Friday, May 20, 2022

"The life of a US teen bride"/ "24-Year-Old Man Finds Love and a New Kidney Through Tinder: 'Never Would've Expected That'"

Oct. 13, 2018 "The life of a US teen bride": Today I found this article by Terrence McCoy in the Edmonton Journal.  It was a big article, but you can read more of it on the link:


It was the day of the birthday party, and the husband and wife had invited everyone they knew. They’d spent the morning buying food — a sheet cake, jumbo hot dogs, ground beef, soda, chips — and were now standing around a picnic table covered with it all, along a long lake under a cloudless sky, hoping at least some people would show up to eat it.

Today was the first time both sides of their family were supposed to come together, something that hadn’t happened at their wedding four months before. On that day, not a single member of the husband’s family had attended — not his brothers, who’d called him a fool for marrying like this, and not his parents, who’d told him the relationship would only get him into trouble. Just about the only people who’d gone that day, and were here so far on this day, had been the people involved in the wedding itself.

There was Maria Vargas, a shy and brooding girl who looked older than her 16 years, and her husband, Phil Manning, 25, who often acted younger than his. And nearby, smoking a cigarette, was a slight woman with long, narrow features, Michelle Hockenberry, 39, the mother who’d allowed her daughter to marry.

Even in an era when the median age of marrying has climbed higher and higher, unions like Phil and Maria’s remain surprisingly prevalent in the United States. 

Between 2000 and 2010, an estimated 248,000 children were married, most of whom were girls, some as young as 12, wedding men. 

Now, under pressure from advocates and amid a nationwide reckoning over gender equality and sexual misconduct, states have begun ending exceptions that have allowed marriages for people younger than 18, the minimum age in most states. 

Texas last year banned it, except for emancipated minors. Kentucky outlawed it, except for 17-year-olds with parental and judicial approval. Maryland considered increasing the minimum marrying age from 15, but its bill failed to pass in April. Then in May, Delaware abolished the practice under every circumstance, and New Jersey did the same in June. Pennsylvania, which may vote to eliminate all loopholes this autumn, could be next.

“Devastating” is how the bill’s memorandum summarized the consequences of child marriage.

Nearly 70 percent of the unions end in divorce, research suggests, and for children in their mid-teens, it’s higher still — about 80 percent. 

Teen brides are nearly three times as likely to have at least five children. 

Their chance of living in poverty is 31 percent higher. 

And they’re 50 percent more likely to drop out of school, which was the outcome that terrified Maria the most. The start of the school year was just two weeks away, and she still didn’t know whether her mounting responsibilities at home would keep her from returning to the classroom.

“There’s your parents,” she now whispered to Phil, trying to put that worry aside on a day when they were expecting two dozen guests. Sinewy and sweating, Phil looked up from the grill and saw a bearded man and a dark-haired woman. They slowly made their way to the picnic table, piled with presents wrapped in tinsel paper to celebrate the second birthday of Maria’s son, Douglas, whom she’d had with another grown man. They stopped and looked down at the presents, then at Phil, then at his new wife.

There was a long silence as everyone looked at one another.

“What do you think, Mama?” Phil finally asked, but his mother only shook her head.

Maria wandered away with her son to play at the lake’s edge. Phil went to the grill and started serving food. Michelle took a sip of iced tea and glanced at her daughter’s new in-laws.

“How you guys doing?” she tried.

“All right,” Phil’s mom said.

“Hot?”

“Yeah.”

And that was the end of the conversation.

Maria walked back, straight black hair dripping from the water, and Phil met her halfway. He put his arm around her. He gave her a long kiss, and everyone watched them, expressionless. The kiss ended, and Maria went to the picnic table. She looked at what the few guests had left behind. The vanilla cake that, by the end of the day, would be only a third eaten. The dozens of hot dogs. The barely touched potato chips.

“Supposed to be a lot more people here,” Maria said. “I wouldn’t have gotten so much food.”

This is how a child in America gets married:

It was a Friday, March 16. Maria woke early. She normally hated anything feminine — “a tomboy,” Michelle called her, who smoked, swore every few words, had skull tattoos — but today was different. She wanted it all. Michelle did her makeup and hair. Maria put on a white dress and veil. 

Then, fearing authorities would arrest Phil at the local courthouse, they drove into nearby West Virginia, where they wouldn’t be recognized and which has one of the country’s highest rates of child marriage. Within an hour of arriving at the Morgan County Courthouse, her mother had signed the form, the marriage license had been issued, an officiant at the ceremony outside had said, “It’s my pleasure to be the first to introduce Mr. and Mrs. Philip Manning,” and everyone had begun to cheer. Maria felt happier than she’d ever thought possible.

And now?

Now it was nearly five months later. She was waking once more, this time past 10 a.m., feeling exhausted again. She poured a bowl of Cocoa Puffs for Douglas’s breakfast, then looked at the mess around her. She swept the floor. Scrubbed the counters. Pulled out a bag of garbage from the trash bin. Put in a load of laundry. Lit a scented candle. And checked on Douglas.

“I got to clean your room next,” she told him, sighing.

Maria was a housewife, in every sense. In this trailer at the edge of town, which she rarely left and which she and Phil shared with an unemployed friend, she cooked most meals, swept floors, dispensed advice and managed finances. 

Every month, Phil took home $1,600 from a furnace of a factory making drill bits, and every month, they spent about $1,150 of it on bills. To keep them disciplined, she’d stuck a budget to the refrigerator. “Monthly savings: $450,” it said. The sum seemed more hopeful than realistic, but it was what they had to save if they were ever going to get the money they needed to move to nearby Bedford, where she hoped to enroll at a high school that had on-campus child care for Douglas.

The possibility of going to school was the only remaining shard of a childhood that had long since splintered apart. She remembered the moments. She was 4, hugging her handcuffed mother, while Michelle was incarcerated for simple assault. She was 13, caring for her younger siblings, day after day, as Michelle watched her stepfather die of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma at the hospital. 

She was 14, hanging out with a 19-year-old man who, according to police reports filed in the subsequent criminal cases, had sex with her at least five times at the Janey Lynn Motel in Bedford, got her pregnant, became her boyfriend and then later abducted her.

After Douglas was born, and after the father had gone to prison for the concealment and corruption of a minor, school seemed to matter less. Michelle told her she’d look after Douglas. But Maria couldn’t bring herself to trust him with anyone, not even her mother, and didn’t return to the classroom that year. One of the first people, in fact, she allowed to care for Douglas was Phil, whom she’d met at a friend’s place when she was 15 and with whom she’d at first wanted only a physical relationship. But soon she couldn’t imagine being with anyone else, and still couldn’t.

“Will you make me lunch today?” he now asked, as a hard rain washed over the trailer park and they sat on the porch smoking.

“I already made it,” she said of two tuna sandwiches. She stood and, noticing the time, glanced down at herself, still in pajamas, then at Phil, still shirtless.

“I got to get dressed,” she said. “And then get Douglas dressed. And get you dressed.”

Douglas had a pediatric appointment. Phil told her he was coming, too, and she was again reminded why she married him. Even in the beginning, their relationship had never to her conformed to the stereotype — with her as victim, him as predator — but instead felt as if they were saving each other. 

She helped him stay out of jail, where he’d twice gone on burglary convictions, and he helped her with Douglas, promising to treat the boy like his son.

“All right, we got to go,” Maria said. The roommate, a recovering heroin addict with short blond hair, drove them in his battered white sedan through downtown Everett, a drab collection of Colonial houses beneath a mountain, before pulling up to a pediatrician’s office. They went inside, and that’s when Maria saw her. The middle-aged woman in the waiting room with her own child, wearing a shirt that said “Everett Warriors.” It was her old high school principal.

Maria had last seen her at the beginning of the 2017 school year, when, following her time away, she’d tried out Everett High School. Within weeks, the isolation of eating lunch alone, unable to connect with other students, and the annoyance at seemingly impractical classes had become too much, and she was back home. 

But did that mean 2018 would be that way, too? What would it feel like, she wondered, to do something, rather than having things done to her?

“I have to enroll,” she whispered to Phil.

“We are going to Bedford,” he promised.

“If we don’t, I’m going to be a sitting duck,” she said, left at home doing nothing. “I can’t put Douglas on my hip and take him with me, or I would.”

The name of the principal’s child was called. Maria watched her disappear into the back. Relieved that the woman hadn’t seemed to recognize her, she leaned her head against her husband.

Phil met Maria on Feb. 25, 2017, in a trailer on the other side of Everett, where a buddy from jail was living. He loved her hair, long and black, and all that night, she laughed and took pictures of him with her phone. Phil leaning back, giving her a weird face. Phil closing his eyes, drinking a beer. Phil smiling in a selfie, bare shoulder pressing against hers. To him, she sure didn’t look 15, but he never asked. What he did ask for was her phone number. “I’d caught feelings” was how he put it, and that was that. He was 24, and he had a 15-year-old girlfriend.

What at first felt innocuous soon became a terrible secret. They saw each other as often as they could but lived according to certain rules. Never hold hands in public. Never kiss unless they were alone. Never tell anyone anything, least of all the truth — that they were already sleeping together, that they weren’t just friends.

“U know I’m always only a message away,” one friend wrote to him on Facebook in early April 2017, trying to find out what was going on.

“I don’t think you want in on this one, really,” Phil replied, distraught. “. . . It’s just this thing that won’t stop.”

He thought about breaking up with Maria all of the time, and about how it could end if he didn’t. With him in jail. With his face on the Pennsylvania sex offender registry. With his life ruined. But instead he moved into her mother’s house, started calling Maria “wifey” and concocted another cover story. He was living there to help care for her mentally disabled brother, Donte, and nothing more.

All of the lies, one after another. It got to be too much, especially after he’d come to see her son as his own, and especially after he’d ask her to marry that October, and she’d said yes. 

So he stopped hiding it. He changed his Facebook picture to one of him and Douglas. He called Maria his girlfriend online. He started telling people. His parents were furious: “You shouldn’t be doing this; she’s 16 years old,” his father said. His co-workers laughed: “Chester Cheeto,” they called him from then on, referencing the comic strip “Chester the Molester.”

“No one likes me,” he wrote on Facebook one night soon after the wedding.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/national/wp/2018/10/05/feature/child-marriage-in-the-u-s-is-surprisingly-prevalent-now-states-are-passing-laws-to-make-it-harder/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.6560c2d29b43

My opinion: I feel really sorry for Maria.  Her mom went to jail for awhile, and her step dad died of cancer.  She had to take care of her younger siblings.  She's 14 yrs old and then dated a 19 yr old man. and got pregnant.  She should either get an abortion or give the baby up for adoption.  

I don't really have a problem with Phil.  However, they shouldn't get married.  I don't know, wait until she's 18 yrs old, and graduated out of high school? 



Sept. 21, 2021 "24-Year-Old Man Finds Love and a New Kidney Through Tinder: 'Never Would've Expected That'": Today I found this article by Joelle Goldstein on Yahoo News.  This is a love story, but also about being an organ donor:





 Courtesy Reid Alexander and Rafael Dìaz Rafael Dìaz (left) and Reid Alexander with their wedding cake

A 24-year-old man got his happy ending twice over when he met his soulmate on Tinder — who was also a perfect match for the kidney transplant he needed.

Reid Alexander tells PEOPLE he's still in disbelief about how the events of the last year left him with a new husband and a second chance at life.

"Expect the unexpected," he says. "I never would've thought that I would move across the country and meet the love of my life, and then the love of my life would also be a perfect match, and I would get a kidney. Never would've expected that."

"It was meant to be," adds Alexander's husband, Rafael Dìaz, 28.

Alexander's health issues began when he was diagnosed with Alport syndrome at age 17. The inherited disease causes damage to the blood vessels in the kidney, which can lead to hearing loss, eye problems, kidney disease and kidney failure, according to the National Kidney Foundation (NKF).

In Alexander's case, after graduating college, doctors informed him that his kidneys were only functioning at 20 percent and he would need to start dialysis while he awaited a transplant.

Despite the scary prognosis, Alexander — who grew up in Kokomo, Indiana — carried on with his plans to move to Denver and start a new life.

"I really love it out there," he says. "I got a job two days before I was moving and I was really determined to do it. I did it on a whim."

And not long after making the move, Alexander logged onto Tinder and met Dìaz.

"We started chatting on Tinder in August 2020," Dìaz says. "Both of us [were] impressed with each other."

"We really just hit it off," recalls Alexander. "And we were together every day ever since. It felt like we knew each other for a really long time. And it still feels like that to us."

Alexander was quick to disclose his medical history, noting that it would be hard to hide due to his hearing aids and challenges with eating salt. (The progression of Alport syndrome can be slowed by limiting sodium in the diet, per the NKF.)

But Dìaz was not phased, and immediately offered support to Alexander, who was preparing to begin dialysis.

"That's when I started to put more attention into the syndrome he has," Dìaz says, noting that he didn't know anyone with a similar condition, but thought, "'Okay, that is not a problem.'"

Dìaz then offered to look into being Alexander's kidney donor. "I was like, 'No, you don't have to do that,'" Alexander recalls. "But he was very determined."

"I was very sure that I [could] do it," adds Dìaz, who was already registered as an organ donor at the time. "I just said, 'I want to. You are someone that I want, that I love, so I can do it for you.'"

From then on, things came together quickly for the couple. This February, the pair got engaged and by April, they began testing to see if Dìaz was a match.

That same month, the duo also decided to tie the knot at an intimate ceremony, opting to use the money they were saving for a destination wedding to fund Alexander's transplant.

"We were going to wait and do a big traditional wedding... but then the realization of a transplant happening this year was getting more and more likely," says Alexander. "So it was [either] saving up money for a wedding or saving up money for a transplant. And so we chose transplant."

In June, after testing confirmed Dìaz was a perfect match, they were finally able to set a transplant date — and on Aug. 13, the couple underwent the procedure at Indiana University Health hospital.

Afterwards, they were filled with relief and emotion.

"I was in a lot of pain [initially]," Dìaz says. "But if I had to do it again, I would."

"It's not only because I love him so much, but it's also because I will be able to share life [with him] and enjoy this feeling that made [him] happy," Dìaz adds.

"I don't think there's anything that I can do that shows my appreciation," Alexander says of his husband. "It means so much because to me, he made the ultimate sacrifice. He gave me an organ so that I can live a better life [and] be healthy. And that's just so amazing."

"I've already cried so much," he continues. "From the first day that I woke up in the hospital after surgery and every day after, every time we saw each other, I just cried. It means a lot to me."

Currently recovering at Alexander's parents' home in Indiana, the pair are eager to return to Colorado.

"I think that the next step for us in this journey is to enjoy as much as we can because we never know what can happen next," Dìaz says.

They also hope their story will bring awareness to the importance of organ donation.

"You never know who [may] need you for that, or where you can help," Dìaz notes. "You can help families. You can help people. You can help to change the life of someone else and [give] someone the opportunity that they didn't have before. If you can do it, do it."

Those interested in becoming organ donors can do so here.

24-Year-Old Man Finds Love and a New Kidney Through Tinder: 'Never Would've Expected That' (yahoo.com)





"Will Smith Reveals Details of His Open Marriage With Jada Pinkett Smith"/ "Will Arnett recalls his 'brutal' divorce from Amy Poehler: 'It was a painful couple of years'"

Sept., 28, 2021 "Will Smith Reveals Details of His Open Marriage With Jada Pinkett Smith": Today I found this article by Ryan Smith on Newsweek:  


Will Smith’s marriage to Jada Pinkett Smith has landed below the highlight as soon as once more, amid new revelations about their union.

In the summertime of 2020, singer August Alsina, 29, revealed that he’d beforehand had an affair with Pinkett Smith, 50—which the married couple confirmed once they appeared collectively on her present, Purple Desk Speak, days later.

And after talking candidly about Pinkett Smith’s “entanglement” with Alsina during a break in their marriage, Smith, 53, shared additional particulars about their relationship, admitting the actress is not the one one who has indulged in affection exterior of their union.  

In a brand new interview with GQ, Smith admitted that whereas their romance was initially monogamous, they finally opened their relationship upon realizing they had been “each depressing and clearly one thing needed to change” following an argument on Pinkett Smith’s fortieth birthday.

Addressing the general public notion that he was a long-suffering husband who Pinkett Smith had cheated on, Smith stated: “Jada by no means believed in typical marriage. Jada had members of the family that had an unconventional relationship. So she grew up in a manner that was very totally different than how I grew up.

“There have been important, countless discussions about ‘What’s relational perfection? What’s the excellent option to work together as a pair?’ And for the big a part of our relationship, monogamy was what we selected, not pondering of monogamy as the one relational perfection.”

The Focus star added: “We have now given one another belief and freedom, with the idea that everyone has to seek out their very own manner. And marriage for us cannot be a jail. And I do not counsel our street for anyone. I do not counsel this street for anyone.

“However the experiences that the freedoms we have given each other… and the unconditional help, to me, is the very best definition of affection.”

Smith—whose upcoming memoir, Will, is about to be launched in November—wrote concerning the variety of incidents and choices that led to unhappiness in his marriage, together with the very ceremony itself again in 1997.

Regardless of not wanting conventional nuptials, Pinkett Smith gave into her husband’s strain, the actor writes in his upcoming tome, including: “This is able to be the primary of many compromises Jada would make over time that painfully negated her personal values.”

Years later, when Pinkett Smith insisted that she did not need him to buy a sprawling, 256-acre compound in Southern California, Smith purchased it anyway.

“Nothing good comes from spending your hard-earned cash on a ‘household dwelling’ that your spouse does not need,” Smith writes. “You’re placing a down payment on discord and for years you can be paying off a mortgage of distress. Or worse.”

Smith’s rising fame additionally impacted actress and musician Pinkett Smith’s personal profession, as she turned down the chance for her band, Wicked Wisdom, to open for Guns N’ Roses whereas her husband was taking pictures The Pursuit Of Happyness with their son, Jaden Smith.

Tensions boiled over between the celebs when Pinkett Smith celebrated her fortieth birthday at a soirée in Santa Fe, New Mexico, that her husband had spent three years planning.

Smith commissioned a documentary that seemed again on her life up till that time and traced her lineage again to slavery, together with the monitoring down of a white household who as soon as owned the Girl's Trip star’s ancestors.

“That was probably the most disgusting show of ego I’ve ever seen in my life,” Smith recollects the actress telling him once they acquired again to their resort suite, prompting an argument so loud that their daughter, Willow Smith, begged them to cease as she wept.

Elsewhere within the GQ interview, it was additionally revealed that Smith dreamed of getting a harem of girlfriends—with Halle Berry and Misty Copeland among the many ladies he desired.

Smith stated: “I do not know the place I noticed it or some s*** as an adolescent, however the thought of travelling with 20 ladies that I beloved and took care of and all of that, it appeared like a extremely nice thought. After which, after we performed it out a bit, I used to be like, ‘That will be horrific. That will be horrific.’  I was like, 'Can you imagine how miserable?'"



Feb. 8, 2022 "Will Arnett recalls his 'brutal' divorce from Amy Poehler: 'It was a painful couple of years'": Today I found this article by David Artavia on Yahoo news:


Divorce is never easy, but when you're one part of a famous couple, having it unfold in the public eye can be "brutal," says Will Arnett.

In an interview with The Guardian, the Arrested Development star opened up about his 2012 separation from comedian Amy Poehler after nine years of marriage (the divorce was finalized in 2016), and how it impacted his personal and professional life.

Arnett and Poehler starred together in a string of memorable projects, including Blades of Glory, all while raising sons Archie and Abel James, who are now 13 and 11, respectively.

At the time of their separation, Arrested Development was shooting its fourth season for Netflix after Fox had abruptly canceled the show in 2006.

While the actor was thrilled to be returning to the show, he admits that filming the series in the midst of his divorce was "excruciating."

"Just brutal, brutal, brutal," he told The Guardian. "I was driving to the set one day and I pulled over to the side of the road and cried for an hour."

Arnett carried that pain into his next two projects, BoJack Horseman and Flaked, the latter of which he described as "an amalgamation of characteristics that I didn’t like about other people and other stuff about me that I didn’t like," which allowed him to work through his own emotions.

"What a weird thing to do," he said. "But it was kind of the only thing I knew how to do. It was a painful couple of years, but I had to go through it, I guess."

The public scrutiny he faced during that time was also difficult.

"People talk about you like they know you and they talk about your relationship as if they know what's going on," he explained. "So imagine how weird that is. It's brutal with any relationship, and we have kids, and without getting into specifics, you then see stuff online, like, this one journalist wrote: 'I'm Team Amy.' I'm like: 'You're a grown person. What are you talking about? This is a breakup. This is a family. This isn't some game.'"

But, as Arnett noted, you simply have to "get on with it" for the sake of the children.

"It's been almost 10 years and my kids are so lucky that Amy is their mother and I'm so lucky that we're such a huge part of each other’s lives, even more so than we were five years ago," he said.

Poehler had previously reflected on the divorce in a 2014 interview with Howard Stern, saying, "As you know, Will and I are very, very good friends. We are doing a really good job. I don't think a 10-year marriage constitutes a failure. I think relationships are really tough."

Will Arnett recalls his 'brutal' divorce from Amy Poehler (yahoo.com)

My opinion: This stood out to me the most, because it was a personal and private moment that Arnett was in:

 "I was driving to the set one day and I pulled over to the side of the road and cried for an hour."


Friday, May 13, 2022

"Singular for abortion rights in the US"/ "Trudeau is scaremongering over abortion"/ NDP abortions petition

May 25, 2019 "Singular for abortion rights in the US": Today I found this article by Rosemary Westwood in the Globe and Mail:

Rosemary Westwood is a New Orleans-based journalist


Last year, when I wanted to visit an abortion clinic in Louisiana, I first had to meet the administrator for coffee. She was, essentially, sussing me out. Clinics in the South are deeply protective of their privacy and their patients. I was sussing her out, too. How did she feel about the state of abortion rights in Louisiana, where only three clinics are operating, down from 11 in 2001? 

What did she make of Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s contentious ascendance to the U.S. Supreme Court? She told me she could hear the “death rattle” of abortion rights. Later, I heard her staff joke, darkly, of an “abortion apocalypse.”


They – and others who’ve been fighting anti-abortion laws in conservative states for years – are not surprised by recent events in the United States. Really, no one should be.


The “heartbeat” abortion bans enacted in six states and counting (the laws ban abortion at about six weeks, when the pulsing of a cluster of embryonic cells that later form a heart can first be detected), an eight-week ban in Missouri, and Alabama’s outright abortion ban (the only exception is if a woman is likely to die or risks serious bodily harm) are by far the most severe abortion laws in the United States in recent decades.

They’re also in line with both the trajectory of the anti-abortion movement’s fight and its core beliefs. They are, essentially, the legislative equivalent of a long-held ideology: that zygotes, embryos and fetuses are people.


What is exceptional is that the laws clearly contradict decades of Supreme Court precedent, and that is the point.


They are aimed at Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision that established the constitutional right to abortion, and its descendants (Planned Parenthood v. Casey in 1992 and Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt in 2016). None of them will take immediate effect, since all have or will be challenged by lawsuits.


What matters is the outcome of those cases. The laws are the clearest legislative indication yet that conservatives believe their new appointments to the Supreme Court are poised to hand them a long-wished-for victory. That Roe is toast.


The Democratic Party has erupted in outrage and alarm – outrage on a scale not previously seen while anti-abortion laws advanced over decades, alarm that was largely absent until the arrival of President Donald Trump.


“Momentum is clearly on the side of life," Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the prominent anti-abortion group the Susan B. Anthony List, said in a statement after a Missouri bill passed. Another group, Pro-Life Action League, tweeted, “The days of #RoeVWade are numbered.”


Mr. Trump is one major reason. The President aggressively campaigned on appointing justices who would overturn Roe (“that will happen automatically,” he said in 2016). He’d barely arrived in the White House before he put Justice Neil Gorsuch on the bench. But replacing Justice Anthony Kennedy last year with Brett Kavanaugh was especially crucial – Justice Kennedy, a conservative, twice voted to uphold abortion rights, including as the pivotal vote just three years ago in the Whole Woman’s Health case.

While Mr. Trump banged this particular drum the loudest, appointing anti-abortion judges has been a Republican priority since Ronald Reagan, as Supreme Court observer Linda Greenhouse recently noted in The New York Times, and the effort extends across the entire federal bench. Thus, lower courts have entertained numerous state attacks on abortion, and “a majority of the Fifth Circuit is at war with the Supreme Court’s abortion precedent – and was, even before the Trump administration filled five vacancies on the 16-judge appeals court,” she wrote.


There was no such attention on the other side. While conservative states built a network of abortion hurdles, liberal ones have, for decades, done little. In an analysis of state policy, the pro-choice research non-profit the Guttmacher Institute deems 21 states “hostile” to “very hostile” toward abortion and only four “supportive” or “very supportive.” 

Twenty-five are simply “middle ground.” Nor have Democratic politics obsessed over Supreme Court appointments the way Republican circles have – one could hardly imagine a swath of Hillary Clinton voters telling reporters they voted for her because of the Supreme Court, but that’s what Trump voters did.


With the writing on the wall, all this is changing. Protests against abortion bans swept the United States last week in a national day of action. Democratic states have pushed reproductive-rights bills of their own in 2019 and pro-choice groups argue the 2018 midterm elections – which sent a wave of pro-choice Democrats to the U.S. House of Representatives – prove their voters have been galvanized.


Liberal groups are attacking Republicans over questions raised by the many laws: 

Could women be punished for abortion? 

For laws that protect a woman’s life – what exactly counts as a serious-enough threat? 

What is the personhood of an IVF treatment? 

Alabama Senator Clyde Chambliss told his critics his state’s ban doesn’t apply to IVF. “The egg in the lab doesn’t apply. It’s not a woman. She’s not pregnant.”


Some are now questioning whether attempting to topple Roe is good politics for Republicans ahead of the next presidential election. A recent poll found Georgians are split over their support for the “heartbeat” ban and 70 per cent do not think Roe should be overturned. 

A Fox News political analyst warned last week the extreme bans “will help the Democrats in 2020," especially in key suburban districts. Mr. Trump himself was conspicuously silent for weeks as the bans sped through state legislatures. Only last weekend, days after Alabama’s Governor signed the new law, did he take to Twitter, and the message was subdued.


“We have come very far in the last two years with 105 wonderful new Federal Judges (many more to come), two great new Supreme Court Justices, the Mexico City Policy, and a whole new & positive attitude about the Right to Life,” Mr. Trump tweeted. 

Arguably the most consistent action of this unpredictable President has been his full-throttled effort to please religious conservatives by targeting abortion rights, including putting anti-abortion judges across federal benches and reinstating the Mexico City policy banning U.S. overseas funding from pro-choice groups.


“We must stick together and Win for Life in 2020,” Mr. Trump went on, warning that “if we are foolish and do not stay UNITED as one, all of our hard fought gains for Life can, and will, rapidly disappear!” – presumably by Mr. Trump losing the election. But another part of his tweet revealed a key weakness in that unity. 

Mr. Trump proclaimed himself “strongly Pro-Life” with exceptions for rape, incest, and risks to a woman’s life – a statement that drew backlash from anti-abortion activists, one of whom captured the mainstream pro-life view when she tweeted that “a baby of rape is innocent & doesn’t deserve the death penalty for her father’s evil crimes.”


Meanwhile, a previously unreleased 2018 poll found that even in Alabama, 65 per cent of respondents think rape and incest victims should be able to get abortions.


How the Supreme Court will react to these political convulsions remains unclear. The justices are already considering whether to hear a handful of abortion cases that do not directly challenge Roe the way these new laws have. The New Yorker’s Jeffrey Toobin and Slate’s Mark Joseph Stern argue conservative justices have already shown their willingness to disregard precedents they don’t like (in a recent dissent, liberal Justice Stephen Breyer warned the court’s decision “can only cause one to wonder which cases the Court will overrule next”).


Others expect Chief Justice John Roberts – a conservative who prizes the court’s reputation and its legitimacy – will preside over a continued chipping away at abortion rights, rather than their outright demise.


For pro-choice Americans, that is the current best-case scenario, and there is only one way to change it. The 2020 elections will be, in part, a referendum on abortion in America, a singular moment for the country to choose its fate after 46 years of bitter discord. There is only one way to ensure abortion access, for those who’d choose to: they need to take back the U.S. Senate, the White House and, ultimately, the Supreme Court.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-a-singular-moment-for-abortion-rights-in-the-us/

There are 54 comments right now:

Dianne440:

Passing a law prohibiting abortion does not stop abortions.  It simply ensures that women of means travel to a location where abortion is legal to have the procedure.  Women without means have back street abortions by unlicenced practitioners or try to abort themselves, which results in more women dying.




"Trudeau is scaremongering over abortion": Today I found this article by Margaret Wente in the Globe and Mail:

Not everyone is distressed over the radical new abortion laws in Alabama and other U.S. states – the ones that restrict abortions under almost any circumstances. Hardline abortion opponents are, of course, rejoicing. But so is the Liberal Party of Canada, which sees these distressing developments as a golden opportunity to wring dollars from people’s pockets and portray their Conservative opponents as anti-woman.


Justin Trudeau, for instance, declared the other day that he is “deeply disappointed” by the “backsliding on women’s rights” in the U.S.  This backsliding stands in sharp contrast to his position on the rights of women, which all true Canadians defend. 

“As a government, as Canadians, we will always be unequivocal about defending a woman’s right to choose, defending women’s rights in general,” he said. By contrast, he warned, the Conservatives want to take away “rights that have been hard-fought over many, many years by generations of women and male allies.”


Mr. Trudeau’s female allies in the Liberal Party are currently tweeting up a storm to warn us that a woman’s right to choose is under threat. As proof, they offer the fact that 12 Conservative MPs (that’s 12 out of 97) recently attended a pro-life rally in Ottawa. “This is the true face of the Conservative Party,” tweeted Mélanie Joly, who, when last I looked, was Mr. Trudeau’s Minister of Tourism.

Maryam Monsef, our Minister for Women and Gender Equality, has been busy too. She issued a letter daring Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer to let us know “whether or not the Conservative Party of Canada would take us backwards by restricting or undermining a woman’s right to choose.”


So keep your red cloaks handy, ladies. If Andrew Scheer has his way, Canada could become a real-life Handmaid’s Tale before you know it.


Not to be outdone, Katie Telford, Mr. Trudeau’s chief of staff, is using her Twitter account to pass along particularly scary bits from severely rattled female columnists, of whom there is no shortage. Ms. Telford quoted from a column in the Toronto Star, which argued: “Given what is happening south of the border ... it would be wise to pay close attention to the growing political influence of pro-lifers in Canada.”


In reality, there’s no evidence that pro-lifers have any more influence than they’ve always had. Hardline pro-lifers are a small (if noisy) minority of the population. A 2017 Ipsos poll found that only 12 per cent of Canadians think abortions shouldn’t be permitted. People who are pro-choice, make up 77 per cent of the population. Conservative leaders don’t wish to self-implode. They can read the poll results, and they know that support for choice in Canada is overwhelming.


Despite many dire predictions, during a decade in office the Harper government wouldn’t go near near the issue, and today’s Conservatives won’t either. The party’s official policy says that a Conservative government “will not support any legislation to regulate abortion.” Even in Alberta, where the pro-life movement is unusually vigorous, the new Premier, Jason Kenney, says he would not “bring forward legislative measures on abortion”. 


Of course all these people could be lying. They could have a hidden agenda. That’s what Liberals want you to believe.


In fact, if anything abortion rights in Canada are growing stronger. Last week Ontario’s high court ruled that even doctors who oppose abortion on religious grounds are required to offer “effective referrals” for any patient who wants one.  But the biggest guarantor of women’s rights in this country is the fact that for the past 30 years – ever since the Supreme Court struck down Canada’s abortion law – we’ve had no law at all. This peculiar situation seems to suit almost everyone just fine.


Personally, I’m sick of the abortion war. That’s because it has long since ceased to be a debate, and has devolved into two opposing tribes screaming at each other across the void. Both sides have no room for moral complexity. They have turned the abortion question into a purity test. 

The pro-life (or anti-choice) side cannot admit that in certain circumstances, abortion is sometimes the moral choice. 

The pro-choice (or anti-life) side cannot admit that under some circumstances abortion can be morally problematic. 

(Is there a difference between terminating a fetus at seven weeks and at seven months? Most people would probably say yes.)

Despite these lingering moral dilemmas (which will never go away), the abortion wars in Canada are basically over. Canada won’t turn into Alabama under any scenario that I can see. But the Liberals have no interest in admitting that. After all, there’s an election on.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-justin-trudeau-and-the-liberals-are-scaremongering-over-abortion/

There are 127 comments.


This week's theme is about abortions:

"This doctor commutes 800 miles to provide abortion services in underserved communities"



"Big changes to abortion law appear likely after oral arguments at Supreme Court in Mississippi case"/ "An activist claims she took an abortion pill on live TV"




My week:


May 6, 2022 NDP abortions petition: I posted this on my Facebook page so you can sign the petition:




Abortion services must be accessible to every Canadian.

Abortion rights are only as strong as access to services.

In Canada many individuals seeking abortion services can’t access them – only 1 hospital in 6 offers abortion, and some provinces refuse to cover the cost of surgical abortion outside hospitals. Lack of access is even worse for people in rural areas and the North.

Everyone deserves safe, accessible abortion and reproductive healthcare services – no matter where they live or how much money they make. It’s not enough for elected officials to say that they won’t reopen the abortion debate – we need leaders to take action to improve access to services.

Join Jagmeet Singh and the NDP in demanding Justin Trudeau and the Liberal government to implement a national plan to expand abortion and reproductive health care access to all parts of Canada without barriers.

Add your name and take action now.




My- feminism: I found this on Facebook and posted this on my page:


Hours later, Facebook sent me this:

Does the Netherlands have the lowest abortion rate in the world? No, that's not true: Although the Netherlands has a low abortion rate, with data showing that it has an estimated average annual rate of seven abortions per 1,000 women, it is not the lowest in the world. That title belongs to both Singapore and Switzerland, which, according to the same dataset, have an estimated average annual rate of five abortions per 1,000 women.









Defend Roe:


Right now the Supreme Court in the United States is debating Roe v. Wade. Roe is the only protection women have to control their own bodies in the USA. 

If we lose Roe 3 things will happen:

1. Women will not have access to healthcare and will die and be permanently harmed from "back street" abortions.  Restricting or making abortion illegal doesn't stop them - it just stops safe ones.

2. Miscarriages will be investigated. When abortion is illegal that means that every pregnancy loss must be investigated to ensure the "crime" of abortion didn't happen.

3. The rich will still have access to abortion. 




May 9, 2022:

ROE VS WADE
First... I LOVE babies! I LOVE life. I LOVE choice.
Please be VERY CLEAR....
I'm not pro-murdering babies and if you saying words like that...block me right now... you and I will never agree on this and likely many other topics. I love you and goodbye.
Now, having said that...
I'm pro-Becky who found out at her 20-week anatomy scan that the infant she had been so excited to bring into this world had developed without life sustaining organs.
I'm pro-Susan who was sexually assaulted on her way home from work, only to come to the horrific realization that she was pregnant when she got a positive test result a month later.
I'm pro-Theresa who hemorrhaged due to a placental abruption, causing her parents, spouse, and children to have to make the impossible decision on whether to save her or her unborn child.
I'm pro-little Cathy who had her innocence ripped away from her by someone she should have been able to trust and her 11-year-old body isn't mature enough to bear the consequence of that betrayal.
I'm pro-Melissa who's working two jobs just to make ends meet and has to choose between bringing another child into poverty or feeding the children she already has because her spouse walked out on her.
I'm pro-Brittany who realizes that she is in no way financially, emotionally, or physically able to raise a child.
I'm pro-Emily who so desperately wanted a baby that she went through IVF, ending up with SIX viable implanted eggs requiring selective reduction to ensure the safety of her and a SAFE number of fetuses.
I'm pro-Jessica who is FINALLY getting the strength to get away from her physically abusive spouse only to find out that she is carrying the monster's child.
I'm pro-Vanessa who went into her confirmation appointment after YEARS of trying to conceive only to hear silence where there should be a heartbeat.
I'm pro-Lindsay who lost her virginity in her sophomore year with a broken condom and now has to choose whether to be a teenage mom or just a teenager.
I'm pro-Courtney who just found out she's already 13 weeks along, but the egg never made it out of her fallopian tube so either she terminates the pregnancy or risks dying from internal bleeding.
You can argue and say that I'm pro-choice all you want, but the truth is:
I'm PRO CHOICE.
YOU nor anyone else does not get to pick and choose which scenarios should be accepted.
It's not about which stories you don't agree with. It's about fighting for the women in the stories that you do agree with and the CHOICE that was made.
Women's rights are meant to protect ALL women, regardless of their situation!


May 13, 2022 Abortions on TV: I wrote about this before:

Jenny Jones: There was this out-of- control teen girl with blond hair.  She looks like she's 14.  She wears tight and revealing clothes and says things like: "When I grow up, I want to be a stripper."  This was probably back when I was 14 and watching this in 1999.

Jenny: You got pregnant when you were 13?
Girl: Yeah.
Jenny: And you got an abortion?
Girl: Yeah.

Do you think this girl should have stayed pregnant and had the kid?

My friends' opinions:

Sherry: No, she's too young.

Angela: No, she doesn't seem very smart and mature, so how do you know she's not going to smoke, drink and do drugs during the pregnancy?

My opinion: No, this girl seems like her priorities are boys and partying.  No guy is going to hit on her when she's pregnant.  Can you imagine her dancing on the dance floor with this huge baby bump?  She's not going to be partying that much. 

America's Most Wanted: I saw this like in 2003-2004.  This woman was pregnant and got into a fight with her friend's boyfriend.  The boyfriend kicked her in the stomach.  So she got an abortion because she got kicked in the stomach and didn't want to risk anything bad happening to the baby.

The pregnant woman's boyfriend was very upset that she got an abortion, because he wanted to be a dad.  He then killed the guy who kicked her in the stomach and then he's on the run.

They both needed counseling.