Connect with us

AZ Legislature Passes “Pregnancy Begins 2 Weeks Before Conception” Bill

Published

on

Arizona‘s Legislature yesterday afternoon passed three harsh anti-abortion bills, including one that defines pregnancy as being two weeks before conception. Known in some circles as the “egg drop” bill, lawmakers apparently believe they are more knowledgable than physicians at determining gestational age. The attempt to redefine pregnancy of course is to reduce the legal window of when a woman may have an abortion. Arizona Republican “pro-life” Governor Jan Brewer would not comment on her intent to sign or veto the bill.

UPDATE: ‘Pregnancy Begins 2 Weeks Before Conception’ Now The Law In Arizona

“State Rep. Kimberly Yee (R-Phoenix), the bill’s sponsor, was not immediately available for comment. Her assistant said that Yee, a former aide to former California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R), was voting on the House floor,” The Huffington Post reports:

State Rep. Matt Heinz (D-Tucson), a physician, said he did not want the state to set the gestational age since science could not provide a precise one. “I imagine it will be a legal dispute. How can a judge determine gestational age?” Heinz said. “If medical science can only determine gestational age to within 10-14 days, how can a superior court judge do it?”

The Republican-controlled House of Representatives passed a bill to prohibit abortions after the 18th week of pregnancy; a bill to protect doctors from being sued if they withhold health information about a pregnancy that could cause a woman to seek an abortion; and a bill to mandate that how school curriculums address the topic of unwanted pregnancies.

The 18th week bill includes a new definition for when pregnancy begins. All of the bills passed the Senate and now head to Gov. Jan Brewer (R) for her signature or veto. Passage of the late-term abortion bill would give Arizona the earliest definition of late-term abortion in the country; most states use 20 weeks as a definition.

A sentence in the bill defines gestational age as “calculated from the first day of the last menstrual period of the pregnant woman,” which would move the beginning of a pregnancy up two weeks prior to conception.

Elizabeth Nash, states issues manager for Guttmacher Institute, a reproductive health research organization in Washington, said the definition corresponds with how doctors typically determine gestational age. She said since the exact date of conception cannot be pinpointed, doctors use the day of the woman’s last menstrual period to gauge the duration of a pregnancy. The method does not provide an exact date.

“It will have some impact, from what we understand there are abortions provided at that point in Arizona,” Nash said. “It will reduce access.”

The Huffington Post also notes:

The other two bills passed by the House include the state’s “wrongful birth, wrongful life” bill that prohibits lawsuits against doctors who do not provide information about a fetus’ health if that information could lead to an abortion. In addition, parents cannot sue on the child’s behalf after birth.

The third bill requires that schools teach students that adoption and birth are the most acceptable outcomes for an unwanted pregnancy.

Discussion via MSNBC:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32545640

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

 

Image: Chastity Belt by DonkeyHotey

There's a reason 10,000 people subscribe to NCRM. You can get the news before it breaks just by subscribing, plus you can learn something new every day.
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

‘Smash-and-Grab’: Trump Torched for ‘Corrupt’ $230 Million Payout Push

Published

on

President Donald Trump is under fire after a New York Times bombshell revealed he wants $230 million from the Justice Department over two investigations targeting him during his campaign.

The Times explained that there is “no parallel in American history, as Mr. Trump, a presidential candidate, was pursued by federal law enforcement and eventually won the election, taking over the very government that must now review his claims.” The paper of record also called it “the starkest example yet of potential ethical conflicts created by installing the president’s former lawyers atop the Justice Department.”

Critics are blasting the president.

“It’s hard to think of an action more purely corrupt than a …. president ordering the executive branch to pay him hundreds of millions of dollars,” wrote David French, a New York Times opinion columnist. “I cannot wait to read the MAGA defenses of this (and there will be many). They’ll display Soviet levels of sycophancy.”

READ MORE: Not a ‘Gut-Wrenching’ Problem: Ron Johnson Shrugs Off Millions Losing Subsidies

Attorney Andrew Weinstein, a former Obama and Biden appointee, noted that “$230 million could feed every homeless veteran in America for more than 3 years.”

Jesse Lee, a former Obama and Biden official, remarked, “What a g– crook.”

Marlow Stern, who teaches at the Columbia Journalism School and is a former Rolling Stone senior editor, asked, “now he’s extorting… the u.s. justice department?”

Mother Jones reporter Dan Friedman quoted the Trump White House Press Secretary: “’I think it’s frankly ridiculous that anyone in this room would even suggest that President Trump is doing anything for his own benefit,’ Karoline Leavitt said in May. ‘He left a life of luxury and a life of running a very successful real estate empire for public service.'”

Political historian Brian Rosenwald commented, “Like come the f– on, this is the most blatant corruption in American history. He’s just stealing from us the taxpayers.”

Derek Martin, founder and president of Pathfinder Research, wrote: “Trump is demanding taxpayers write him a check for $230 million while Republicans tell us they can’t afford to help ordinary Americans pay for health insurance. Cartoonishly evil.”

Jeff Hauser, who writes the Revolving Door Project on Substack, observed: “The dude is desecrating the White House and extorting the Treasury during a shutdown [after] several million Americans protested him. It’s kind of now or never for an opposition party to be provocative in attacking corruption. Trump is too busy enriching himself to govern.”

Media Matters’ Matthew Gertz wrote: “The president of the United States is attempting a smash-and-grab on the U.S. Treasury, and the people with the ability to say no are his former personal lawyers, this is insane.”

READ MORE: ‘Sick’: Jeffries Torches Trump’s ‘Out of Control’ Press Secretary

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

News

‘Travesty’: Trump Reportedly Seeking ‘Bizarre’ $230 Million Payout From DOJ

Published

on

President Donald Trump reportedly appears to be demanding the U.S. Department of Justice pay him $230 million in compensation after multiple investigations during his presidential campaign.

“The situation has no parallel in American history, as Mr. Trump, a presidential candidate, was pursued by federal law enforcement and eventually won the election, taking over the very government that must now review his claims,” The New York Times, citing people familiar with the matter, reported.

Noting that President Trump has installed his former personal lawyers at the top of the DOJ, the Times called it “the starkest example yet of potential ethical conflicts.”

Trump, according to the Times, in 2023, submitted a claim that “seeks damages for a number of purported violations of his rights, including the F.B.I. and special counsel investigation into Russian election tampering and possible connections to the 2016 Trump campaign, according to people familiar with the matter.”

READ MORE: Not a ‘Gut-Wrenching’ Problem: Ron Johnson Shrugs Off Millions Losing Subsidies

Another complaint, filed the following year, “accuses the F.B.I. of violating Mr. Trump’s privacy by searching Mar-a-Lago, his club and residence in Florida, in 2022 for classified documents.”

Bennett L. Gershman, an ethics professor at Pace University, told the Times it was “a travesty.”

“The ethical conflict is just so basic and fundamental, you don’t need a law professor to explain it,” Gershmann said. “And then to have people in the Justice Department decide whether his claim should be successful or not, and these are the people who serve him deciding whether he wins or loses. It’s bizarre and almost too outlandish to believe.”

READ MORE: ‘Sick’: Jeffries Torches Trump’s ‘Out of Control’ Press Secretary

 

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

News

How Megachurches Use the Bible to Defend and Promote Wealth Inequality: Report

Published

on

Does religion drive Americans to support or oppose economic inequality? That’s a question explored by a Ph.D. candidate at The Ohio State University who recently examined ten years of a megachurch’s sermons in a published paper: “‘I Thank God We’re Rich’: Justifying Economic Inequality in an Evangelical Congregation.”

“To investigate how evangelical leaders confront the conflict between inequality and egalitarian passages of the Bible, I conducted a sermon analysis study of New River, a Midwestern suburban megachurch,” wrote Dawson P. R. Vosburg.

“New River’s approach to inequality was one of clear justification of the status quo, centered on the justification of wealth accumulation and the minimization of inequality’s moral importance,” Vosburg added.

The church’s pastors, he found, “justified economic inequality in several ways: proclaiming that God did not condemn ownership of vast wealth; minimizing domestic inequality in comparison to global inequality; selectively spiritualizing economic passages of the Bible; and saying that God owns everything and thus the status quo distribution is justified.”

READ MORE: Not a ‘Gut-Wrenching’ Problem: Ron Johnson Shrugs Off Millions Losing Subsidies

Hemant Mehta of The Friendly Atheist examined the paper. He writes that Vosburg found sermons “that discussed anything financial—by searching for terms like ‘rich,’ ‘tithe,’ ‘debt,’ ‘billionaire,’ etc.—and analyzed the results to see how this typical white evangelical megachurch minimized the wealth gap.” He also noted that Vosburg anonymized the name of the church.

Mehta looked at the four ways New River downplayed wealth inequality:

“They condemned ‘rich shaming’ anyone”
The pastor, Mehta found, “delivered an anecdote about a rich couple that left another church and came to his because they felt personally attacked when their previous pastor condemned wealth from the pulpit. (At their new home, of course, their tithes would go into New River’s coffers.)”

“They downplayed U.S. inequality by focusing on global inequality”
Essentially, pastors told congregants that compared to the world’s poor, they were doing quite well.

“They re-interpreted Bible verses about poverty—even the direct ones”
When it comes to preaching about the poor, Mehta wrote, the pastor was “not talking about financially poor people, he’s talking about spiritually impoverished people.”

READ MORE: ‘Sick’: Jeffries Torches Trump’s ‘Out of Control’ Press Secretary

Vosburg told Mehta that pastors stressed tithing “over 150 times across 16 separate sermons.”

“They said God owns everything, anyway”
Ultimately, Mehta explained, the pastor’s point was to not be mad “at people with private jets and yachts and multiple summer homes.”

“The takeaway from all this,” Mehta wrote, “is that conservative policies that benefit the ultra-wealthy at the expense of everyone else in society are going to be supported by congregations like this one that are being brainwashed into thinking God loves the rich and the poor deserve their lot in life.”

Mehta also blasted the New River pastor.

“Pastors like this one hollow out Christ’s teachings until all that’s left is a gilded throne for the wealthy. In their hands, Scripture is a weapon to shame the poor, a shield to protect billionaires, and a drug to keep their congregations quiet while the cancer of inequality grows around them.”

READ MORE: ‘Existential Threat’: U.S. on Path to Authoritarianism Warn Ex-Intelligence Officials

 

Image by Mor via Flickr and a Creative Commons License

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.