City committee approves anti-abortion resolution
Source: Bakersfield Californian
Standing shoulder-to-shoulder with local right-to-life supporters, a Bakersfield City Council committee approved an anti-abortion resolution on Monday affirming that "there are many positive and feasible alternatives to abortion."
The resolution must still be approved by a council majority at a future meeting, and its passage is a step back from an earlier, more restrictive ordinance.
But its approval marked a victory for anti-abortion activists amid concern nationwide that abortion will increase under health care reform.
City Attorney Ginny Gennaro has said that even if the resolution is approved by the entire Bakersfield City Council, it would not be enforced.
Read more: http://www.bakersfieldcalifornian.com/local/x196571142/City-committee-approves-anti-abortion-resolution
The Central Valley = the armpit of an otherwise progressive state.
seveneyes
(4,631 posts)Here's one...keep your nose out of other peoples private medical concerns. There must be a smart way to get, and keep meddling creeps like these out of public positions.
</EditSpellingTypo>
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)HockeyMom
(14,337 posts)That was mine. I am sure these people would be fine with that. Unfortunately, me, my husband, our 3 year old daughter didn't like that option.
obxhead
(8,434 posts)Increased access to health care will likely yield an increase of birth control use making abortions less... oh wait that's not it.
Give me a minute, I'm sure I can figure out their reasoning..... Never mind, reason is the thing completely missing.
dem in texas
(2,673 posts)Cities have enough to worry about without getting involved with what a woman is doing with her body. This is just like Farmers Branch trying to keep Mexicans from living there. So far it cost the city over 8 million in legal fees and they are appealing. Bakersfield will probably be sued too.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)Make it so.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)billh58
(6,635 posts)stronghold of Kern County:
"According to the California Secretary of State, as of April 2008, Kern County had 283,732 registered voters. Of those, 101,580 (35.8%) were Democrats, 131,878 (46.5%) were Republicans, 10,752 (3.8%) were registered with other political parties, and 39,522 (13.9%) declined to state a political party. The cities of Bakersfield, California City, Maricopa, Ridgecrest, Taft, Tehachapi, and the unincorporated areas had a plurality or majority of voters registered Republican. All of the other cities and towns had Democratic pluralities or majorities."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kern_County,_California
Swede Atlanta
(3,596 posts)I don't think anyone in the progressive community would disagree with that objective.
The alternatives include:
(1) Providing meaningful family planning education and means (i.e. condoms, etc.) to sexually active individuals
(2) Providing financial and medical support of a woman who, in concert with the father, have elected to bring the child to term and then offer them for adoption
(3) Providing financial and medical support for a woman who, in concert with the father, choose to bring the child to term and raise it as their own. This includes living wages for the parent(s), safe neighborhoods free of NRA weapons and bullets, access to affordable health care, subsistence so they have nutritious and adequate food, a competent education that positions them for the future
But of course Republicans are only concerned about forcing her to have he baby. They don't care about the woman, the father or the baby. They hate the baby. They don't want to ensure the "life" they fought to save is a good life, one with opportunity, etc.
They are hopeless losers but we will never win this argument.
SunSeeker
(51,512 posts)Indyfan53
(473 posts)These pro-life fucks need to be tear gassed by the police!
This is unconstitutional! Why isn't more action being taken against these fascist? Where is NARAL on this?