I have two equally strong reactions to this. One, I am ashamed to be living in Oklahoma. I voted for Henry, I thought he'd show more guts than this.

Secondly, I'm really, really, really relieved that I was finally able to get my tubes tied last September. Is that selfish of me?

Selfish, perhaps . . . But maybe also just realistic?

I was just looking over data on state-by-state abortion rights and trying to decide how heavily that will weigh in my future relocations. I don't want to be stuck somewhere where my reproductive decision-making will not be respected and my actions based on those decisions will not be protected.

Of course, I also send money and sign petitions for Planned Parenthood, NARAL, the National Network of Abortion Funds, the Global Fund for Women, etc., etc., etc.

We can try to care for ourselves under the current conditions, while also fighting for reproductive justice for all.

* bangs head against keyboard *

I'm living further North these days, but I grew up in Oklahoma and just feel so damn pissed off and violated by this whole thing.

I know Oklahoma's a conservative state--so conservative that, as I recall, there didn't even seem to be many other options than red--but come on, people.

Sorry I don't have anything more articulate to say. I'm just so damn angry.

Kimmy, how is getting a tubal ligation selfish of you?

How is this even legal,? Though it's on a slippery slope, abortion is still a legal right, dammit!

(I think Kimmy meant selfish to be relieved that she won't have to deal personally with the abortion ban shit . . . not that getting a tubal ligation was itself selfish)

Ah, that makes sense anna. Thanks.

Deflated...as someone who has worked hard to defeat this legislation, today is a bad day and I feel deflated.

But I'm sure as hell not giving up. We can only bang our heads on the keyboards for one day. Then we re-group and move forward.

Yeah, Anna's got it right, that's what I meant. But y'all are right, too. It's okay for me to be relieved I don't have to worry about it, as long as I don't forget that I can still help work on behalf of those who do.

Yeah, I don't see how a state can ban something that's legally protected. Isn't banning abortion like banning "freedom of the press?" Bad example, I know.

They can pass unconstitutional legislation - it just won't stand judicial review. I live in Idaho, and the ID legislature passed some unconstitutional abortion restrictions that it spent hundreds of thousands of dollars fighting to keep - and then when it inevitably lost, they had to pay hundreds of thousands to Planned Parenthood to repay court costs.

Wasn't it vetoed?

I've got a question. In SC, most hospitals are private and most women seeking abortions for reasons other than the exceptions listed in the legislation go to private clinics so legislation like this would make little difference. How is the hospital system in OK? How much will this bill really change things? Obviously it is horrible to have on the books (as it is part of the eroding away of our rights), don't get me wrong - the legislation sucks and I hate it, but I am just wondering how it will change things (besides no longer allowing doctors to abort a fetus if it has little to no chance to survive outside the womb, which is a tragic thing in its own right).

Once again, I am not defending the bill or any part of it, I am just curious as to what the impact will be - will the legislation change things for women in OK on an immediate level or is its purpose more to set precedent for the future when they want to erode reproductive rights away even more (until there are none)?

The Governor vetoed the bill. What are you all freaking out about?

http://defeatsb714.org/comments.html

Because he vetoed Senate Bill 714. What passed now was Senate Bill 139, a slightly modified version of 714. You can tell that by reading all of the information linked from the post, and not just half of it.

BULLSHIT. Fuck you, OK legislature.

You just know what's gonna happen ... even people who need abortions for reasons that all but the nuttiest pro-lifers would support will end up not being able to get abortions at state-funded hospitals, if only because of uncertainty about what's actually prohibited and doctors not wanting to go to jail.

So then these people will go to specialized abortion clinics. And pro-lifers will say "if these people really needed abortions for medical reason [X], why didn't they get them in a regular hospital?".

The disingenuousness of the so-called pro-life movement is amazing.

So...say you are pregnant with a very wanted child and you find out at your second trimester (routine) ultrasound that there are some problems with the pregnancy. You are told that your child would most likely survive until birth, but upon delivery the child would die because unfortunately the lungs and heart are growing outside the baby's body.

In OK, you can no longer be refered to the top notch teaching hospital for an abortion. You can either carry the pregnancy to term - warding off innocent yet painful questions like "when are you due?" "are you having a boy or girl?" OR you could try and seek out a private hospital that would be willing to do the proceedure (good luck) or travel to a different state to have the proceedure performed. If you are poor - you are probably not going to have the resources to travel or pay a private hospital. Sucks to be poor.

And folks will argue that this doesn't happen very often. But the statistics do not matter if it happens to you or to your sister or to your best friend now does it?

"In OK, you can no longer be refered to the top notch teaching hospital for an abortion. You can either carry the pregnancy to term - warding off innocent yet painful questions like "when are you due?" "are you having a boy or girl?" OR you could try and seek out a private hospital that would be willing to do the proceedure (good luck)..."

Which reminds me, what about state hospital doctors working in private hospital facilities?

From what I've heard, Children's Hospital in Boston has some adult patients because some of its doctors are experts on rare conditions that affect people of all ages, but reserves its ORs for patients under age 25. That doesn't mean CHB doctors can't operate on the occasional 75-year-old patient who needs their expertise - it means CHB has arrangements with other hospitals to do that in *their* ORs.

OTOH, isn't Oklahoma less densely populated than Massachusetts? Even if a state hospital doctor and her or his patient can have an abortion at a private hospital, wuld there be any within a reasonable distance?

The linked article says that Okla. is the 32nd state to pass legislation restricting abortions in state funded hospitals. I had no idea it was that many.

Also worth noting that the vetoed bill (714) had no rape/incest exception, but the ratified bill (139) added in the exception, which apparently roped in enough legislators to ensure a veto override if the governor had vetoed it. Which he lamely did not.

Chip chip chip.

What in the Hell is wrong with our country? Its so backwards compared to some European countries!

Until pro-choicers become as adamant as pro-lifers, we'll continue to our rights erode.

Which comes to another problem: I know I am afraid to become more active about promotoing pro-choice beliefs (birth control, abortion rights) as I will most likely lose my job and/or get harassed.

/sigh