#dobbs crisis pregnancy centers | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

mostlysignssomeportents · 11 months

Text

Google makes millions on paid abortion disinformation

Google’s search quality has been in steady decline for years, and Google assures us that they’re working on it, though the most visible effort is replacing links to webpages with lengthy, florid paragraphs written by a confident habitual liar chatbot:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/02/16/tweedledumber/#easily-spooked

The internet is increasingly full of garbage, much of it written by other confident habitual liar chatbots, which are now extruding plausible sentences at enormous scale. Future confident habitual liar chatbots will be trained on the output of these confident liar chatbots, producing Jathan Sadowski’s “Habsburg AI”:

https://twitter.com/jathansadowski/status/1625245803211272194

But the declining quality of Google Search isn’t merely a function of chatbot overload. For many years, Google’s local business listings have been terrible. Anyone who’s tried to find a handyman, a locksmith, an emergency tow, or other small businessperson has discovered that Google is worse than useless for this. Try to search for that locksmith on the corner that you pass every day? You won’t find them — but you will find a fake locksmith service that will dispatch an unqualified, fumble-fingered guy with a drill and a knockoff lock, who will drill out your lock, replace it with one made of bubblegum and spit, and charge you 400% the going rate (and then maybe come back to rob you):

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/31/business/fake-online-locksmiths-may-be-out-to-pick-your-pocket-too.html

Google is clearly losing the fraud/spam wars, which is pretty awful, given that they have spent billions to put every other search engine out of business. They spend $45b every year to secure exclusivity deals that prevent people from discovering or using rivals — that’s like buying a whole Twitter every year, just so they don’t have to compete:

https://www.thebignewsletter.com/p/how-a-google-antitrust-case-could/

But there’s an even worse form of fraudulent listing on Google, one they could do something about, but choose not to: ad-fraud. For all the money and energy thrown into “dark SEO” to trick Google into putting your shitty, scammy website at the top of the listings, there’s a much simpler method. All you need to do is pay Google — buy an ad, and your obviously fraudulent site will be right there, at the top of the search results.

There are so many top searches that go to fraud or malware sites. Tech support is a favorite. It’s not uncommon to search for tech support for Google products and be served a fake tech-support website where a scammer will try to trick you into installing a remote-access trojan and then steal everything you have, and/or take blackmail photos of you with your webcam:

https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/google-search-ads-infiltrated-again-by-tech-support-scams/

This is true even when Google has a trivial means of reliably detecting fraud. Take the restaurant monster-in-the-middle scam: a scammer clones the menu of a restaurant, marking up their prices by 15%, and then buys the top ad slot for searches for that restaurant. Search for the restaurant, click the top link, and land on a lookalike site. The scammer collects your order, bills your card, then places the same order, in your name, with the restaurant.

The thing is, Google runs these ads even for restaurants that are verified merchants — Google mails the restaurant a postcard with a unique number on it, and the restaurant owner keys that number in to verify that they are who they say they are. It would not be hard for Google to check whether an ad for a business matches one of its verified merchants, and, if so, whether the email address is a different one from the verified one on file. If so, Google could just email the verified address with a “Please confirm that you’re trying to buy an ad for a website other than the one we have on file” message:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/02/24/passive-income/#swiss-cheese-security

Google doesn’t do this. Instead, they accept — and make a fortune from — paid disinformation, across every category.

But not all categories of paid disinformation are equally bad: it’s one thing to pay a 15% surcharge on a takeout meal, but there’s a whole universe of paid medical disinformation that Google knows about and has an official policy of tolerating.

This paid medical disinformation comes from “crisis pregnancy centers”: these are fake abortion clinics that raise huge sums from religious fanatics to buy ads that show up for people seeking information about procuring an abortion. If they are duped by one of these ads, they are directed to a Big Con-style storefront staffed by people who pretend that they perform abortions, but who bombard their marks with falsehoods about health complications.

These con artists try to trick their marks into consenting to sexual assault — a transvaginal ultrasound. This is a prelude to another fraud, in which the “sporadic electrical impulses” generated by an early fetal structure is a “heartbeat” (early fetuses do not have hearts, so they cannot produce heartbeats):

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/womens-health/heartbeat-bills-called-fetal-heartbeat-six-weeks-pregnancy-rcna24435

If the victim still insists on getting an abortion, the fraudsters will use deceptive tactics to draw out the process until they run out the clock for a legal abortion, procuring a forced birth through deceit.

It is hard to imagine a less ethical course of conduct. Google’s policy of accepting “crisis pregnancy center” ads is the moral equivalent of taking money from fake oncologists who counsel people with cancer to forego chemotherapy in favor of juice-cleanses.

There is no ambiguity here: the purpose of a “crisis prengancy center” is to deceive people seeking abortions into thinking they are dealing with an abortion clinic, and then further deceive them into foregoing the abortion, by means of lies, sexually invasive and unnecessary medical procedures, and delaying tactics.

Now, a new report from the Center for Countering Digital Hate finds that Google made $10m last year on ads from “crisis pregnancy centers”:

https://www.wired.com/story/google-made-millions-from-ads-for-fake-abortion-clinics/

Many of these “crisis pregnancy centers” are also registered 501(c)3 charities, which makes them eligible for Google’s ad grants, which provide free ads to nonprofits. Marketers who cater to “crisis pregnancy center” advertise that they can help their clients qualify for these grants. In 2019, Google was caught giving tens of thousands of dollars’ worth of free ads to “crisis pregnancy centers”:

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/may/12/google-advertising-abortion-obria

The keywords that “crisis pregnancy centers” bid up include “Planned Parenthood” — meaning that if actual Planned Parenthood clinics want to appear at the top of the search for “planned parenthood,” they have to outbid the fraudsters seeking to deceive Planned Parenthood patients.

Google has an official policy of requiring customers that pay for ads matching abortion-related search terms to label their ads to state whether or not they provide abortions, but the report documents failures to enforce this policy. The labels themselves are confusing: for example, abortion travel funds have to be labeled as “not providing abortions.”

Google isn’t afraid to ban whole categories of advertising: for example, Google has banned Plan C, a nonprofit that provides information about medication abortions. The company erroneously classes Plan C as an “unauthorized pharmacy.” But Google continues to offer paid disinformation on behalf of forced birth groups that claim there is such a thing as “abortion reversal” (there isn’t — but the “abortion reversal” drug cocktail is potentially lethal).

This is inexcusable, but it’s not unique — and it’s not even that profitable. $10m is a drop in the bucket for a company like Google. When you’re lighting $45b/year on fire just to prevent competition, $10m is chump change. A better way to understand Google’s relationship to paid disinformation can be found by studying Facebook’s own paid disinformation problem.

Facebook has a well-documented problem with paid political disinformation — unambiguous, illegal materials, like paid notices advising people to remember to vote on November 6th (when election day falls on November 5th). The company eventually promised to put political ads in a repository where they could be inspected by all parties to track its progress in blocking paid disinformation.

Facebook did a terrible job at this, with huge slices of its political ads never landing in its transparency portal. We know this because independent researchers at NYU’s engineering school built an independent, crowdsourced tracker called Ad Observer, which scraped all the ads volunteers saw and uploaded them to a portal called Ad Observatory.

Facebook viciously attacked the NYU project, falsely smearing it as a privacy risk (the plugin was open source and was independently audited by Mozilla researchers, who confirmed that it didn’t collect any personal information). When that didn’t work, they sent a stream of legal threats, claiming that NYU was trafficking in a “circumvention device” as defined by Section 1201 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, a felony carrying a five-year prison sentence and a $500k fine — for a first offense.

Eventually, NYU folded the project. Facebook, meanwhile, has fired or reassigned most of the staff who work on political ad transparency:

https://pluralistic.net/2021/08/06/get-you-coming-and-going/#potemkin-research-program

What are we to make of this? Facebook claims that it doesn’t need or want political ad revenue, which are a drop in the bucket and cause all kinds of headaches. That’s likely true — but Facebook’s aversion to blocking political ads doesn’t extend to spending a lot of money to keep paid political disinfo off the platform.

The company could turn up the sensitivity on its blocking algorithm, which would generate more false positives, in which nonpolitical ads are misidentified and have to be reviewed by humans. This is expensive, and it’s an expense Facebook can avoid if it can suppress information about its failures to block paid political disinformation. It’s cheaper to silence critics than it is to address their criticism.

I don’t think Google gives a shit about the $10m it gets from predatory fake abortion clinics. But I think the company believes that the PR trouble it would get into for blocking them — and the expense it would incur in trying to catch and block fake abortion clinic ads — are real liabilities. In other words, it’s not about the $10m it would lose by blocking the ads — Google wants to avoid the political heat it would take from forced birth fanatics and cost of the human reviewers who would have to double-check rejected ads.

In other words, Google doesn’t abet fraudulent abortion clinics because they share the depraved sadism of the people who run these clinics. Rather, Google teams up with these sadists out of cowardice and greed.

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this thread to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/06/15/paid-medical-disinformation/#crisis-pregnancy-centers

[Image ID: A ruined streetscene. Atop a pile of rubble sits a dilapidated shack. In front of the shack is a letterboard with the word ABORTIONS set off-center and crooked. In the foreground is a carny barker at a podium, gesturing at the sign and the shack. The barker's head and face have been replaced with the Google logo. Within the barker's podium is a heap of US$100 bills.]

Image: Flying Logos (modified) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Over_$1,000,000_dollars_in_USD_$100_bill_stacks.png

CC BY-SA 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.en

#pluralistic #abortion clinics #forced birth #disinformation #medical disinformation #paid disinformation #google #google ads #ad-tech #seo #kiin thai #locksmiths #abortion #dobbs crisis pregnancy centers #roe v wade

233 notes · View notes

theivorybilledwoodpecker · 10 months

Text

Over one year on from Dobbs, please remember the victims of abortion bans in America. These are just the ones that made it to the news:

Marlena Stell

Amanda Zurawski

Mylissa Farmer

The 10-year-old from Ohio

The 16-year-old from Florida

The 15-year-old from Florida

Nancy Davis

Elizabeth Weller

Anya Cook

Kelly Shannon

Jessica Bernardo

Kierstan Hogan

Taylor Edwards

Kylie Beaton

Gabriella Gonzalez

Samantha Casiano

Lauren Van Vleet

Austin Dennard

Lauren Miller

Jaci Statton

Kristina Cruickshank

Tara George

Kailee DeSpain

Deborah Dorbert

Mayron Hollis

Kristen Anya

Heather Maberry

Melissa Novak

Kayla Smith

Lauren Christensen

Beth Long

Anabely Lopes

Christina Zielke

Kaitlyn Joshua

Lauren Hall

Carmen Broesder

Jill Hartle

Brittany Vidrine

Jane Doe from Massachusetts, who had an ectopic pregnancy rupture because a pregnancy crisis center told her it was viable

The Jane Doe had an ectopic pregnancy rupture after an anti-abortion pregnancy center told her she had a normal pregnancy

Emily Doe, whose fetus had lungs that wouldn’t develop and had no kidneys. The pregnancy had the potential to endanger her health…but it wasn’t endangering it yet. So she had to flee Missouri for an abortion.

Victoria Doe from Louisiana, who had to go to Oregon

Ashley Brandt

Anna Zargarian

Reverend and Doctor Love Holt

Michelle Mitchenor

Brooke High

Ashley from Mississippi, who was raped and forced to give birth to her rapist's baby. She's 13.

Nicole Blackmon

Allie Phillips

Jennifer Adkins

When we do win back our right to bodily autonomy, forced birthers will forget these people. Some have absolutely no idea who these people are. But when you tell them you hope what they force on others gets forced on them, they gasp and say you're evil. Because they recognize that what they force on others is wrong, and they think they deserve better than their victims.

If you think the "abortion debate" is merely a difference of opinion, you haven't been paying attention.

629 notes · View notes

odinsblog · 11 months

Text

🗣️ Please read this !!

👉🏿 https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2023/05/crisis-pregnancy-centers-influence-post-dobbs-abortion-supreme-court.html

👉🏿 https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2023/05/alito-violates-supreme-court-ethics-rules.html

👉🏿 https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1660649551668150272.html

#politics #republicans #crisis pregnancy centers #scotus #abortion #roe v wade #reproductive rights #reproductive justice #healthcare #war on women #white nationalism #christian nationalism #evangelical christians #christian evangelicals #white supremacy

100 notes · View notes

cinematicnomad · 4 months

Text

i'm 32. i've never had an abortion. i grew up moving around the world. at all points of my life, i have always, always, considered in the back of my mind what i would do if i needed one. college in particular stressed me out—from 2009–2013, i lived in a rural small town that didn't have an abortion provider, just one of those malicious "crisis pregnancy centers" that PRETEND to provide options but really guilt and shame and lie to people with uteruses to deny them care.

so i always made sure to know where the closest abortion provider was. my friends and i talked about this, shared our individual plans with each other. at the time, it was a good 2 hour drive away, and i didn't have a license, let alone a car. but i did have older siblings and friends that i knew i could rely on. people i could turn to if i really needed help. my fears at the time mostly surrounded potentially having to reveal any personal details about my private life to them—i have a hard time asking for help, and tend not to share my thoughts or emotions with others, especially family (case in point, i almost posted this on twitter but then DIDN'T bc my sister and brother follow me). i'm in therapy, i'm working on it!!—but i never worried about being able to access abortion care.

i've never had an abortion, but i did have a miscarriage. i was 18 and i didn't even realize i was pregnant. my miscarriage was, thankfully, early and painless and i didn't know what it was until my period came for real and i spoke with my OBGYN about what happened.

i think about that 18 year old version of me all the time. i had just finished my freshman year of college. i had ended things with the guy bc i was hoping to (and would shortly) get back together with my other ex. i was more concerned with watching the latest true blood episode and meeting up with my friends still in high school at their after-prom, than with worrying about whether or not the guy at college had knocked me up.

abortion in austria (where i was at the time) has been fully legalized since 1975. if i had not had a miscarriage, i would have had options. if i had not realized until later in that summer, once we were back in the states, i would have had to have an incredibly uncomfortable and upsetting conversation with my conservative parents. but even then, i know, i would have had options. miscarriage for many people is a traumatic event. a painful loss, both emotionally and physically. for me, it was a blessing. but even if it hadn't have happened, i know i would have an abortion.

reading the latest NYT article (free link!!) about the dobbs decision fucking kills me. i keep having to stop. i keep welling up with tears. these 5 justices calculatingly (and at least some of of them, i believe, maliciously) stripped the country of roe v. wade. they turned back the clock and denied millions of people access to safe abortion, to their right to choose, to their bodily autonomy. just because i never had an abortion does not mean that this loss is felt any less keenly.

i find, time and time again, that i do not understand how some people go through this world and their life seemingly looking for ways to harm others. seeking to strip them of their rights. to deny them their humanity. i cannot comprehend how they seem to take glee in punishing people they view as other for the v basic fact that they exist.

this is long and i don't even know what point i'm making except for: i am so grateful for the fact that when i was 18, i had options, and i am so very, very, very fucking sad for the fact that there are 18 year olds today (and 20 year olds, and 28 year olds, and 15 year olds, and 36 year olds, and WHATEVER) who are being denied their right to choose. it's not fair. it isn't right. i want, so desperately, to change this.

and now the plea: please vote. please care. please advocate and donate and protest and be loud and be heard and demand better rights for yourself and others. please consider the courts when you cast your ballot: not just the supreme court, but the lower courts as well. if you don't, there will only be more decisions like this, the consequences of which will continue to ripple out for years on end causing harm to untold numbers of people.

#this is long #and random #i don't know #this article has made me so upset i'm sorry #abortion #politics #kat liveblogs her life

21 notes · View notes

philosophicalconservatism · 1 year

Text

Certain parties on the Left are inventing new political concepts to undermine the pure ideal of free speech. One of the latest of these is "Stochastic Terrorism". If any one speaks in a manner that the Left deems as insensitive toward some particular group of people (for example, by saying with respect to people with gender dysphoria, that men cannot become women and that women cannot become men) they become an accessory to any violence that is perpetrated against that group in the future.

And so I take it that the harsh villification of the the pro-life movement in the wake of the Dobbs ruling by the Supreme Court which was followed by the firebombing and vandalism of crisis pregnancy centers (as well as the attempted murder of a Supreme Court justice) was also an instance of "Stochastic Terrorism."

78 notes · View notes

dontmeantobepoliticalbut · 1 year

Text

The rates of mothers and newborn babies dying during pregnancy, at birth or postpartum are much higher in states that currently ban or restrict abortions than in states preserving access, according to a new report.

The researchers analyzed data on deaths and other health outcomes using the most recent data available – from 2020 and earlier – and compared rates based on states’ current abortion access policies, as of November, after the Supreme Court decision this summer that overturned Roe v. Wade.

States that have restricted access to abortion services had maternal death rates in 2020 that were 62% higher than in states preserving access to abortion services. Between 2018 and 2020, the maternal death rate increased twice as fast in states that now have abortion restrictions, according to the report released Wednesday by the research foundation Commonwealth Fund.

Overall, death rates from any cause among women of reproductive age – 15 to 44 – were 34% higher in abortion-restriction states than in abortion-access states, according to the report.

The report also says that in 2019, fetal or infant death rates in the first week of life occurred at a 15% higher rate, on average, in states with abortion restrictions than in states with wider abortion access.

“Making reproductive services inaccessible to women and families can have dire consequences, and particularly, it varies by state,” said obstetrician/gynecologist Dr. Laurie Zephyrin, a co-author of the report and senior vice president for advancing health equity at the Commonwealth Fund.

In June the Supreme Court ruled on Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which overturned Roe v. Wade, holding that there is no longer a federal constitutional right to an abortion and paving the way for states to ban abortions.

Based on the findings in the report, Zephyrin thinks maternal death rates in the US could worsen after the Dobbs decision.

“More people in the US die from complications of pregnancy and childbirth than any other developed nation, and most are preventable – and our rates are on the rise,” she said. “So I think that’s just very important as we think of this maternal health crisis and this collision of crises with this impact and this Dobbs decision.”

MATERNAL DEATH RATES 62% HIGHER IN ABORTION-RESTRICTION STATES

The new report – by researchers at Boston University and the Commonwealth Fund – includes data on state-by-state abortion policies and health outcomes among mothers and babies from sources including the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Health Resources and Services Administration and the nonprofit March of Dimes.

The researchers compared the health outcomes in 26 abortion-restricting states with those in the remaining 24 states and the District of Columbia, which appear to be unlikely to pass such restrictions.

The researchers found that slightly more than half – 55% – of US births in 2020 were in the 26 states currently with abortion bans or restrictions. In those states, births tended to be concentrated among women younger than 30, with 57% in women in that age group. In comparison, in abortion-access states, 45% of births were to women under 30.

The analysis also revealed that 39% of counties in states restricting abortion access fit the criteria to be considered “maternity care deserts,” meaning there is limited or no access to maternity health care services, such as an ob/gyn, hospital or birth center with obstetric care or certified midwives. In comparison, 25% of counties in abortion-access states can be considered maternity care deserts.

The researchers noted that a higher number of births in abortion-restriction states are in rural areas, where access to maternity care can be more limited and maternity care deserts more common. Rural areas had 17% of births in abortion-restriction states but 8% in abortion-access states.

The report also says that, between 2018 and 2020, the infant and perinatal mortality rates were 6.2 deaths per 1,000 births in abortion-restriction states, compared with 4.8 per 1,000 in abortion-access states. Across all racial and ethnic groups, infant mortality in the first year of life was higher in abortion-restriction states than in abortion-access states.

“What’s most surprising is, states have within their power to be able to avoid these outcomes,” Zephyrin said. “States really have it in their power to enhance maternal health capacity, really create the systems that are necessary to ensure that every person has an opportunity for a safe and healthy birth and life, whether we’re talking about recruiting maternity providers, providing more birthing centers, supporting the range of reproductive health services, expanding Medicaid, investing in postpartum Medicaid extension.”

Separate research published in 2020 in the journal Women’s Health Issues found that although maternal mortality overall continues to increase in the United States, the maternal death rate in states that have expanded Medicaid has had less of an increase than in non-expansion states.

“Compared with their counterparts in other states, women of reproductive age and birthing people in states with current or proposed abortion bans have more limited access to affordable health insurance coverage, worse health outcomes, and lower access to maternity care providers,” Zephyrin and her colleagues wrote in the new Commonwealth Fund report.

“Making abortion illegal risks widening these disparities, as states with already limited Medicaid maternity coverage and fewer maternity care resources lose providers who are reluctant to practice in states that they perceive as restricting their practice,” the researchers wrote. “The result is a deepening of fractures in the maternal health system and a compounding of inequities by race, ethnicity, and geography.”

‘THIS IS NOT HOW HEALTHCARE SHOULD BE’

Dr. Kristyn Brandi, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists’ Darney-Landy Fellow, said she is not surprised by the findings in the new report because the “issues around reproductive health care are intricately linked.”

“My patients that seek abortion care are the same patients that need prenatal care in other pregnancies. Similarly, there is great data that suggests that the places that limit abortion also have higher maternal morbidity rates, less access to insurance, higher teen pregnancy rates, less access to sex education – the maps are overlapping,” Brandi, a practicing ob/gyn who was not involved in the research, wrote in an email to CNN.

She adds that restricting abortion care disproportionately affects marginalized communities, such as people with disabilities or travel limitations.

“It also means, similar to states that have only one abortion clinic, that the places where there are only one or a few labor and delivery units or prenatal care centers, those facilities will become overwhelmed with patients and that may create delays in care,” Brandi said. “This is not how healthcare should be. People should be able to access all reproductive health care services, regardless of their zip code.”

34 notes · View notes

beardedmrbean · 2 years

Text

The pro-abortion radical group dubbed "Jane’s Revenge" that’s claimed responsibility for various arson attacks and vandalism since the leak of a draft opinion that would overturn Roe v. Wade published a new letter Tuesday declaring "open season" on pro-life pregnancy crisis centers.

The letter spoke of a supposed 30-day deadline for all pro-life groups to cease operations and condemned those "who impersonate healthcare providers in order to harm the vulnerable."

"We were unsurprised to see thirty days come and thirty days pass with no sign of consilience or even bare-minimum self-reflection from you," the letter dated June 14 reads. "History may not repeat itself, but it certainly rhymes, and we’ve already seen such stanzas where medical autonomy is stripped away, humanity is increasingly criminalized, and merely surviving becomes largely untenable."

It then warns to pro-life groups "your thirty days expired yesterday."

ARMED SUSPECT ARRESTED BY JUSTICE KAVANAUGH'S HOME IDENTIFIED

"We offered an honourable way out," it says. "You could have walked away. Now the leash is off. And we will make it as hard as possible for your campaign of oppression to continue."

The letter described how "easy and fun it is to attack" and vowed to take "increasingly drastic measures against oppressive infrastructures" following the expiration of the supposed deadline, saying this time "those measures may not come in the form of something so easily cleaned up as fire and graffiti."

"From here forward, any anti-choice group who closes their doors, and stops operating will no longer be a target. But until you do, it’s open season, and we know where your operations are," the letter, disseminated to email subscribers and in the form of an "Abolition Media" blog post, reads.

The group appeals to anyone "with the urge to paint, to burn, to cut, to jam" to commit violence.

"The infrastructure of the enslavers will not survive. We will never stop, back down, slow down, or retreat. We did not want this; but it is upon us, and so we must deal with it proportionally. We exist in confluence and solidarity with all others in the struggle for complete liberation," it says. "Our recourse now is to defend ourselves and to build robust, caring communities of mutual aid, so that we may heal ourselves without the need of the medical industry or any other intermediary. Through attacking, we find joy, courage, and strip the veneer of impenetrability held by these violent institutions."

According to the letter, Jane’s Revenge is "not one group but many," and has disseminated "communiqués from the various cells" in locations mostly based in the Pacific Northwest.

The letter claimed responsibility for various attacks already seen in the cities of Portland, Eugene and Gresham in Oregon, as well as in Olympia, Lynwood and Vancouver in Washington state. In Maryland, the group claims to have carried out actions in Reisterstown and Frederick.

Other locations named are Madison, Wisconsin; Ft. Collins, Colorado; Des Moines, Iowa; Asheville, North Carolina; Buffalo, New York; Hollywood, Florida; Denton, Texas; and Washington, D.C.

The Washington Examiner has documented incidents of arson or vandalism or both targeting at least 13 anti-abortion centers across the country since the leak of a draft opinion in the case of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. In several of the attacks, mostly lodged at Christian faith-based pregnancy crisis centers, the building are tagged with renditions of the messages "Jane’s Revenge" or "If abortions aren’t safe, neither are you."

According to the newspaper, few of the incidents have resulted in any arrests.

The Des Moines Register reported that vandals accused of breaking windows at the Christian Agape Pregnancy Center in Des Moines, Iowa, tagged the message "God loves abortions," and afterward a message online signed Jane’s Revenge claimed responsibility and encouraged attacks on churches.

In a letter sent June 7, Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kansas, supported by 15 other GOP senators, appealed to U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland for information about how the Department of Justice is addressing "this disturbing trend of harassment, intimidation, and violence against religious and other pro-life organizations and individuals in the aftermath" of the leaked draft opinion.

"We are dismayed that the open and public urgency with which the Department of Justice undertook efforts in the name of public safety last year is not being replicated currently to protect religious and other pro-life organizations and individuals," the letter says, claiming the DOJ "wasted no time" in publics responding to threats of violence against educations and school administrators related to COVID-19 back-to-school policies.

In its most recent terrorism bulletin also issued on June 7, Department of Homeland Security warned of a "heightened threat environment" in the coming months, noting "individuals who advocate both for and against abortion have, on public forums, encouraged violence, including against government, religious, and reproductive healthcare personnel and facilities, as well as those with opposing ideologies.

Last week, a California man was arrested after showing up outside the home of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh with a gun, ammunition, a tactical knife, zip ties and various burglary tools. The affidavit says the suspect dialed 911 and admitted to intending to assassinate the conservative justice to "give his life purpose" following to the leak of the draft decision on abortion rights.

_______________________________-

How to get labeled a terrorist organization with just a letter.

#nunyas news #well with just a letter #if you're on the political right #if you're on the left they set up a charity for you

97 notes · View notes

fanworksforfreechoice · 2 years

Text

Fanworks for Free Choice!

Hello! Welcome to the Fanworks for Free Choice exchange! This exchange works to encourage donations to abortion networks and funds in exchange for a customized fanwork! Creators will set their own suggested donation amounts, suggested organizational recipients, as well as restrictions on what they will and will not create.

Donors will claim work from a creator whose suggestions and works line up with their preferences for both receiving organizations and fan content. After providing proof of donation, the donor will request a fanwork from their chosen creator by providing a prompt/details for what they would like to see.

This event has been inspired by the recent decision by the US Supreme Court to overturn Roe v Wade through the ruling in Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health, however, this event will be international. Participants outside the US are encouraged to donate to abortion networks, funds, and reproductive justice advocacy organizations in their regions.

Timeline

Sunday, June 26 - Sunday, July 3 11:59PM EST: sign-ups are open

Monday, July 4th - Monday July 11, 10:00PM EST: offerings for the exchange will be posted and donors can make their claims

Works should be completed by August, 31 2022 (please let us know if extensions are needed)

Rules

General:

Please choose reputable, pro-choice networks and organizations. Do not ask for donations to pregnancy crisis centers or other organizations that do not support abortion access.

Planned Parenthood is an acceptable organization, but we encourage you to choose local/regional branches rather than the national organization. Furthermore, donations to abortion fund networks and grassroots organizations are encouraged.

Donations to campaigns for political parties and politicians are not allowed.

Creators and donors, please be open to communicating with each other so that if more details are needed for a prompt, you can share that information and be happy with your exchange.

Creators:

Please only sign up if you are confident you can complete the exchange. Obviously, things come up, so, please let us know as soon as possible if you need to drop out and we can discuss a backup with your fan recipient.

If you are writing fanfiction and want to post the work on archive of our own, do not mention anywhere in the fic’s summary, tags, or notes that this is done in exchange for a donation. You are simply gifting a fanfic to someone who happened to donate to a reproductive justice organization. (This is as a result of AO3’s legal status and how fanfiction writers cannot receive money in exchange for their works.) ***EDIT 06/26/2022 6:35PM EST*** I stand corrected, you may mention that the fic is for charity on AO3! You just can't solicit for donations on AO3.

Authors, fanartists, and crafters are all allowed to participate. If you do crafting, you will have to coordinate shipping and addresses with the recipient.

Donors:

Creators can also be donors to receive works from other creators.

Please provide proof of donation (ie, a screenshot of your donation or the confirmation email) but be sure to redact any personally identifying information!

If you choose a craft, please be aware that you will have to either give out your address or a PO box to the creator.

Sign-ups for creators are now live on google sheets

#pro-choice #fandom activism #fanworks for free choice #pro-abortion #fanfiction #fanart #fandom

69 notes · View notes

valkyriesexual · 2 years

Note

Please share some links to help understand roe v Wade better and also how it impacts the people

well roe v. wade was the 1973 supreme court decision that affirmed that a woman has a constitutionally protected right, to an extent, to terminate a pregnancy. the right stems from the penumbral theory of privacy rights, that all specifically enumerated rights in the bill of rights (right to be free of unreasonable searches/seizures, right not to have to let soldiers stay in your house lol) are undergirded by a concept of privacy so fundamental that it didn't need to be explicitly stated. roe v. wade established the trimester framework, in which the government interest in "protecting life"/regulating abortion increases the longer a pregnancy goes on.

roe v. wade was essentially chipped away at over the years, including, most significantly, planned parenthood v. casey, which was decided in 1992. casey held that states can enact all kinds of barriers to access to abortion, so long as it does not create an "undue burden".

basically, the undue burden standard was pretty toothless until the 2013 decision of whole women's health v. hellerstedt, finding that the texas scheme which was allegedly about requiring admittance privileges at hospitals for a doctor to hand out abortion pills in the first trimester, a scheme would essentially force all existing clinics to close, was an undue burden.

that was a big happy decision. then, 3 years later, trump elected, mitch mcconnell steals the seat that belonged to merrick garland, installs neil gorsuch. then a federalist society quid pro quo scheme to get anthony kennedy to retire and a promise that brett kavanaugh would fill his seat, then RBG dies (because she kind of arrogantly wanted HRC to fill her seat, but honestly mcconnell would have just stolen her seat had she retired during obama's second term anyway so), and barrett is rushed through the confirmation process - with like no fucking trial experience - while people are alreaDY VOTING in the 2020 election...

and then whole women's health v. jackson (the texas third party bounty law) and dobbs... and now states can outlaw abortion in its entirety and/or criminalize abortion. and any doctor still willing to help women who don't want to be pregnant, and any woman who tries to end her own pregnancy, can face criminal and civil charges in any state that chooses to enact such a statutory scheme.

i'd recommend people to the works of kate shaw, melissa murray, and leah litman, & their production, the strict scrutiny podcast for analysis. check out whole woman's health action page (here)

& the worlds most terrifying article: we're not going back to the time pre-roe. we're going somewhere worse.

Both abortion and miscarriage currently occur more than a million times each year in America, and the two events are often clinically indistinguishable. Because of this, prohibition states will have a profoundly invasive interest in differentiating between them. Some have already laid the groundwork for establishing government databases of pregnant women likely to seek abortions. Last year, Arkansas passed a law called the Every Mom Matters Act, which requires women considering abortion to call a state hotline and requires abortion providers to register all patients in a database with a unique I.D. Since then, six other states have implemented or proposed similar laws. The hotlines are provided by crisis pregnancy centers: typically Christian organizations, many of which masquerade as abortion clinics, provide no health care, and passionately counsel women against abortion. Crisis pregnancy centers are already three times as numerous as abortion clinics in the U.S., and, unlike hospitals, they are not required to protect the privacy of those who come to them. For years, conservative states have been redirecting money, often from funds earmarked for poor women and children, toward these organizations. The data that crisis pregnancy centers are capable of collecting—names, locations, family details, sexual and medical histories, non-diagnostic ultrasound images—can now be deployed against those who seek their help.

and

If you become pregnant, your phone generally knows before many of your friends do. The entire Internet economy is built on meticulous user tracking of purchases and search terms. Laws modelled on Texas’s S.B. 8, which encourages private citizens to file lawsuits against anyone who facilitates an abortion, will proliferate, giving self-appointed vigilantes no shortage of tools to track and identify suspects. (The National Right to Life Committee recently published policy recommendations for anti-abortion states that included criminal penalties for anyone who provides information about self-managed abortion “over the telephone, the internet, or any other medium of communication.”) A reporter for Vice recently spent a mere hundred and sixty dollars to purchase a data set on visits to more than six hundred Planned Parenthood clinics. Brokers sell data that make it possible to track journeys to and from any location—say, an abortion clinic in another state. In Missouri, this year, a lawmaker proposed a measure that would allow private citizens to sue anyone who helps a resident of the state get an abortion elsewhere; as with S.B. 8, the law would reward successful plaintiffs with ten thousand dollars. The closest analogue to this kind of legislation is the Fugitive Slave Act of 1793

and

Pregnancy is more than thirty times more dangerous than abortion. One study estimates that a nationwide ban would lead to a twenty-one-per-cent rise in pregnancy-related deaths. Some of the women who will die from abortion bans are pregnant right now. Their deaths will come not from back-alley procedures but from a silent denial of care: interventions delayed, desires disregarded. They will die of infections, of preëclampsia, of hemorrhage, as they are forced to submit their bodies to pregnancies that they never wanted to carry, and it will not be hard for the anti-abortion movement to accept these deaths as a tragic, even noble, consequence of womanhood itself.

and

In the meantime, abortion bans will hurt, disable, and endanger many people who want to carry their pregnancies to term but who encounter medical difficulties. Physicians in prohibition states have already begun declining to treat women who are in the midst of miscarriages, for fear that the treatment could be classified as abortion. One woman in Texas was told that she had to drive fifteen hours to New Mexico to have her ectopic pregnancy—which is nonviable, by definition, and always dangerous to the mother—removed. Misoprostol, one of the abortion pills, is routinely prescribed for miscarriage management, because it causes the uterus to expel any remaining tissue. Pharmacists in Texas, fearing legal liability, have already refused to prescribe it. If a miscarriage is not managed to a safe completion, women risk—among other things, and taking the emotional damage for granted—uterine perforation, organ failure, infection, infertility, and death.

and

In Texas, already, children aged nine, ten, and eleven, who don’t yet understand what sex and abuse are, face forced pregnancy and childbirth after being raped. Women sitting in emergency rooms in the midst of miscarriages are being denied treatment for sepsis because their fetuses’ hearts haven’t yet stopped. People you’ll never hear of will spend the rest of their lives trying and failing, agonizingly, in this punitive country, to provide stability for a first or fifth child they knew they weren’t equipped to care for.

so yeah.

#answered #sources cited #pro choice #protect women #pro abortion #without apology

36 notes · View notes

mostlysignssomeportents · 10 months

Text

The "religious liberty" angle for overturning the overturning of Dobbs

Frank Wilhoit’s definition of “conservativism” remains a classic:

There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.

https://crookedtimber.org/2018/03/21/liberals-against-progressives/#comment-729288

Conservativism is, in other words, the opposite of the rule of law, which is the idea that the law applies equally to all. Many of America’s most predictably weird moments live in the tension between the rule of law and the conservative’s demand to be protected — but not bound — by the law.

Think of the Republican women of Florida whose full-throated support for the perfomatively cruel and bigoted policies of Ron Desantis turned to howls of outrage when the governor signed a law “overhauling alimony” (for “overhauling,” read “eliminating”):

https://www.orlandoweekly.com/news/this-is-a-death-sentence-for-me-florida-republican-women-say-they-will-switch-parties-after-desantis-approves-alimony-law-34563230

This is real leopards-eating-people’s-faces-party stuff, and it’s the only source of mirth in an otherwise grim situation.

But out of the culture-war bullshit backfires, none is so sweet and delicious as the religious liberty self-own. You see, under the rule of law, if some special consideration is owed to a group due to religious liberty, that means all religions. Of course, Wilhoit-drunk conservatives imagine that “religious liberty” is a synonym for Christian liberty, and that other groups will never demand the same carve outs.

Remember when Louisiana decided spend tax dollars to fund “religious” schools under a charter school program, only to discover — to their Islamaphobic horror — that this would allow Muslim schools to get public subsidies, too?

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/louisiana_n_1593995

(They could have tried the Quebec gambit, where hijabs and yarmulkes are classed as “religious” and therefore banned for public servants and publicly owned premises, while crosses are treated as “cultural” and therefore exempted — that’s some primo Wilhoitism right there)

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/quebec-francois-legault-crucifix-religious-symbols-1.4858757

The Satanic Temple has perfected the art of hoisting religious liberty on its own petard. Are you a state lawmaker hoping to put a giant Ten Commandments on the statehouse lawn? Go ahead, have some religious liberty — just don’t be surprised when the Satanic Temple shows up to put a giant statue of Baphomet next to it:

https://www.npr.org/2018/08/17/639726472/satanic-temple-protests-ten-commandments-monument-with-goat-headed-statue

Wanna put a Christmas tree in the state capitol building? Sure, but there’s gonna be a Satanic winter festival display right next to it:

https://katv.com/news/offbeat/satanic-temple-display-installed-at-illinois-capitol-next-to-nativity-scene-menorah-decorations-snake-serpent-satanic-temple-springfield-christmas-tree

And now we come to Dobbs, and the cowardly, illegitimate Supreme Court’s cowardly, illegitimate overturning of Roe v Wade, a move that was immediately followed by “red” states implementing total, or near-total bans on abortion:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/06/15/paid-medical-disinformation/#crisis-pregnancy-centers

These same states are hotbeds of “religious liberty” nonsense. In about a dozen of these states, Jews, Christians, and Satanists are filing “religious liberty” challenges to the abortion ban. In Indiana, the Hoosier Jews For Choice have joined with other religious groups in a class action, to argue that the “religious freedom” law that Mike Pence signed as governor protects their right to an abortion:

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/06/21/legal-strategy-that-could-topple-abortion-bans-00102468

Their case builds on precedents from the covid lockdowns, like decisions that said that if secular exceptions to lockdown rules or vaccine mandates existed, then states had to also allow religious exemptions. That opens the door for religious exemptions to abortion bans — if there’s a secular rule that permits abortion in the instance of incest or rape, then faith-based exceptions must be permitted, too.

Some of the challenges to abortion rules seek to carve out religious exemptions, but others seek to overturn the abortion rules altogether, because the lawmakers who passed them explicitly justified them in the name of fusing Christian “values” with secular law, a First Amendment no-no.

As Rabbi James Bennett told Politico’s Alice Ollstein: “They’re entitled to their interpretation of when life begins, but they’re not entitled to have the exclusive one.”

In Florida, a group of Jewish, Buddhist, Episcopalian, Universalists and United Church clerics are challenging the “aiding and abetting” law because it restricts the things they can say from the pulpit — a classic religious liberty gambit.

Kentucky’s challenge comes from three Jewish women whose faith holds that life begins “with the first breath.” Lead plaintiff Lisa Sobel described how Kentucky’s law bars her from seeking IVF treatment, because she could face criminal charges for “discarding non-viable embryos” created during the process.

Then there’s the Satanic Temple, in court in Texas, Idaho and Indiana. The Satanists say that abortion is a religious ritual, and argue that the state can’t limit their access to it.

These challenges all rest on state religious liberty laws. What will happen when some or all of these reach the Supreme Court? It’s a risky gambit. This is the court that upheld Trump’s Muslim ban and the right of a Christian baker to refuse to bake a wedding cake for a same-sex couple. It’s a court that loves Wilhoit’s “in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.”

It’s a court that’s so Wilhoit-drunk, it’s willing to grant religious liberty to bigots who worry about imaginary same-sex couples:

https://newrepublic.com/article/173987/mysterious-case-fake-gay-marriage-website-real-straight-man-supreme-court

But in the meantime, the bigots and religious maniacs who want to preserve “religious liberty” while banning abortion are walking a fine line. The Becket Fund, which funded the Hobby Lobby case (establishing that religious maniacs can deny health care to their employees if their imaginary friends object), has filed a brief in one case arguing that the religious convictions of people arguing for a right to abortion aren’t really sincere in their beliefs:

https://becketnewsite.s3.amazonaws.com/20230118184008/Individual-Members-v.-Anonymous-Planitiff-Amicus-Brief.pdf

This is quite a line for Becket to have crossed — religious liberty trufans hate it when courts demand that people seeking religious exemptions prove that their beliefs are sincerely held.

Not only is Becket throwing its opposition to “sincerely held belief” tests under the bus, they’re doing so for nothing. Jewish religious texts clearly state that life begins at the first breath, and that the life of a pregnant person takes precedence over the life of the fetus in their uterus.

The kicker in Ollstein’s great article comes in the last paragraph, delivered by Columbia Law’s Elizabeth Reiner Platt, who runs the Law, Rights, and Religion Project:

The idea of reproductive rights as a religious liberty issue is absolutely not something that came from lawyers. It’s how faith communities themselves have been talking about their approach to reproductive rights for literally decades.

The Clarion Science Fiction Writers’ Workshop (I’m a grad, instructor and board member) is having its fundraiser auction to help defray tuition. I’ve donated a “Tuckerization” — the right to name a character in a future novel:

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/clarion-sf-fantasy-writers-workshop-23-campaign/#/

If you’d like an essay-formatted version of this thread to read or share, here’s a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/07/11/wilhoitism/#hoosier-jews

[Image ID: Moses parting the Red Sea. On the seabed is revealed a Planned Parenthood clinic.]

Image: Nina Paley (modified) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Moses-Splits-Sea_by_Nina_Paley.jpg

CC0 1.0 https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/deed.en

—

Kristina D.C. Hoeppner (modified) https://www.flickr.com/photos/4nitsirk/40406966752/

CC BY-SA 2.0: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/

#pluralistic #religion #frank wilhoit #petard #gender #religious freedom #1a #abortion bans #dobbs #roe

1K notes · View notes

theivorybilledwoodpecker · 2 years

Text

I highly recommend reading the whole article. It doesn't take long, but it's well worth it. There are so many parts I want to highlight.

Professor Bridges absolutely owned that court room:

"Republican Senator Tom Cotton asked panelists testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee on 12 July whether they condemn violence against so-called crisis pregnancy centres, nonmedical facilities intended to deter people from seeking an abortion.

“'I condemn violence,' said Ms Bridges, a professor of law at University of California Berkeley School of Law and reproductive health scholar. 'And I would like to note that forced birth is an act of violence.' "She pointed to an increase in the number of assaults, barricades and suspicious packages outside abortion clinics, as abortion rights advocates face escalating threats to abortion care following the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn the landmark, half-century precedent in Roe v Wade. "Heidi Matzke, executive director of the Alternatives Pregnancy Center in California, said crisis pregnancy centres like hers – nonmedical facilities intended to dissuade people from seeking an abortion – have been “targeted for violent assaults of vandalism, and hateful attacks online and in the media.” "Dr Colleen P McNicholas, chief medical officer of Planned Parenthood of the St Louis Region and Southwest Missouri, also condemned violence – then read the names of nine abortion providers and clinic workers who were killed for providing abortion care. “'I absolutely condemn violence against everyone, including abortion providers,' she said."

And then

"She stressed that 'people of color, specifically Black people, will feel the impact of the court’s decision in Dobbs more than any other racial group,' pointing to reporting from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that finds that Black women are three times more likely to die from a pregnancy-related causes than white women.

....

"Texas Republican John Cornyn asked Ms Bridges whether she believes “there ought to be more Black babies aborted”.

“'[Black people] have agency, they have intelligence, they know what is best for themselves and I would love to create the conditions under which they can live lives that are filled with dignity and humanity,' Ms Bridges said."

And

"Ms Bridges also fired back at Senator Josh Hawley after the Republican senator from Missouri appeared to dismiss that transgender people could become pregnant, underscoring the myriad, far-reaching impacts of dissolving legal abortion care that the committee sought to uncover, from the legal ramifications to what committee chair Dick Durbin called a looming health crisis."

#Khiara Bridges #Abortion #Roe v. Wade #reproductive rights #Black lives matter

180 notes · View notes

elfwreck · 2 years

Text

Free ebook: We Organize to Change Everything - Fighting for Abortion Access and Reproductive Justice

Here's the table of contents:

Introduction by Jessie Kindig

Part I. It’s Time to Fight

1T he Fight Is On Why We’re Going Backwards on Abortion Rights—and How We Can Rebuild a Fighting Feminist Movement - by Jenny Brown

2 Pañuelos Verdes, Acompañamiento, Solidaridad The Global South Has Much to Teach the North in This Moment - by Naomi Braine

3 Women Themselves Are the Solution Las Libres Has Been Helping Women Access Abortion and Human Rights in Mexico—and Now the United States—for Over Two Decades - by Verónica Cruz Sanchez, interviewed by Elizabeth Navarro; translated by Elizabeth Navarro

4 The Attacks on Native People’s Reproductive Autonomy Amicus Brief Filed in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization Supreme Court Case

Shared on behalf of Cecilia Fire Thunder (Oglala Lakota), the National Indigenous Women’s Resource Center, the Native American Community Board, and Team: Counsel of Record Lael Echo-Hawk; Legal Team Lauren van Schilifgaarde and Sarah Deer; Epidemiology Team Abigail Echo-Hawk and Kaeli Flannery; and Research Assistant Elise Higgins

5 Clinic Defense Is Advocating for Our Patients Defending the Last Abortion Clinic in Mississippi - by Derenda Hancock and Kim Gibson; interviewed by Anne Rumberger

6 They Were Wrong to Bet on Our Silence Shout Your Abortion’s Rapid Response to the Dobbs Decision - by Amelia Bonow

7 What We Need Now Is More of What We Did The Militant Multiracial Grassroots Campaign That Won Abortion by Popular Referendum in Washington State—in 1969 - by Barbara Winslow

Part II. Reproductive Justice Is Justice for All 8 Empty Choices Women of Color and the History of Reproductive Justice - by Marian Jones

9 Sovereignty Lost Not Only Has Native People’s Right to Parent Our Children Been Stolen from Us, but So Has Our Right to Abortion—Even with Roe v. Wade in Effect - by Jen Deerinwater

10 Aborto Libre, Seguro y Accesible In Puerto Rico, a History of Colonization Led to an Atrocious Lack of Reproductive Freedom - by Raquel Reichard

11 Labor Crisis in the Clinics When You’re Not Focused on the Workers, Who Is Going to Provide the Care? - by Crystal and Luna, in conversation with Amy Littlefield

12 White Supremacy and the Antiabortion Movement Abortion Bans and Regressive Gender Roles Increase the Number of White Babies Born While Criminalizing Women of Color - by Erin Matson and Shireen Rose Shakouri

13 Your Body Is Not Your Own What If We Understand the Criminalization of Abortion as Part of Creating a Larger Criminalized Class? - by Cheryl Rivera

14 Abortion Behind Bars The Carceral State Already Removes Bodily Autonomy and Any Illusion of Reproductive Choice - by Victoria Law

15 Pregnant and Prosecuted In a Post-Roe World, the Rights of the Fetus Would Supersede Those of the Person Carrying It—but for Many Pregnant People, This Is Already True - by Marie Solis

16 One Struggle, One Fight Abortion and Transgender Healthcare Are Under Attack by the Same Forces Using the Same Playbook - by Dr. Mary K. Bowman

17 Pregnancy and Abortion Only by Measuring How Much We Enjoy This Right Can We Measure the Social Wealth We Enjoy - by Movimento di Lotta Femminile di Padova; translated by Arlen Austen

Part III. Get Yourself Some Pills

18 Maybe Abortion Isn’t as Complicated as We’ve Been Led to Believe The Underground Network of Midwives, Herbalists, Nurses, and Activists Providing Home Abortions Across America - by Lizzie Presser

19 How to Give Yourself an Abortion Get Yourself Some Pills - by Arielle Swernoff illustrated by Mattie Lubchansky

20 Self-Managed Abortion Services It’s Safe, Effective, and Done All over the World - by Naomi Braine

Resource Guide and Directory Fight Back, Get an Abortion, Find Legal Resources, Fund Care, Tell Your Story - by the Editors

#health care

11 notes · View notes

they-are-a-prolife-autist · 2 years

Text

A pro-abortion terrorist group has issued a communique instructing its followers to carry “anger out into the world” by “expressing it physically” on the night the Supreme Court releases the opinion in the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization case, which, according to a leaked draft opinion, is expected to overturn Roe v. Wade this month.

These people have claimed responsibility for multiple terrorist attacks on crisis pregnancy centers and non-violent prolife organizations; and are continuing to encourage and threaten violence towards people who oppose them.

American prolifers, we oppose a culture of violence, of manipulation, of abuse, and oftentimes of dangerous mindsets that express homicidal and suicidal tendencies. Now is not the time to fight fire with fire. In the face of profound fear, confusion, and rage we must continue to be the voice of compassion and grace. Many advocates of abortion are survivors of immense trauma. Many genuinely do believe that prolifers desire to force women to become pregnant and see us as somehow pro-breeding farm. Society is in a panic because many women don’t know if they can survive an unplanned pregnancy.

Our response to terrorists cannot be counter-terrorism. We cannot be spiteful. We cannot be hateful. We MUST continue to show support for women in difficult circumstances and we must continue to stand our ground and not be bullied. The attacks on crisis pregnancy centers speak to character of the prochoice movement. What will our actions say about our characters? Who will history remember as violent and evil? Who will destroy, and who will rebuild? Now is not our time to rise up in anger to wreak havoc on people who are reacting out of fear and fury. Now is our time to stand firm and continue to push to true human equality, and to END our countries season of slaughter and antinatalism. Now is our time to encourage women to stand up and demand better than conformity. To embrace and celebrate our biology. To advocate for REAL healthcare. We will not violently tear down organizations build on racism, eugenics, and misogyny… but they will crumble from disuse as all they stood for becomes obsolete. As a real war against us begins we will remain pro-woman. Pro-birth. Pro-peace. And always ProLife

17 notes · View notes