Ensler on Twitter: www.twitter.com/vdayorg


Tuesday, July 5, 2011

Gay Marriage Opponents Target New York Senators Who Flipped

This reaction is not unexpected after NYS historic vote--NOM wants to campaign to oust the senators --Democrat and Republican--from the NYS senate because they voted for equal marriage. This is the same group that succeeded in getting a ballot measure on the California ballot a few years ago which overturned the right for same sex couples to marry, and they want to do the same thing in NYS.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/29/gay-marriage-foes_n_887271.html

Ohio Heartbeat Bill Seeking To Impose Abortion Restrictions Advances

I'm sure we've heard by now about Ohio's atrocious anti-abortion bill, which seeks to outlaw abortion after 6 weeks--another direct assault against Roe v Wade that lawmakers are ADMITTING they are writing for the courts (hoping that the conservative Supreme court will overturn Roe V Wade). This is a most urgent situation for all of NOW, obviously

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/29/ohio-heartbeat-bill-seeki_n_887062.html

Fathers and Familiar Strangers? What?

Why does Dr. Drexler refer to our current culture as post-feminist? Wouldn't some better questions be "why are we still looking for approval from male figures" or "why do we still identify ourselves by how men see us?" Wouldn't the answers to those questions do us more good?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/peggy-drexler/fathers-and-familiar-stra_b_877289.html

The Republican Threat to Voting

The Republican Threat to Voting

Less than a year before the 2012 presidential voting begins, Republican legislatures and governors across the country are rewriting voting laws to make it much harder for the young, the poor and African-Americans — groups that typically vote Democratic — to cast a ballot.

Spreading fear of a nonexistent flood of voter fraud, they are demanding that citizens be required to show a government-issued identification before they are allowed to vote. Republicans have been pushing these changes for years, but now more than two-thirds of the states have adopted or are considering such laws. The Advancement Project, an advocacy group of civil rights lawyers, correctly describes the push as “the largest legislative effort to scale back voting rights in a century.”

Anyone who has stood on the long lines at a motor vehicle office knows that it isn’t easy to get such documents. For working people, it could mean giving up a day’s wages.

A survey by the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law found that 11 percent of citizens, 21 million people, do not have a current photo ID. That fraction increases to 15 percent of low-income voting-age citizens, 18 percent of young eligible voters and 25 percent of black eligible voters. Those demographic groups tend to vote Democratic, and Republicans are imposing requirements that they know many will be unable to meet.

Kansas’ new law was drafted by its secretary of state, Kris Kobach, who also wrote Arizona’s anti-immigrant law. Voters will be required to show a photo ID at the polls. Before they can register, Kansans will have to produce a proof of citizenship, such as a birth certificate.

Tough luck if you don’t happen to have one in your pocket when you’re at the county fair and you pass the voter registration booth. Or when the League of Women Voters brings its High School Registration Project to your school cafeteria. Or when you show up at your dorm at the University of Kansas without your birth certificate. Sorry, you won’t be voting in Lawrence, and probably not at all.

That’s fine with Gov. Sam Brownback, who said he signed the bill because it’s necessary to “ensure the sanctity of the vote.” Actually, Kansas has had only one prosecution for voter fraud in the last six years. But because of that vast threat to Kansas democracy, an estimated 620,000 Kansas residents who lack a government ID now stand to lose their right to vote.

Eight states already had photo ID laws. Now more than 30 other states are joining the bandwagon of disenfranchisement, as Republicans outdo each other to propose bills with new voting barriers. The Wisconsin bill refuses to recognize college photo ID cards, even if they are issued by a state university, thus cutting off many students at the University of Wisconsin and other campuses. The Texas bill, so vital that Gov. Rick Perry declared it emergency legislation, would also reject student IDs, but would allow anyone with a handgun license to vote.

A Florida bill would curtail early voting periods, which have proved popular and brought in new voters, and would limit address changes at the polls. “I’m going to call this bill for what it is, good-old-fashioned voter suppression,” Ben Wilcox of the League of Women Voters told The Florida Times-Union.

Many of these bills were inspired by the American Legislative Exchange Council, a business-backed conservative group, which has circulated voter ID proposals in scores of state legislatures. The Supreme Court, unfortunately, has already upheld Indiana’s voter ID requirement, in a 2008 decision that helped unleash the stampede of new bills. Most of the bills have yet to pass, and many may not meet the various balancing tests required by the Supreme Court. There is still time for voters who care about democracy in their states to speak out against lawmakers who do not.

Comparing abortion to spare tires and heroin

You know what makes the hairs on the back of my neck stand on end?

Hearing a woman’s right to choose compared to a spare tire… or using heroin.

It takes a certain kind of person to think so little of women to make statements like that. And when these people are elected officials, it’s just all the more insulting.

You really have to see it for yourself. Check out our 90-second video of the attacks waged against the right to choose and then pass it on to your friends and family.

War on Women Video