The Supreme Court decision, when it happens later this year, is quite likely going to set off an argument within the Republican Party -- or, at the very least, that subset of the party who are running for president.
The Republican platform makes several medical claims that shape its policies. Since public health policy should be based on the best scientific and medical evidence, fact-checking these claims is timely.
Religious fundamentalism is alive and well in the Supreme Court, and abortion rights are an endangered species. The interesting thing is that the terms "abortifacient," "Obamacare mandate," "accommodation," "buffer zone" or "contraceptive" were all unknown at the time of the Constitution.
This week, pro-life advocates in Congress struck another heavy blow against equality and reproductive justice by contaminating an otherwise uncontroversial anti-human trafficking bill, which had strong bipartisan support, with anti-abortion restrictions.
Abortion-rights supporters have no interest in pressuring women into abortions. The whole point of the pro-choice movement is that women need to be supported in making life-changing decisions about their bodies and their future.
The decline in marriage rates began long before gay couples won the right to marry anywhere. To pin that decline on them is scapegoating, pure and simple, and I suspect, an act of desperation.
Abortion transgresses three "feminine" ideals: That female sexuality should only be for the purposes of procreation; the inevitability of motherhood; and that women are inherently and instinctively nurturing.
Latinos in the U.S. have important health care needs that we must make visible, and in April we have the perfect opportunity. This month, let's look together at the advancements as well as the ongoing reproductive health care needs of Latinos in the U.S.
SB 95 is an unwarranted and dangerous intrusion into the patient-physician relationship. The bill provides no medical or public health justification for outlawing the safest method of second-trimester abortion in the world today. Thus, one must conclude that the intent is to punish women by relegating them to obsolete care.
The campaign to eliminate the right to safe, legal abortions is intentional, relentless and political. The consequences are real, personal and frightening. Attacks on abortion rights further entrench discrimination against women.
Since 2000, Tarasiewicz has worked as the director for the Network for East-West Women in Poland. She has watched as many foundations that funded women's issues have pulled out of Poland as money from the European Union became available. But the EU funding has been a mixed blessing at best.
Those who seek to limit or prohibit safe, legal abortion need to understand the damaging consequences for the unwanted children, their mothers, and society.
Pro-life advocates in Congress recently infected an uncontroversial anti-human trafficking bill that had strong bipartisan support with a contentious amendment that prohibits taypayer-funded abortions. Women's reproductive health should not be the euphemistic football in a match played mostly by and for men in Congress.
Having been at the forefront of American politics for over five decades, there's little that still surprises Frank... except the Tea Party.
In regards to women's health, the GOP and Iranian hardliners are indeed comrades. (Though I'm sure neither of them would ever admit that.)
Republican Senators are playing hide and seek with victims of sex trafficking. The U.S. Department of Justice now estimates that approximately 300,000 American children are at risk of being prostituted in the U.S. -- at an average age of 13 or 14.