Robert Lewis Dear

Sad enough, that isn’t the part that shocks me. What shocks me is that there are pro-lifers out there that want to make this man out to be a hero. Yes, I said it: there are people out there that want to make Robert Dear out to be some type of Superman for their ideologies and movements. Forget the fact that he harmed and murdered innocent people. In contrast, there are those that see him as doing some sort of “public good”.

Don’t believe me? Well, just take a gander at some of these tweets:

#PlannedParenthood is upset they cannot sell police officer's body parts. #BabyLivesMatter

— Cynical Tim (@CynicalTim) November 28, 2015

#PlannedParenthood will have murdered 325,000+ babies this year. That's the real news.

— Zachary Craft (@zwcraft) November 28, 2015

Active Shooter Colorado Planned Parenthood. I would think this brave HERO is saving innocent Baby lives!

— David JGoodwin (@DJGoodwin1) November 27, 2015

I'm pulling a play out of Obama's playbook and calling the #PlannedParenthood shooting in Colorado Springs 'Workplace Violence'.

— The Patriot (@ThePatriot143) November 28, 2015

planned parenthood kills a million babies and no one bats an eye. but 1 brave hero tries to put a stop to that, everyone loses their minds

— riskys top (@rouge_th3_bat) November 27, 2015

Folks upset that murderers & murder enablers died at #PlannedParenthood but babies die at #PlannedParenthood everyday, why shouldn't adults?

— Enviro Mint (@Enviro_Mint) November 28, 2015

Planned Parenthood Attacks Seen As Justified Homicide

There should be an immediate problem with seeing this act of terror as some sort of justified homicide. People can disagree with the abortion issue all they want to. People can hold onto their beliefs as much as possible. What is NOT right is the fact that some of us find it commendable to take someone’s life because our beliefs don’t match. This goes along the line of the “God, judge, and jury” beliefs that many of these same people would want to include in their debates if someone said something they didn’t care for.

What I am saying is this: how can you be an American and actually validate such heinous acts as some courageous situation?

The Planned Parenthood Attack Made No Sense

And did these cheerleaders of the incorrigible actually think to see what was going on in that said Planned Parenthood? Last time I checked, Planned Parenthood isn’t some haven for abortions. We should all know that this organization, with all of its dreadful history, deals with reproductive healthcare. So, plenty of people go to Planned Parenthood for reasons besides abortions. I mean, it should be obvious if people would do research.

But that’s just it: plenty of people don’t do research because they are sheep to those with agendas. From talking heads to politicians, many people are fed schemas that fit into some way of thinking that thrives off of half-truths, lies, and incomplete facts. Still, these people will carry out on their way believing in things that may not be real. A couple of clicks on the World Wide Web would actually do some of these people some good. For others, however, it is the reason why they believe what they believe. Too many people lack the ability to discern between exactitude and excrement.

Planned Parenthood Ad Finite

Planned Parenthood is not the devil, Robert Dear is no hero, and these people that believe otherwise are idiots. But idiocy is cheered upon in America. Insert any person that says anything dumb and gets paid for it just to see the truth of what I just said. When people can lie and make money off it, then you know there is a problem. Add mental health issues, the need to take action, and this is what you get: the insipid cheering on the actions of a mentally deficient terrorist.

God help America.

The post Planned Parenthood versus Idiot Pro-Lifers appeared first on Madness & Reality.

So I’m hearing that upon release, Casey Anthony will be whisked away to a secret location and a new identity. Oh the lengths “certain people” will go to protect a baby killing white woman – yeah, sucks to be you O.J. Simpson. Speaking of baby killers, let’s meet a little known “baby killer” who just so happen to be Black. Her name is Rennie Gibbs, and she lives in Mississippi. And of course you know how it is when it comes to justice and Black folks in the state of Mississippi, right? If you don’t know you better ask somebody.

` is accused of murder, but the crime she is alleged to have committed does not sound like an ordinary killing. Yet she faces life in prison in Mississippi over the death of her unborn child.

Gibbs became pregnant aged 15, but lost the baby in December 2006 in a stillbirth when she was 36 weeks into the pregnancy. When prosecutors discovered that she had a cocaine habit – though there is no evidence that drug abuse had anything to do with the baby’s death – they charged her with the “depraved-heart murder” of her child, which carries a mandatory life sentence.

Gibbs is the first woman in Mississippi to be charged with murder on the loss of her unborn baby. But her case is by no means isolated. Across the US more and more prosecutions are being brought that seek to turn pregnant women into criminals.

“Women are being stripped of their constitutional personhood and subjected to truly cruel laws,” said Lynn Paltrow of the campaign National Advocates for Pregnant Women (NAPW). “It’s turning pregnant women into a different class of person and removing them of their rights.”

First off, this case needs, and should be given more attention. Sure she didn’t fail to report a missing child for thirty-one days to authorities. This is a woman facing life in prison for the murder of her unborn child, when she was 15-years-old. I don’t know about you, but there are several egregious issues with that scenario. First one being: she was a teenager with a drug problem at the time. But I guess that’s no big deal since there’s an epidemic of Black teens pregnant and hooked on drugs as some Conservatives would have you believe.

Please believe that without the necessary media attention, this young Black woman is doomed. Without the media spotlight, with her being Black, and this being a case that sets much precedence — not to mention the political implications given the GOP’s war on women of late — this case is much bigger than the Casey Anthony murder trial. But like I said before, she’s Black so who cares? She just did what every Black woman did in the 80s. That is, give birth to crack babies who have now all grown up to be the scourge of our society, right?

Rennie Gibbs

I know what you’re thinking, “Nah, this isn’t about the rights of women RiPPa. This is about protecting and seeking justice for unborn children. After all, they have rights too, right?” Sure they have rights; I mean I’m all about fetuses being protected from being kicked in the stomach, or risk death at the hands of a third-party. But to criminalize a woman for drug use while pregnant when there’s no evidence to support it as being the cause of death of her unborn child? Hello! That’s bullshit! What, are we going to do the same for women who drink and smoke cigarettes while pregnant? Aren’t those “legal abuses” found to be more harmful to unborn children? I mean, that’s what the experts say, right?

Recently many of us in the Black community were outraged by the tactics of anti-abortion groups as they targeted the Black community with their billboards. We voiced our displeasure, and won. We should be equally disgusted and vocal about the indictment of Ms. Gibbs. We should let our voices be heard, and heard loudly. We all raised our voices and expressed our disgust when it came to the Scott Sisters and the state of Mississippi, and we were victorious. Today, we must do the same for Rennie Gibbs. We marched on Jena fighting for justice for six Black teenage boys. It would be a damn shame if we do not seek justice for one Black woman. Wouldn’t be surprising; but disappointing.

Thankfully others are already on it:

[…] Women’s rights campaigners see the creeping criminalization of pregnant women as a new front in the culture wars over abortion, where conservative prosecutors are chipping away at hard-won freedoms by stretching protection laws to include fetuses, in some cases from the day of conception. In Gibbs’ case defence lawyers have argued before Mississippi’s highest court that her prosecution makes no sense. Under Mississippi law it is a crime for any person except the mother to try to cause an abortion.

“If it’s not a crime for a mother to intentionally end her pregnancy, how can it be a crime for her to do it unintentionally, whether by taking drugs or smoking or whatever it is,” Robert McDuff, a civil rights lawyer asked the state supreme court.

McDuff told the Guardian that he hoped the Gibbs prosecution was an isolated example. “I hope it’s not a trend that’s going to catch on. To charge a woman with murder because of something she did during pregnancy is really unprecedented and quite extreme.”

He pointed out that anti-abortion groups were trying to amend the Mississippi constitution by setting up a state referendum, or ballot initiative, that would widen the definition of a person under the state’s bill of rights to include a foetus from the day of conception.

Some 70 organisations across America have come together to file testimonies, known as amicus briefs, in support of Gibbs that protest against her treatment on several levels. One says that to treat “as a murderer a girl who has experienced a stillbirth serves only to increase her suffering”.

Another, from a group of psychologists, laments the misunderstanding of addiction that lies behind the indictment. Gibbs did not take cocaine because she had a “depraved heart” or to “harm the foetus but to satisfy an acute psychological and physical need for that particular substance”, says the brief.

Perhaps the most persuasive argument put forward in the amicus briefs is that if such prosecutions were designed to protect the unborn child, then they would be utterly counter-productive: “Prosecuting women and girls for continuing [a pregnancy] to term despite a drug addiction encourages them to terminate wanted pregnancies to avoid criminal penalties. The state could not have intended this result when it adopted the homicide statute.”

Some of you are still angry about Casey Anthony getting away with murder as you se it. Well, you should be just as angry or even more, if this young Black woman goes to prison for the rest of her life, for the crime of being a troubled teen. Surely in good conscience you can’t say that she deserves to be in prison.

[FULL STORY HERE]

[Checkout Radley Balko’s piece in WaPo here.]

The post Mississippi: Rennie Gibbs Faces Life in Prison for Stillborn Birth appeared first on Madness & Reality.

Marlise Munoz and her husband are just the latest victims caught in the crossfire of abortion politics. Mandating that pregnant women stay on life support regardless of their wishes is a neat and easy way to establish the claim that the state has an interest in fetal life, even at the earliest stages, that overrides a pregnant woman’s basic human rights. After all, brain death during pregnancy is incredibly rare, making these laws more symbolic in nature than pragmatic. If your goal is to legally enshrine the notion that pregnant women are incubators first and humans second, keeping their bodies alive to grow babies long after their minds are gone is a perfect way to do it.   Of course, rare doesn’t mean impossible, as Marlise Munoz’s family is discovering. “All we want is to let her rest, to let her go to sleep,” Munoz’s father, Ernest Machado, told the Dallas Morning News. “What they’re doing serves no purpose.” The family reasonably fears that the loss of oxygen that was enough to destroy Marlise Munoz’s brain probably did serious damage to her fetus.   To make it worse, by going public with their story, Munoz’s family is being treated to a heavy dose of vicious anti-choice rhetoric. Erick Munoz has been the subject of ugly speculation online, with anti-choice commenters eagerly suggesting that he simply wants to “get rid” of his wife. The reality, however, is that by holding Marlise Munoz in this state, her family is not being allowed to lay her to rest and start the grieving process properly. Laws like this need to be overturned.

I’d love to hear your take on this story, especuiially since the story of 13-year-old Jahi McMath has been front and center nationally in recent weeks. Like Nunoz, McMath is also brain dead; however, unlike Nunoz, her family has fought to keep her on life support even though there’s no chance of her condition being reversed. Personally, I think the decision to keep someone on life support should be up to the immediate relative in cases like the aforementioned, even if the deceased is pregnant. In the case of Nunoz, though I’m no expert, but it’s hard for me to see the fetus developing normally if carried to term. Beyond medical speculation, however, Texas’ law and position sounds like too much government if you ask me. And as bad as health care is in Texas, one has to wonder who’s paying for her care? I could be wrong, but something tells me that Texas isn’t paying it. Watch the video below via WFAA:

The post Brain Dead Pregnant Woman Forced to be Kept on Life Support Against Family’s Wishes appeared first on Madness & Reality.

This from Melissa’s letter to Mourdock:

Rape and sexual assault are complicated experiences for survivors. Some of us fight, kick, scream, and resist at every moment. Some of us eventually give in to save our own lives or to manage the horror. Some of us know that what is happening is rape, others of us just know it is wrong, but don’t have the words to describe why. Some of us push the memories down and try to forget, others of us battle openly with the nightmares and scars every day. There is no one right way to survive. There is no one right way to feel.

As we heal, we learn not to judge ourselves or to judge our fellow survivors, because we learn that judgment can wound as deeply as assault. If a woman finds herself pregnant after a rape, we do not judge the choices she makes.

I am descended from American slaves. I have foremothers who found themselves pregnant with children whose birth increased the wealth of the very man who enslaved and raped them. Somehow, through the angst and misery of that experience some of those women found a way to love and embrace the children they bore from rape. So I do not doubt the compassion or judge the choice of a survivor who carries a rape pregnancy to term.

But the whole point is choice. Consent. You see, Mr. Mourdock, the violation of rape is more than physical. Rapists strip women of our right to choose, of our right to say no, of our right to control what is happening to our bodies. Most assailants tell us it is our fault. They tell us to be silent. Sometimes they even tell us it’s God’s will. That is the core violation of rape– it takes away choice.

Richard, you believe it is fine to ignore a women’s right to choose because of your interpretation of divinity. Sound familiar?

Let me explain something to you. When we survive sexual assault, we are the gift. When we survive, when we go on to love, to work, to speak out, to have fun, to laugh, to dance, to cry, tolive, when we do that, we defeat our attackers. For a moment, they strip us of our choices. As we heal, we take our choices back. We are the gift to ourselves, our families, our communities, and our nation when we survive.

Now let me say this very clearly to you Mr Mourdock, and to all of your shameless endorsers: we did not survive an attack on our consent just to turn around and give up our right to choose to you. Not without a fight.

That to me, is the crux of the outrage of any rational thinking mind, to the simplistic justification of a woman becoming pregnant through non-consensual sex as a “gift” from God by drinkers of Jesus Juice. To suggest that women who become pregnant through rape should not have access to a legal abortion, is in fact much like rape. It is, because not being able to have the choice of a legal abortion or not, should a woman become pregnant after being raped, is much like being raped all over again. After all, there’s a fine line between being able to give consent and saying no.

So, unless God in his infinite mystery has a rapist tickle his victim into submission (and pregnancy) whereby being victimized becomes somewhat tolerable; yep, unless that happens, rape is still rape and a child produced as a result of said gruesome circumstance is not a blessing or a gift from some assumed higher power. But as I mentioned in an earlier post, to suggest otherwise is as absurd as the notion that through slavery, God blessed African-Americans with the gift of citizenship.

Check out Melissa reading her letter on air below:

The post Melissa Harris-Perry Blasts Indiana Candidate Rep. Richard Mourdock appeared first on Madness & Reality.

I came across Stevens’ story via News One. The article they did was heart wrenching, but it could not have come at a better time. I say that because as my wife and I discussed, it’s easy for people and politicians like Mourdock to discuss rape and incest without having been victimized themselves; or, without have any close and personal experience with anyone who has actually been through such a horrific experience. But, with women being sexually assaulted every 45 seconds here in the United States; and, with 1 in 15 sexual assaults resulting in pregnancy, rape is very real, folks.

So yes, let’s take a look at one woman’s story. That’s right, meet Tiara Stevens, a rape survivor and single mother to her son who also happens to be her brother. Yep, Tiara was sexually assaulted by her father repeatedly when she was 12-years-old, and gave birth to, well, her brother.

Would you really be willing to go through it?

Unfortunately for Tiara, she didn’t have that option. As she stated in the video above, she had no idea she was pregnant until the baby was born. But I have to wonder, what if she knew? What if she knew she was pregnant, would she want to willingly go through a pregnancy and deliver a child fathered by her father at 13-years-old? I think we can all agree that at that age, life is pretty much complicated as is. Why then would a young woman want to burden herself with the emotional scar of giving birth to her father’s child? Should she too in her not-yet-formed adult mind accept her circumstance as “God’s will,” and her child as a “gift” from God? As a parent, can you honestly say that it would be?

Do you really believe hat?

Tiara Stevens was raped by father when she was 12-years-old and became pregnant — yeah, God gave her the gift of a bouncing baby boy. What’s really awesome, is that she didn’t have an abortion and gave birth to her brother… eww… who quite naturally has a host of medical problems and is blind.

Having said that, I wonder how many of you “believers” are still of the opinion that a woman (or girl) conceiving a child when raped is still a “gift” from God.? I’m only asking because if this is a blessing, then maybe abortion should be illegal and not an option for women who through no fault of their own, are victimized…. oops, I meant blessed by God. I mean, am I wrong, or am I wrong? Oh well, you can watch Tiara’s full interview below. Yep, pay attention to the part where she said her father found out she was pregnant when the baby kicked while he was having sex with her.

The post Single-Mom Confuses Son as Brother Years After Dad Impregnates Her appeared first on Madness & Reality.

Truth be told, I believe some of the GOP politicians are in fact a products of incestuous relationships. How did they rise to prominence with such low intelligence I’ll never know. But, there’s no other way one can explain the downright stupidity that falls as turds from the mouth, from the likes of Rep. Steve King, Rep. Todd Akin, and the idiots defending the concept of “legitimate rape”.

Speaking to a local KMEG-TV reporter while on the campaign trail in his district, King said, “Well I just haven’t heard of that being a circumstance that’s been brought to me in any personal way.” However, as for allowing victims of rape and incest having abortions, King added, “and I’d be open to discussion about that subject matter.” This was said after King sung praises of Akin and touted him as a “a strong Christian man, with a wonderful family.” He also said that he support’s Akin’s character and had nothing specific to say about his remarks, because he was not sure of the context of his statement. Now I don’t know about you, but I think Akin’s statement was pretty clear.

Context aside, in case you’re of the knockle-dragging kind much like King and Akin, check out the following piece by Sarah Kliff of the Washington Post. In the following, Kliff presents the results of a study published in the journal Human Nature by Jonathan A. Gottschall and Tiffani A. Gottschall, that argues that rape victims have a higher rate of pregnancy than other women.

Rep. Todd Akin caused a public outcry Sunday when he suggested that women who were “legitimately raped” would rarely become pregnant. Study after study has proven that theory false. But one provocative study, published in 2003, went even further: It found that a single act of rape was more than twice as likely to result in pregnancy than an act of consensual sex.

The study, “Are per-incident rape-pregnancy rates higher than per-incident consensual pregnancy rates?” was published in the journal Human Nature by Jonathan A. Gottschall and Tiffani A. Gottschall, two professors at St. Lawrence University in Canton, N.Y. They used data from the federally administered National Violence Against Women survey. There, they found a sample of 405 women between the ages of 12 and 45 who had experienced one incidence of rape that included intercourse.

Of those 405 women included in the sample, 6.4 percent — or 26 women — reported a pregnancy that year. A separate large-scale study showed that, for the general population of women that age, the per-incidence pregnancy rate for a single act of intercourse is 3.1 percent.

As to why rape victims would have a higher rate of pregnancy, the Gottschalls put forward a few theories. They look at previous research, which suggests that men are more attracted to women who are fertile and ovulating. In consensual sex, women can decline sex at a time where there might be a high likelihood of pregnancy. That’s not the case in rape.

“Rapists do not wait to be chosen, rapists choose,” they write. “As such, within the limits of opportunity, rapists would be able to target women bearing cues [of fertility].”

The Gottschalls do acknowledge that their study was at odds with previous research, which showed a lower rate of pregnancy among rape victims.

Facts and science be damned, while Republicans are stampeding away from wackjobs like Akin and King. The truth is, the notion that it is impossible rape victims to become pregnant and thus should be forced to carry a pregnancy to term, as Rachel Maddow shows below, this is nothing new to folks on the political right. And for many, this belief is used to justify the personhood movement in an attempt to ban abortions. I know, hard to believe that they support this.

The post Rep. Steve King Has Never Heard of Pregnant Rape or Incest Victims appeared first on Madness & Reality.

By now I’m sure you’re aware of the epic shit storm sparked by comments made Missouri Rep. Todd Akin yesterday. In the event that you’ve been living in a bubble and may have missed the controversy, you can read fellow blogger and contributor, The Skeptik One’s take on the absurdity that is his comments here. Akin’s comments were so abhorrent that members of the Republican Party have been distancing themselves from him; and, many have called for him to withdraw from this November’s Senate race.

For Republicans to call for his withdrawal is a bit of a surprise. After all, most Republicans agree with Akin; and, ironically when Rep. Ron Paul made similar comments about “Honest Rape” no such outrage was seen from members of the Republican Party elite. My guess is that this unfortunate comment came a tad bit too close to the elections for some.

Unfortunately for them, Akins isn’t showing any signs of withdrawal from the contest. Akin, a Missouri state Rep running for Senate, while appearing on Jaco Report,  said the following as an advocate for making abortion illegal, even if women are victims of rape: “From what I understand from doctors … if it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.” I may have missed that particular day in biology class, but I don’t remember learning about a woman’s ovaries being able to detect when sex is consensual, or illegitimate (?).

This from the Washington Post:

Rape Survivor: Gabrielle Union

National Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman John Cornyn (R-Tex.) informed Rep. Todd Akin on Monday that the national GOP will not spend money to help elect him to the Senate after Akin’s controversial comments about “legitimate rape,” according to an NRSC aide.

Cornyn also told Akin that, by staying in the race, he is endangering Republicans’ hopes of retaking the majority in the Senate, the aide said.

Akin had refused to withdraw his Senate campaign earlier Monday as Republicans, hoping to contain damage to the party brand, stampeded away from the staunch anti-abortion Senate candidate after he used the phrase “legitimate rape” in talking about abortion and pregnancy.

Akin, who has become a flash point of the 2012 campaign, responded to Republicans’ calls for him to drop out during an interview Monday with Mike Huckabee on his radio show.

The House member from Missouri apologized, calling his remarks “a very, very serious error.”

“The good people of Missouri nominated me, and I’m not a quitter,” Akin told Huckabee, a Republican and former governor. “My belief is we’re going to take this thing forward. And, by the grace of God, we’re going to win this race. To quote my old friend John Paul Jones: ‘I’ve not yet begun to fight.’­­ ”

Speaking on MSNBC, film star Gabrielle Union, herself a rape survivor, shared the following:

The post Gabrielle Union Talks Women, Todd Akin, & “Legitimate Rape” appeared first on Madness & Reality.

Now, clearly to any rationally thinking mind, it is absurd to suggest anything as ridiculous as the aforementioned. But, don’t tell that to South Carolina State Senator Kevin Bryant, who argues that it is the unborn fetus conceived in an act of rape or incestuous relationship who is the real “victim,” and not its would-be-mother, Yes, I know, this is just re-damn-diculous.

This via The Columbia State:

The dispute focuses on the definition of “victim.” Supporters, like Bryant, say the unborn child is a victim who has rights that must be protected.

“We’re focusing on the rights and the liberty of an unborn child, and I can’t understand why the life of a child that’s a victim ought to be terminated,” Bryant said.

So what is an uninsured rape victim supposed to do? Well, she can pay-out-of-pocket for an abortion — something that isn’t likely given her financial status. Or, she can bare the shame and degradation of knowingly carrying and eventually going into labor and delivering the child of her attacker.

At that point, she can then make the decision to keep the child, or give it up for adoption. Now I’m not a woman, but this seems very wrong on so many levels. I could be wrong, but it seems too much like punishing a woman for 1) being a victim of rape, and 2) for being poor. According to the provisio — which is defined as a temporary one-year law — abortions would be paid for with tax payer dollars only in the event that the life of the mother is in danger.

The three exemptions in the state health plan — rape, incest or life of the mother — mirrors the policy of the federal government health plan, commonly referred to as the Hyde Amendment, named for former U.S. Rep. Henry Hyde of Illinois. That federal policy has been in place for more than 30 years.

Since 2006, state taxpayers have paid for 6 abortions. All of them were to save the life of the mother, according to the state Budget and Control Board.

Currently the state’s health insurance plan covers 417,000 individuals — no word on just how many of them are raped annually. However, this is something SC Republicans have been trying to pass for the last two years. Here’s to hoping that they remain unsuccessful this time around. But whether they are or not, it can never be said that women without access to affordable health care were not under attack like they always have by our slightly-more-conservative friends in the Republican party.

[FULL STORY HERE]

The post South Carolina Pushes Abortion Ban for Low-Income Victims of Rape & Incest appeared first on Madness & Reality.

This is what’s been happening with this not-so-new but ongoing debate over contraceptives between the Catholic church and the White House. People have been asking me what are my thoughts concerning the debate, and I’ll say to you as I have said to them:  for Republicans, treating contraceptives and abortion as one in the same – clearly, they are not – is politically expedient. I mean think about this: the argument made by Conservatives suggests that president Obama is infringing on the Constitutional right to freedom of religion. Let them tell it, the government is forcing a Catholic run facility to provide coverage that covers contraceptives, that somehow kills a fetus.

Mitt Romney himself said on the campaign trail that the policy forces women to use the Morning After Pill, which he considers to be an abortion pill. Simply put, this is not true; this is the twisting of facts for political expediency. And the funny thing about this, is that Romney himself signed into law the very same measure as governor for Massachusetts infamous “Romneycare”. You know, that now evil health care plan that was the template for today’s Affordable Care Act  otherwise known as Obamacare? Yeah, you know that whole Kenyan style Socialist thingy?

This from Team Obama:

Mitt Romney is attacking new Affordable Care Act guidelines that require most insurance providers to cover contraceptive services, accusing President Obama’s administration of “using Obamacare to impose a secular vision on Americans who believe that they should not have their religious freedom taken away.”

But the facts tell a different story. Just as he criticizes federal health reform based on the law he passed in Massachusetts, Mitt Romney is attacking the President for providing women with the same access to contraception and preventive health care services Romney did as governor. Our new infographic takes a look at how contraception coverage compares under the Affordable Care Act and the Massachusetts law Romney stood behind.

But no, today contraceptives used by women and covered by health insurance companies, are treated like back alley abortion. And all the while, nobody on the right like Romney mentions that this rule already exists in 28 states; or that 98% of Catholic women have used contraceptives at one point in their lives. But no, let them tell it, you’d think that Catholic men will go to hell if they use condoms, and the pill is like smoking crack. Yep, and of course nobody wants the government to force people to smoke crack or be damned to hell. Listen, you can choose to believe the lies of the GOP if you choose if you like. But hey, if you’re interested in understanding just what I’m talking about, Rachel Maddow does an excellent job of breaking it all down in the following video. Yep, do yourself a favor and take a few minutes to understand just what this is all about.

Clearly with nothing else to stand on, the road to the White House run through a uterus.

The post The GOP Road to the White House Runs Through the Uterus, & Obama’s “War On Religion” appeared first on Madness & Reality.

This isn’t really surprising; especially since Ron Paul is  opposed to a woman having the right to file a claim for sexual harassment. Yep, Paul recently said that if a woman was sexually harassed, her natural (and only) course of action should be to terminate her employment. That’s right, don’t even think about holding anyone accountable for creating an uncomfortable work environment. Yeah, jokes of a sexually inappropriate nature? Penis on your shoulder while sitting in your cubicle? Yep, just shut up and quit like a big girl would. Yep, sexual harassment is illegal in Libertarian land.

“Employee rights are said to be valid when employers pressure employees into sexual activity. Why don’t they quit once the so-called harassment starts? Obviously the morals of the harasser cannot be defended, but how can the harassee escape some responsibility for the problem? Seeking protection under civil rights legislation is hardly acceptable.” – Ron Paul, Freedom Under Siege: The U.S. Constitution after 200-Plus Years

My guess is that the train of thought is that none of this is in the constitution, no? Yep, obviously in Libertarian utopia, just like in the real world, the rights of women are compromised and just not important. Uh huh, Paul went on to argue that women should not have the right to abort a “nine-pound baby,” despite the fact that 90 percent of all abortions occur within the first trimester.

MORGAN: But it’s a dilemma that I am going to put to you. You have two daughters. You have many granddaughters. If one of them was raped — and I accept it’s a very unlikely thing to happen. But if they were, would you honestly look at them in the eye and say they had to have that child if they were impregnated?

PAUL: No. If it’s an honest rape, that individual should go immediately to the emergency room. I would give them a shot of estrogen or give them –

MORGAN: You would allow them to abort the baby?

PAUL: It is absolutely in limbo, because an hour after intercourse or a day afterwards, there is no legal or medical problem. If you talk about somebody coming in and they say, well, I was raped and I’m seven months pregnant and I don’t want to have anything to do with it, it’s a little bit different story.

But somebody arriving in an emergency room saying, I have just been raped and there is no chemical — there’s no medical and there’s no legal evidence of a pregnancy.

Watch it here:

The post Ron Paul Supports Abortion in Only Cases of “Honest Rape” appeared first on Madness & Reality.