While campaigning in Colorado, Barack Obama warned the voters that Mitt Romney was planning to kill his health reform and get rid of Planned Parenthood.

Obama criticized that Romney’s policies were more suitable for the 1950s than the 21st century. To defend his position Obama stated that woman’s health decisions are “not up to politicians, they’re not up to insurance companies, they’re up to you.” The President is making a big effort to insure the female voters support in swing states like Colorado.

President Obama made a direct reference to his wife and his late mother; he said that women issues resonate in him because of them. Obama argued that he wanted his wife to be able to have control over her health care choices, that’s why he is insisting so much in this health-care reform. He defends that it will bring many benefits to women.

Also Obama made a very sentimental statement referring to his late mother to defend the Obama care benefits, he said she would have been 70 this year, if she had not died from cancer almost 20 years ago. He stated: “I often think about what might have happened if a doctor had caught her cancer sooner.”

Obama made a harsh criticism directed to Romney, saying that the next president “could tip the balance in a way that turns back the clock for women in the next decade to come.” It seems the Democrats are making a big effort to confront the Republicans with the female voters, arguing that if Romney wins, women will lose many of the rights they have conquered in recent years.

Sandra Fluke, the famous Georgetown student who has become one of the leading voices supporting Obama’s health reform, was the one that introduced Obama in Colorado to a crowd formed mostly of women. Fluke became popular after being called a slut by talk show host Rush Limbaugh.

Limbaugh said during his radio talk show that Fluke went before a “Congressional Committee and essentially said that she must be paid to have sex.” Limbaugh added that her comments made Fluke a whore because she wanted to be paid to have sex. Fluke demanded before the Congressional Committee that insurance coverage should cover contraception methods. Limbaugh said that Fluke is “having so much sex that she can’t afford the contraception, and she wants you and me, and the tax payers to pay her to have sex.”

During Obama’s introduction, Fluke said that when she was “verbally attacked”, Barack Obama was one of us. She added that Obama defended her right to speak without being verbally insulted, and condemned the criticism she had received. Fluke also had some words saved for Mitt Romney, she said that “if Mr. Romney can’t stand up to extreme voices in his own party, then he will never stand up for us.”

Image Courtesy of  Indiana Public Media

The article Obama Criticizes Romney for Supposedly Not Favoring Women appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Revolution via Social Media is a recently set trend, especially in the Middle East. Inspired by it, women in Saudi Arabia have started the ‘Women to drive’ campaign in 2011. A 35 year old Saudi lady, Manal-al-Sharif, drove around the Eastern province in Dammam and posted the video on YouTube. In the video she highlighted the troubles females in Saudi Arabia face for transportation, and thought it was time to take an initiative and break this ridiculous custom. She was then arrested, and later made to sign a pledge to take no further part in a campaign to persuade the Saudi authorities to allow women to drive.  So were the few other brave ladies, who followed her footsteps in other parts of the country. June 17, 2012 marks the one year anniversary, and Ashwag Alghamdi, a Saudi female now studying in USA, decided to get supporters all over the world to go and honk in front of Saudi Embassies and post the videos on YouTube.

Toonari Post (TP): When did you decide you need to do something to change the law about women driving in Saudi Arabia?

Ashwag Alghamdi (AA): For a long time we didn’t like this unfair ban. Our mothers in 1990 made a protest but they were shocked because the government and the religious clerks made many troubles for them and that affected their lives. I decided to join the Women2Drive campaign last May 2011. I just participated online like the others till they arrested Manal Alsharif and then I decided to make pages in English to spread her story and make the world hear about her till they released her. Then I decided to keep fighting till we get our rights starting with the right to drive.

TP: Despite Saudis being very strict about demonstrations and knowing the punishment may be lashes or imprisonment, how did you dare to take this initiative?

AA: It’s not a protest. We just asked and encouraged women in KSA to go out and drive to work, school and supermarket. It’s not a big issue but they got scared of us this time.

TP: Is Manal-al-sharif your inspiration? If not, how and why are your projects different from hers?

AA: Manal thanked me after they released her because my group and I, back then were one of the reasons behind releasing her in 9 days only. But after that she worked alone and we worked alone. I’m the admin of 3 English pages and my other friends are supervising the Arabic page that is dedicated to Saudi people. We don’t serve people or make idols, we serve the case.

 TP: Have you ever driven around Saudi Arabia? If yes, how has it been? Do you think women can maneuver around such crazy drivers here, given that Saudi drivers are infamous for reckless driving and speeding?

AA: Yes I did. The last time I drove was June 17, 2012 in Jeddah since I’m back to Jeddah for a short family visit, and I posted the video on the wall. I’ve been always driving in Jeddah, in some resorts (Durrat Alarous) where women can drive and wear whatever they want. And I drove with my friend before dressed up as a male and that was very exciting. And about the dangerous roads, I think we’re ready now, since we have cameras at almost everywhere in our big cities, and women in desert communities and villages are used to driving for decades. I think it should be now or never. It’s our chance since we got the world’s attention.

TP: What do you hope to achieve via this new movement?

AA: We get the right of mobility, then we’ll get our other rights and be equal to men in this country.

TP: Recently a lot of revolution has been taking place in the Middle East with the help of Social Media. What are your views on this? Do you think your people will be able to make a change too?

AA: Yes I think so. If you observed KSA after 9/11, you’ll notice many changes and people are changing their minds, if there is any revolutions will happen in KSA, it’ll be a pinky revolution, women are making the change since 2011 and still.

TP: A lot of critics have commented that women driving is not the issue, the real problem arises when women are allowed out without a male guardian. They may undergo harassment and not be able to deal with problems in case a technical issue arises with the car, such as a flat tire or a dead battery. What are your views on this, and how do you think you will tackle such problems?

AA: Well, KSA still has no law against sexual harassment, they should make a law first because we get harassed in malls, streets and everywhere in here because guys are free to do whatever they want, there is no law. And women in the Arab gulf countries are driving in the same situation and nothing happened to them, they’re just scaring us so we’ll keep silent

TP: Recently an article was published stating ‘End of virginity’ if women drive, Saudi cleric warns’ and also including bizarre comments about increase in prostitution and homosexuality. What are your comments on this?

AA: That was the most absurd thing I’ve ever read. Believe me, many people in KSA laughed when they read it. He means that we’ll go out more than before and we’ll be free to date or whatever and I can tell you and tell him if any girl wanted to do so, she can do it with driving or without.

TP: Have any proof that you are not going against Shahriah?

AA: Women were riding camels and horses in the prophet’s time, it’s about transportation, if there was cars during the prophet’s time, he would allow women to drive, because he wouldn’t take it sexually like these people did.

TP: Do you have anything to say the numerous women who dream of driving freely in Saudi Arabia one day? And something for the critics of this dream?

AA: I just want to tell them, we will drive sooner or later, just get behind the wheels and buckle up and drive. And I feel it’s very soon, not because of his majesty, because we decided to get this right by force and I’m very proud of that.

The article ‘Women2drive’ Campaign Marks Its One Year Anniversary appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

This is part 2 of an interview with feminist leader and professor Gulhan Balsoy.

Turkey has recently been plagued by a series of protests, after Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan announced that his government and party– the AKP Party– would push through a bill that would ban abortion after the first 4-6 weeks of pregnancy; this is a significant limitation from the original ten weeks that has been allowed in Turkey since 1983.

One woman and feminist, Gulhan Balsoy, a professor and historian of reproductive rights in the mid to late nineteenth century, spoke to Toonari Post about this ban, as well as the movement that has emerged to reject it.

Several protests have already occurred on June 3 and June 8, but the largest one yet happened June 17. These protests have occurred across the country and have been coordinated between the largest cities including Ankara (the capital), Eskisehir, and Istanbul. Balsoy stated, “Many young and old women were in the protests,” and these women were not only from feminist groups, but they were average Turkish citizens as well.

A protest was also arranged by a male group for women’s rights, called Irritated Men, although they protested independently of the other feminist groups. Balsoy discussed Irritated Men saying, “It is good to see some men support as well.”

According to Balsoy, the first protest resulted in police violence against the protesters, and several women being taken into custody. Since then the protests have grown in size and have been peaceful.

Balsoy, like many other women in Turkey, feels that there is no reasonable debate, stating, “Women haven’t seen any real ethical discussion.” She pointed out that the comments from government officials have been inflammatory at best and insulting at worst. The Health Minister Recep Akdag claimed that if a woman is raped and she does not want the child the government will take care of the child. Another example she gave was the comments of Ankara Mayor Melih Gökçek who stated that if a woman is raped the child should not be aborted but the woman herself should be killed. Balsoy calmly stated, “We are offended, actually.” Many women can understand why.

Balsoy explains that there are so many different policies that the government could support to increase the population that would not involve banning abortion. She suggested that the government start by providing more funding for programs such as day care centers. She also added that the abortion rates in the country have been falling since 2008.

Balsoy has stated that the AKP Party has enough chairs in Parliament to pass the law. In fact, the Parliament’s summer break start date has been pushed back to July 19 which Balsoy believes may be so that the government can push through the law as the last act of this session. The main opposition party is not saying a lot about the issue. “They [the opposition party] act like nothing is happening. They are pretty much indifferent to the protest,” Balsoy stated. There are some members of government who are opposing the law, some even within the AKP Party, but not enough. Balsoy stated, “[The law passing] is the the worst scenario I can imagine right now.”

Balsoy stated that even if the law is passed the protests will continue and abortions will also probably continue,“Throughout all of human history women have had abortions.”

The ban has not gained much popular support. Only some conservatives are supporting the government, but weakly, and Balsoy claims that “people who support the government’s position are not bringing something new to the conversation.” As Balsoy pointed out, even if a woman is a conservative that does not mean that she will want to be only a mother her whole life. One Turkish newspaper, HaberTurk, reported that 55.5 percent of Turkish citizens oppose the law. Balsoy also claims that the popularity of the AKP Party is falling and that Erdogan has already announced that he will not be running for reelection.

Recently the protest groups have filed a petition with the government with 55,000 signatures and support from 900 organizations that are against the abortion ban.

According to Balsoy Health Minister Akdag has been talking about finding a middle ground. “[He says that] if a baby is going to have a health problem there could be an abortion. But this could be a problem too because people could know they are going to have a handicap child and still want to keep the child.”

Balsoy wants to make clear the message that the Turkish citizens and feminists are trying to get across. “Feminists think that abortion is a right and we are not negotiating this right with anybody… this is our right. It’s about our right to live and to make choices about our lives.”

Image Courtesy of  Gulhan Balsoy

The article Turkey’s Anti-Abortion Protests: A Feminist Speaks Up Part 2 appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Turkey has recently been plagued by a series of protests after Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan announced that his government and party– the AKP Party– would push through a bill that would ban abortion after the first 4-6 weeks of pregnancy. This is a significant limitation from the original ten weeks that has been allowed in Turkey since 1983.

One woman and feminist, Gulhan Balsoy, a professor and historian of reproductive rights in the mid to late nineteenth century, spoke to Toonari Post about this ban, as well as the movement that has emerged to reject it.

Professor Balsoy explained that the debate about women’s rights and abortion rights began three years ago, when Prime Minister Erdogan declared that women should have at least three children; he later changed this number to more than three. Balsoy claimed that women protested because they did not want to be viewed as only mothers and wanted to have control over their bodies. Balsoy also stated that the protests were caused because “Prime Minister Erdogan has said several times that he does not believe in the equality of men and women.”

In addition to these women’s rights violations, Balsoy pointed out that the mandatory education of girls in Turkey is eight years, but with many questioning the policies and enforcement within Turkey. Some girls are only receiving four years, especially in the remote regions of Turkey.

Women across Turkey have also engaged in a photography campaign that advertises the sentiment “My body belongs to me.” The campaign, which features women– and men– supporting their partners, tells the government that their body is theirs and that the government cannot interfere with it.

“He wants to see women as mothers, just raising their children at home… even many conservatives do not accept that position,” Balsoy claimed. She later stated, “None of those men [from the AKP Party] have thought about abortion for a second.”

Erdogan wants to ban abortions and c-sections, in order to generate a larger population in Turkey that will propel the country into the top economies in the world. However, Balsoy challenges Erdogan’s claims about the shrinking population in Turkey stating, “His claims cannot be supported by numbers.” Although Erdogan has claimed that Turkey’s population is shrinking, the rate of growth is what has been shrinking, according to Balsoy.

Balsoy stated that previous to Erdogan’s announcement, women wanted the deadline for abortion to actually be extended to twelve weeks, so there was much outrage when Erdogan’s proposal limited it to four.

Erdogan is also trying to punish the use of c-sections because women who elect to have a c-section are usually only able to have two children. Balsoy admits that c-sections are happening more and more seemingly more than normal births; however, she also stated, “The government should not tell us how to give birth to our children.”

Instead, Balsoy believes that there are other policies and methods that the government could use to encourage natural births. Prior to the announcements from Erdogan, midwives in Turkey protested because they wanted normal births to be promoted. Instead of helping the midwives and listening to the ideas they had for promoting normal births, the government ignored their protests, according to Balsoy.

Image Courtesy of  Gülhan Balsoy

The article Turkey’s Anti-Abortion Protests: A Feminist Speaks Up Part 1 appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Philadelphia, U.S.A. — The Girl Scouts of Eastern Pennsylvania (GSEP) has been selected to represent the National Girl Scouts organization at the White House on June 20 in a special celebration of Title IX, which, since 1972, has mandated that no individual in the United States shall be excluded from participation in any athletic activity or education program based upon gender.

Seven accomplished Girl Scouts from eastern Pennsylvania, including four Gold Awardees and three Girl Scout Advisers to the Board of Directors, will join CEO Natalye Paquin in participating in the Title IX anniversary celebration 40 years after the legislation was passed. The day’s events will also include a mentorship session, where the young women will have the opportunity to discuss female empowerment and seek leadership advice from trailblazers who pioneered female athletic opportunities. Representing the White House will be Valerie Jarrett, Senior Advisor to President Obama and Chair of the White House Council on Women & Girls and Tina Tchen, Executive Director of the White House Council on Women & Girls.

“We are honored that our council was selected to represent the Girl Scouts of the USA on this national stage, especially in our 100th year of service to girls across the nation and world,” said Paquin. “Joining me at the White House are girls from a cross section of our council who are all accomplished leaders, athletes and representative of the talented young women who take part in the Girl Scouts. Title IX was game-changing legislation for women and girls. Many girl scouts are athletes.”

Title IX served as a step towards equal rights for women and created a pathway for females to become accepted into athletics on a national scale. In response to greater opportunities to play, the number of high school girls participating in sports has risen tenfold since 1972, while six times as many women compete in college sports today. Despite these advances, obstacles for female athletes remain as girls and women still have fewer opportunities and often endure inferior treatment in areas such as equipment, facilities, coaching, and scheduling. The past, present and future of Title IX will be discussed among all guests in attendance June 20.

The article Girl Scouts Representatives Go to Title IX Celebration appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

In a continued attack against the education of women in Afghanistan, 160 female students were poisoned Tuesday at a school in the north-eastern province of Takhar. The second wave of violence in only a week’s time, the incident follows a similar pattern as the first, with police suspecting the classroom had been sprayed with a toxic material before the girls arrived to take their lessons.

Aged 10 to 20, the students reportedly smelled a strange odor upon entering the room, before experiencing symptoms such as headaches and dizziness, with many vomiting before losing consciousness. All were immediately taken to the hospital; most were discharged after only a few hours.

While none of the victims are in critical condition from the poisoning, there remains the obvious potential for emotional trauma after the incident – which is undoubtedly the true goal of this vicious assault. Extremists in Afghanistan, including the Taliban, have long opposed the many attempts to educate women in the country.

From throwing acid in the faces of girls on their way to school, to setting off bombs near institutions that allow education for both sexes, it has never been a secret how these groups feel about the women of their country garnering knowledge.  One of the major goals of their campaign is to keep women ignorant, and what better way is there to do so than to emotionally scar girls from attempting to go to school again? From making these children fear the concept of it?

While no one has formally claimed responsibility for the poisoning of the schools, many have already pronounced the Taliban as the guilty party due to their history of violence and threats against schools and women. The militant group, however, denies any culpability in the incident, instead going so far as to claim that NATO and the United States are attempting to frame them for the heinous act.

Whether the Taliban was involved or not, the poisonings only serve to further increase concern about a potential comeback for the insurgents in the government, after the Western states agreed to pull their military forces out of the country by the year 2014.

The Taliban held a strong reign on Afghanistan from 1996 to 2001, when U.S troops invaded to try and foster democracy within the nation.  Prior to U.S intervention, there was a ban on education for women, which many believe will come back into effect if the Taliban find themselves in a position to return to power.

Image Courtesy of   Lizette Potgieter / Shutterstock.com

The article Another School Poisoned in Afghanistan, 160 Girls Fall Victim appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

It looks as if women’s rights are the hot button on the political landscape this year. There was fighting at the contraception mandate front, as well as over the efforts in Virginia and Ohio to force ultrasounds before an abortion, even in cases of rape or incest.

A measure in February attempted to cut off all financial aid to Planned Parenthood. Something that would seem to be more clear-cut than the previous legislations, The Violence Against Women Act, is up for renewal, and some provisions within the act are putting Republicans in an even greater quandary than they were before.

No politician wants to look like he or she is not against domestic violence. The title alone, as some Republican politicians are pointing out, can make the legislation politically risky to oppose, particularly in an election year. As Senator Roy Blunt put it, “Obviously, you want to be for the title. If Republicans can’t be for it, we need to have a very convincing alternative.”

There is no alternative as of yet, and so Republicans are forced to grapple with the current version. According to the New York Times, it would extend federal grants that are already in place to battered women’s shelters, as well as to local law enforcement. Same-sex couples are included in programs as well, as are transgender victims. So are immigrants without status, that have been victims of domestic violence, and more of them would be able to claim temporary visas. The act would also expand efforts to reach the Indian tribes in some rural areas.

According to Fox News, the measure would also give tribes the authority to prosecute persons who are not members of the tribe. The concern is that this move gives tribal courts too much authority over individuals who are not formally part of a tribe.

It is particularly the last provisions that make the legislation so hard to swallow for Republican politicians. They believe that the overall message is being diluted with these extra provisions. Furthermore, they see some groups as undeserving of this aid.

Republicans allege that the timing of the Act is part of a larger Democrat strategy to “rig legislation that the GOP can’t back,” according to the Huffington Post. This is particularly touchy in an election year in which Congress has a 9 percent approval rating.

Senate Democrats hope to bring up the bill before Easter break.

Image Courtesy of   http://www.flickr.com/photos/gageskidmore/

The article A Battle in The War Against Women appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

A 32-year-old waitress in Hollywood, Florida is on the move once again. This time she is organizing a massive jobs initiative that calls for big businesses to offer employment opportunities to the communities that have supported their success. Denny’s Restaurants has taken the lead by partnering with The Rebuild Your Life Project, Patterson’s empowerment outreach for women.

“I hope that other American big businesses decide to partner with The Rebuild Your Life Project,” Patterson said. “This is a great way for big businesses to attract the type of employees that really want to contribute their skills and it helps to debunk the myth that large corporations do not care about the very people who have helped them to achieve their level of success.”

In April 2011, Patterson, the creator of The Rebuild Your Life Project, an empowerment outreach aimed to teach women to overcome their fear of failure, gave away everything that she owned and moved out of her apartment, becoming homeless on purpose in the city of Hollywood, Florida. Patterson aimed to show women what their biggest fear looked like and teach them how to survive it by watching her do it.

During the 4 months that Patterson was homeless from April 2011 through August 2011, she made a call to action to 30 businesses to participate in a job fair for homeless women and women in distress to help women rebuild their lives.

Patterson organized and executed The Rebuild Your Life Job Fair, raised money through her tips and wages to offer a $650 rental assistance grant to a woman in need, while teaching mental strategies for successfully navigating the obstacles women face when trying to rebuild their lives. She managed to document the entire journey into and out of homelessness in video on her YouTube channel.

After securing a job as a waitress at Denny’s Restaurant, Patterson partnered with the international corporation to hold a mass hiring event in South Florida. On December 20, 2011 more than 100 unemployed residents from Miami-Dade and Broward counties participated in open interviews for the 14 participating corporate owned Denny’s restaurants that partnered with Patterson in support of The Rebuild Your Life Project.

The article Rebuild Your Life Project, Denny’s Restaurants Supports Homeless Waitress’ appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

For the eighth consecutive year, the National Association of Female Executives has named Verizon Communications to the organization’s NAFE Top 50 Companies for Executive Women.  The list recognizes organizations that are committed to hiring, retaining and promoting executive women.  At the 2012 NAFE Top Companies, women executives run 23 percent of operations that generate more than $1 billion in revenue.

“With a solid leadership training curriculum, development courses, mentoring circles, executive coaching and a wealth of external initiatives, Verizon Communications has its bases covered when it comes to programs that encourage the advancement of women,” said Dr. Betty Spence, NAFE president.

Magda Yrizarry, Verizon’s chief talent and diversity officer, said, “Verizon works hard to foster a diverse and inclusive corporate culture that maximizes the talents of employees from all backgrounds.  As women continue to ascend in business, it is essential that we utilize their skills to continue providing the innovative products and services our customers expect from our company.”

Women comprise approximately 40 percent of Verizon’s global workforce and hold more than 30 percent of leadership positions, including key roles in finance, government relations, IT, network services, sales, marketing, human resources and the Verizon Foundation, the company’s philanthropic arm. Women also comprise 25 percent of Verizon’s Board of Directors.

The 2012 NAFE Top Companies’ application included more than 250 questions on topics including female representation, hiring, attrition and promotion rates, access, and usage of key retention and advancement programs. The application draws particular attention to the number of women at the highest ranks and those with profit-and-loss responsibility.

To be considered, companies must have a minimum of two women on their board of directors as well as at least 500 employees in the U.S. Verizon has received numerous honors for the advancement of women and support for working mothers. Last year, for the ninth consecutive year, Verizon earned the No. 8 spot on the Latina Style 50, LATINA Style magazine’s list of the best companies for Latinas.

In addition, Working Mother magazine has recognized Verizon as a Best Company for Multicultural Women for six straight years (every year of the ranking), and for eleven years in a row as a Best Company for Working Mothers.

The article Verizon Named in Top 50 Companies for Executive Women appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

The Obama administration, to justify its widely criticized mandate for contraception and sterilization coverage in private health plans, has posted a set of false and misleading claims on the White House blog (“Health Reform, Preventive Services, and Religious Institutions,” February 1).  In what follows, each White House claim is quoted with a response.

Claim: ”Churches are exempt from the new rules: Churches and other houses of worship will be exempt from the requirement to offer insurance that covers contraception.”

Response: This is not entirely true.  To be eligible, even churches and houses of worship must show the government that they hire and serve primarily people of their own faith and have the inculcation of religious values as their purpose.  Some churches may have service to the broader community as a major focus, for example, by providing direct service to the poor regardless of faith.

Such churches would be denied an exemption precisely because their service to the common good is so great.  More importantly,   the vast array of other religious organizations – schools, hospitals, universities, charitable institutions – will clearly not be exempt.

Claim: “No individual health care provider will be forced to prescribe contraception: The President and this Administration have previously and continue to express strong support for existing conscience protections.  For example, no Catholic doctor is forced to write a prescription for contraception.”

Response:  It is true that these rules directly apply to employers and insurers, not providers, but this is beside the point:   The Administration is forcing individuals and institutions, including religious employers, to sponsor and subsidize what they consider immoral.

Less directly, the classification of these drugs and procedures as basic “preventive services” will increase pressures on doctors, nurses and pharmacists to provide them in order to participate in private health plans – and no current federal conscience law prevents that from happening.

Finally, because the mandate includes abortifacient drugs, it violates one of the “existing conscience protections” (the Weldon amendment) for which the Administration expresses “strong support.”

Claim: “No individual will be forced to buy or use contraception: This rule only applies to what insurance companies cover.  Under this policy, women who want contraception will have access to it through their insurance without paying a co-pay or deductible.   But no one will be forced to buy or use contraception.”

Response: The statement that no one will be forced to buy it is false.  Women who want contraception will be able to obtain it without co-pay or deductible precisely because women who do not want contraception will be forced to help pay for it through their premiums.  This mandate passes costs from those who want the service, to those who object to it.

Claim: ”Drugs that cause abortion are not covered by this policy:  Drugs like RU486 are not covered by this policy, and nothing about this policy changes the President’s firm commitment to maintaining strict limitations on Federal funding for abortions. No Federal tax dollars are used for elective abortions.”

Response: False.  The policy already requires coverage of Ulipristal (HRP 2000 or “Ella”), a drug that is a close analogue to RU-486 (mifepristone) and has the same effects.[i]  RU-486 itself is also being tested for possible use as an “emergency contraceptive” – and if the FDA approves it for that purpose, it will automatically be mandated as well.

Claim: “Over half of Americans already live in the 28 States that require insurance companies cover contraception: Several of these States like North Carolina, New York, and California have identical religious employer exemptions.  Some States like Colorado, Georgia and Wisconsin have no exemption at all.”

Response: This misleads by ignoring important facts, and some of it is simply false.  All the state mandates, even those without religious exemptions, may be avoided by self-insuring prescription drug coverage, by dropping that particular coverage altogether, or by taking refuge in a federal law that pre-empts any state mandates (ERISA).

None of these havens is available under the federal mandate.   It is also false to claim that North Carolina has an identical exemption.  It is broader:  It does not require a religious organization to serve primarily people of its own faith, or to fulfill the federal rule’s narrow tax code criterion.

Moreover, the North Carolina law, unlike the federal mandate, completely excludes abortifacient drugs like Ella and RU-486 as well as “emergency contraceptives” like Preven.

Claim: “Contraception is used by most women: According to a study by the Guttmacher Institute, most women, including 98 percent of Catholic women, have used contraception.”

Response: This is irrelevant, and it is presented in a misleading way. If a survey found that 98% of people had lied, cheated on their taxes, or had sex outside of marriage, would the government claim it can force everyone to do so? But this claim also mangles the data to create a false impression.

The study actually says this is true of 98% of “sexually experienced” women.  The more relevant statistic is that the drugs and devices subject to this mandate (sterilization, hormonal prescription contraceptives and IUDs) are used by 69% of those women who are “sexually active” and “do not want to become pregnant.”  Surely that is a minority of the general public, yet every man and woman who needs health insurance will have to pay for this coverage.

The drugs that the mandate’s supporters say will be most advanced by the new rule, because they have the highest co-pays and deductibles now, are powerful but risky injectable and implantable hormonal contraceptives, now used by perhaps 5% of women.  The mandate is intended tochange women’s reproductive behavior, not only reflect it.

Claim: “Contraception coverage reduces costs: While the monthly cost of contraception for women ranges from $30 to $50, insurers and experts agree that savings more than offset the cost.  The National Business Group on Health estimated that it would cost employers 15 to 17 percent more not to provide contraceptive coverage than to provide such coverage, after accounting for both the direct medical costs of potentially unintended and unhealthy pregnancy and indirect costs such as employee absence and reduced productivity.”

Response: The government is violating our religious freedom to save money?  If the claim is true it is hard to say there is a need for a mandate: Secular insurers and employers who don’t object will want to purchase the coverage to save money, and those who object can leave it alone.

But this claim also seems to rest on some assumptions: That prescription contraceptives are the only way to avoid “unintended and unhealthy pregnancy,” for example, or that increasing access to contraceptives necessarily produces significant reductions in unintended pregnancies.  The latter assumption has been cast into doubt by numerous studies

Claim: ”The Obama Administration is committed to both respecting religious beliefs and increasing access to important preventive services. And as we move forward, our strong partnerships with religious organizations will continue.”

Response: False.  There is no “balance” in the final HHS rule—one side has prevailed entirely, as the mandate and exemption remain entirely unchanged from August 2011, despite many thousands of comments filed since then indicating intense opposition.  Indeed, the White House Press Secretary declared on January 31, “I don’t believe there are any constitutional rights issues here,” so little was placed on that side of the scale.

The Administration’s stance on religious liberty has also been shown in other ways.  Recently it argued before the Supreme Court that religious organizations have no greater right under the First amendment to hire or fire their own ministers than secular organizations have over their leaders – a claim that was unanimously rejected by the Supreme Court as “extreme” and “untenable.”

The Administration recently denied a human trafficking grant to a Catholic service provider with high objective scores, and gave part of that grant instead to a provider with not just lower, but failing, objective scores, all because the Catholic provider refused in conscience to compromise the same moral and religious beliefs at issue here.

Such action violates not only federal conscience laws, but President Obama’s executive order assuring “faith-based” organizations that they will be able to serve the public in federal programs without compromising their faith.

The article White House Misrepresents its Own Contraceptive Mandate appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Tens of thousands of pro-life activists massed in front of San Francisco’s City Hall and then filled the city’s main thoroughfare, walking about two miles down Market Street to the Embarcadero.

Banging drums, playing guitars and chanting “We are pro-life,” the enthusiastic throngs filled Market Street and stopped all traffic for more than a mile. Organizers estimated more than 40,000 attended the Walk.

“We are here to say life is the choice and women are hurt by abortion,” said Dolores Meehan, co-chair of the Walk for Life West Coast, which is held on the Saturday closest to the anniversary of the Supreme Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling legalizing abortion.

Walk co-chair Eva Muntean urged participants to sign petitions to put a parental notification of a minor’s intent to procure an abortion on the California ballot and urged support for a state initiative for a personhood amendment.

At the rally, Dr. Vansen Wong, an ob-gyn, told his story of performing abortions to pay off his medical bills, saying he ended hundreds of lives over the course of seven years working at an evening abortion clinic for his employer. “Abortion is barbaric, abortion is intolerable,” said Dr. Wong, who now works with a pro-life medical clinic where pregnant women receive ultrasounds.

“Abortion has no place in any civilized society,” Dr. Wong said.

A former Miss West Virginia, Jacquie Stalnaker told of being forced at gunpoint to go to an abortion clinic by her boyfriend and of the toll it took for 24 years.  Stalnaker, who is now a regional representative for Silent No More Campaign, an organization of women who have had abortions, urged the crowd to get pro-choice friends to visit the group’s website to hear the stories of women who have had abortions.

Other speakers included Lori Hoye, an African American activist whose mother became pregnant at 15 and whose sister had an abortion, and the Baptist preacher Rev. Clenard Childress who has spoken at seven of the eight Walks.

“You are the salt of the earth,” Childress told the Walk for Life crowd. “This is more than a pro-life movement. This is a holy spirit movement because the spirit addresses evil.”

Image Courtesy of   http://www.flickr.com/photos/infomatique/

The article Walk for Life West Coast Closes San Francisco’s Market Street appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Many regard the Supreme Court decision Roe vs. Wade as a significant step forward in women’s reproductive rights. The decision, handed down in 1971, affirmatively answered the question of whether women had the right to terminate their pregnancies through abortions.

However, as the case celebrates its 39^th anniversary, there are concerns that the progress made in granting women full control of their bodies will soon be for naught.

“Despite the fact that the majority of Americans believe that women have the right to make deeply personal decisions about their health care, the attacks on abortion have been unrelenting,” said Lillian Tamayo, the CEO of Planned Parenthood.

Tamayo firmly contends that this progress must not see hindrance, an opinion that she made known outside the Federal Building in Broward, Fl. on January 22 at 3 p.m.  Tamayo was one of an estimated 100 attendees at a Pro-Choice Rally held at the courthouse to not only recognize the impact of Roe v. Wade on women’s rights, but to encourage those present to not allow their leaders to take those rights away.

Other persons who turned out at the Rally included additional members of Planned Parenthood, representatives from the Pro-Choice Coalition of Broward County, as well as a group of medical students from Nova. Each of these individuals spent equal amounts of time waving their signs on the sides of the street, to appreciative honks and waves from drivers, as well as listening to individuals make their opinions known about the tenuous state of women’s reproductive rights.

Debbie Wasserman Schultz, a senator from Florida and Chairperson of the Democratic National Committee, also appeared at this rally, along with Patrick Murphy and Lois Frankel – two people who are aiming to join Mrs. Schultz in the Congressional halls. Frankel and Murphy are both aiming for the seat occupied by Rep. Allen West. Frankel expressed particular disgust at his obstinate attitude:

“He is uncompromising and bombastic at a time where we need to roll up our sleeves and work together,” Frankel said. Frankel chose to attend this rally to continue her fight for women’s rights. She thought it was important for women to have the tools necessary to make key life decisions concerning their pregnancies.

She was quick to point out that West has used his time in Congress to regress the rights of women. “He voted for the Ryan bill, a proposal that would have limited a woman’s access to maternity care. He has also voted to defund Planned Parenthood and has chastised women who support Planned Parenthood’s values,” she said.

Murphy also expressed revulsion at West’s actions and attitude, mentioning that voters deem his style of leadership unacceptable. “Voters want an individual who will move the country forward, as well as someone who is qualified enough to understand the issues of the day,” he said. Murphy expressed confidence that he could be that person; jobs are what voters are thinking about, and should he win, that issue will be top priority.

“The first action I would take should I be elected is to promote the President’s American Jobs Act,” he said. Wasserman Schultz also took the time to reference the President when it was time for her to address the audience; she noted his bravery in standing up to anti-choice groups by protecting the birth control coverage benefit portion of the Affordable Care Act.

“Having a president that will stand up for women and their rights is crucial,” she noted. As she continued speaking to the audience, she pointed out that legal abortion actually helps in keeping women safe, stating that in 1965, 20 percent of all reported maternal deaths were due to illegal abortions.

Moreover, she encouraged abortion detractors to find common ground with abortion supporters, rather than undermine their efforts. “Instead of working against us by voting to defund Title X Family Planning programs for women who need them most, work with us to make abortion safe, legal and rare,” she said.

Wasserman Schultz remarked on how the Republicans in the House of Representatives have addressed bills that aim to defund Planned Parenthood and redefine rape to where it only included “forcible” actions. “This is what we are up against,” she said, and used this point to emphasize the importance of speaking out to make sure that women are able to retain their reproductive rights.

The DNC Chairwoman’s speech brought cheers from the audience upon its completion. Lauren Bello, part of the Broward Youth Council, found Wasserman Schultz’s words “inspiring”. “It is a good eye opener for young people to vote on these issues, which are far more important than people give them credit for,” she said.

Estee Rosenberg Paviled, a realtor and artist, hoped that the DNC Chairwoman’s message would resonate with members of Congress and make them cease their assault on women’s rights. “I think it is terrible how they are trying to turn the clocks back on a woman’s right to choose. We need to keep government out of our bedrooms,” she said.

As a new Congressional session progresses, each of the attendees at the rally made it clear that they were going to keep a close eye on how members of Congress vote on women’s rights. “Women are going to be watching them closely and taking names,” said Tamayo.

Image Courtesy of   http://www.flickr.com/photos/us-mission/

The article Roe v. Wade Anniversary Recognized at Broward Federal Courthouse appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

On January 10, 2012, Liberty Institute announced a major pro-life victory when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit declared constitutional the recently enacted Texas Sonogram Law, also known as HB 15.

The Fifth Circuit’s decision overturned a controversial ruling by U.S. District Judge Sparks, which enjoined the Texas law co-authored by Senator Dan Patrick and Representative Sid Miller and was signed into law by Governor Rick Perry in May 2011. The law requires doctors and certified sonographers to perform a sonogram on women seeking an abortion at least 24 hours before the procedure.

“This is one of the most important victories in the past 10 years for informed consent for women seeking an abortion,” said Jonathan Saenz, Liberty Institute Attorney who heads the office at the Texas Capitol and provided the main legal testimony for the bill during the legislative process. “Women and unborn children in Texas are safer today because of this decision and no longer subject to the abuse of abortion doctors who deny women critical medical information.”

HB 15, which amends the 2003 Texas Woman’s Right to Know Act, requires the physician “who is to perform an abortion” to perform and display a sonogram of the fetus, make audible the heart auscultation of the fetus for the woman to hear, as well as explain to her the results of each procedure and to wait 24 hours, in most cases, between these disclosures and performing the abortion.

Senator Patrick said, “I was always confident that our bill would survive any constitutional question because our goal from the beginning was to protect the woman’s right to know, protect the unborn, and protect the constitution.”

Representative Sid Miller, said, “I commend the court of appeals for this just decision which confirms that women have every right to be fully informed about the abortion decision and that my fellow Texas lawmakers who supported this law stayed within the bounds of U.S. Supreme Court precedent.”

In August, on behalf of Senator Patrick and Representative Miller and in support of the law, Liberty Institute filed an amicus brief in the lawsuit seeking to strike down Texas’ new sonogram law (HB 15), which was originally scheduled to go into effect on September 1, 2011.

Senator Patrick and Representative Miller were the authors of HB 15 in the Texas Senate and Texas House of Representatives, respectively.  Liberty Institute argued that HB 15 is consistent with The Supreme Court and only requires the disclosure of truthful and accurate information to allow women to make informed decisions regarding their pregnancies.

The article Texas’ Sonogram Law Ruling is a Big Victory for Pro-Lifers appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Some progress is being made under King Abdullah in Saudi Arabia to give women more rights, especially in the political arena. The right to vote, which has historically been banned from women, was granted this past week to Saudi women. Along with the right to vote, the King also announced that women would be able to run for municipality council positions and serve on the Shura council, which is currently all male.

There have been other promises from King Abdullah that have not been  carried out in previous years, such as in 1999 when he promised equal rights for all women. Since his entrance in 1995, the right to vote is one of the most dramatic changes the King has made thus far, and many hope it is just the beginning.

King Abdullah’s actions were influenced by religious motives and relating back to the role women played historically in Islamic culture and for the prophet Muhammad. He states, “Muslim women in our Islamic history have demonstrated positions that expressed correct opinions and advice.

But it seems with every step forward that Saudi Arabia takes to progress towards a more equal society, there has recently also been a step in the wrong direction. Probably the biggest event of unequal rights occurring in Saudi Arabia is women not being able to drive and the recent arrest of Shayma Jastaniah.

Jastaniah was arrested for driving a car and sentenced to ten lashings as her punishment. Two other women are also to appear in court later in the year on charges for driving. They will have to pledge not to drive again to escape punishment.  Backlash almost immediately arose from women’s rights groups throughout the world, viewing the punishment as a letdown for the country, especially after the announcement that women would have the right to hold political positions just days before.

“Saudi Women for Driving” was a petition launched and organized by Change.org and received more than 1,600 signatures when they heard about the lashings that were scheduled for Jastaniah. The same group also is starting a petition calling on King Abdullah to let women drive in Saudi Arabia.

Organizations across the world and within Saudi Arabia have put pressure on the government to cancel the lashings of Jastaniah and King Abdullah finally canceled the flogging. Many women’s rights groups were pleased with the decision and although it was a setback to progress in women rights in country, there was a sigh of relief.

Even though the introduction of a few rights to women is a monumental step in Saudi Arabia, there is a long way to go in giving women complete equality with men. The election will not take place until 2015 and there is hope that these steps taken by King Abdullah are just the beginning of change for women to gain more rights in Saudi Arabia.
Asianet-Pakistan / Shutterstock.com

The article Saudi Arabia Takes Two Steps Forward and One Step Back appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Amidst violence and upheaval in the Middle East, Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah’s recent announcement that women will be granted the right to vote seems a refreshing development. In fact, the 87 year-old monarch’s decree includes not only voting rights for women, but the ability to run in municipal elections, and to join the King’s Shura Council.

However, many worry that this apparent step forward in women’s rights is not all that it appears to be, as similar promises have been alluded to before and never seen fruition. Although encouraging, no changes will take place immediately — if implemented at all, elections won’t be affected until 2015.

By that time, the conservative nation of Saudi Arabia might have a new leader, with an entirely separate agenda from the comparatively liberal King Abdullah. Sarah Leah Whitson, director of Human Rights Watch’s Middle East and North Africa division, was quoted by ABC news saying this about the announcement;

It is a promise, it is not actually a legislative reform…It’s not sanctified in any kind of law. The risk is if the next king comes in and says, ‘We won’t do that after all.’ One of the biggest problems of King Abdullah as a reformer is that the actions that will last beyond his lifetime are really at question and at risk.

In addition, even if women are granted the right to vote, the legislation as it is being discussed now would do nothing to address the tribally rooted guardianship system which all Saudi women must comply with. The guardianship system extends over practically every aspect of a grown woman’s life.

Without a male’s permission, she cannot travel, go to school, marry, or even have medical surgery. In court, the testimony of one male equals that of two women, and a woman who is raped is considered a guilty party in the crime.

One of the aspects of the guardianship system most hotly contested by women’s rights activists is the law which prevents Saudi women from driving. According to a recent update from the BBC, women around the country have been illegally taking to the streets over the past months in a near unprecedented display of protest.

Last May, seven women were arrested for driving, and a small, secondary protest followed in June. Just this week, King Abdullah overturned a sentence of ten lashes levied against a female driver.

However, in the name of fairness, the BBC also spoke with a Saudi man who claimed, “There are hundreds and thousands of guys and they get the same or more if they do bad things…If I am in the mall and I bother some girl, I will get more than [10 lashes] from the court.”

Most Saudi women’s activists are under no illusion that the right to vote will change everything overnight. Many believe that no improvement will occur until women can drive themselves to the polls, but at the very least, it’s a step forward somewhere and that’s cause enough for celebration.

The article Change In Saudi Arabia; Is It Coming? appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

Ruled by Sharia laws, Saudi women have to face most severe reins, such as the dress code, sex segregation, male guardianship, not being able to vote and be elected to high political positions, and many others. Being “the lowest ranking country in Freedom House’s assessment of women’s rights in the Middle East and North Africa”, Saudi Arabia kingdom’s enforcement cause the country to be the only one in the world that doesn’t allow women to drive.

To stand for Saudi women’s one of the most basic rights, one brave Saudi women-rights activist, Manal al-Sharif posted to YouTube, a video of herself driving, and drove both her country’s and world’s attention. While Saudi authorities arrested her, she got the world’s admiration, and gave to the Women2Drive Campaign a voice.

The protest against the ban on women driving  actually first emerged in 1990 in Saudi Arabia, and concluded with the punishment of several women. This last incident of Manal-al Sharif, raised the voice of Saudi women once again.

“Manal al-Sharif, a 32-year-old computer security consultant, was arrested on 22 May, the day after she was stopped by police while driving in al-Khobar city in Saudi Arabia’s Eastern Province”, reported Amnesty International. Al-Sharif was released this week from Dammam prison, but as a condition of that she had to sign a pledge, which indicates that she will not take part in Women2Drive campaign. She also presented her apologies to the king, and declared that she appreciates her release.

Nonetheless Manal al-Sharif initiated the campaign, and Women2Drive did not lose its effect. Many Saudi women are uploading their videos filmed by their husbands, fathers, relatives and the campaign is growing from Facebook and Twitter .

Supporting the campaign, Freedom House , in its press release demands from Saudi Arabia, to fulfill their promises that has been given since 2008, regarding the lifting of the driving ban of women, and also to allow the campaign to take place in a peaceful environment.

The campaign encourages Saudi women with international driver licences, to drive on Saudi Arabia streets on 17th of June, and demands support from all around the world. It is about time for women to raise their voices against severe Saudi authority.

The article Women2Drive: Saudi Women’s Strive on June 17 appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.

The article French Ban on Muslim Veil Enacted – First Sign of Multi-Culti Failure? appeared first on The Toonari Post - News, Powered by the People!.