Right to live … but just as I say

By: Barbara Farina

As usual Amanda Fox got me thinking. This time a bit by accident but it is always a good thing.


Vladimir_Putin_12015We all have different views and visions about Putin’s participation in the alleged solution to the problem with Syria.

But among all this mess, suddenly I could not help but notice that to Putin, it is okay to hide the facts regarding discrimination in his own country.

Why is he being hailed as part of the solution to the conflict with Syria while discriminates against the gay community? Not that bringing peace is a bad thing at all, but why not bring peace to his own people as well?


3fd83112In further evidence of intolerance, Russian President Vladimir Putin sanctioned in July of this year a law which, among other things, prohibits alleged gay propaganda. Whether in person, internet or any means of communication, if the government sees some nontraditional sexual propaganda that could potentially wind up in front of children (so says the law), that person will be punished with fines of between 100 and 125 euros for each of these events. Now, if these acts of free speech, or as I think it would be correct to call, HUMAN RIGHTS, are carried out by legal entities fines would be around 20,000 euros and if they are done by a foreign person, they would be expelled from the country.


Most troubling about this situation is that 80% of Russians are in favor of this law, and 40% agreed with prosecution and punishment homosexuals. Why? Well, I can think of several good answers and none of them say much good about Putin or the 80% of Russians in agreement with him.

Remember, we are in the 21st century. It would be stupid to just say “get with the times” as an argument, although it is quite obvious that he still acting like the old Soviet Union leaders. We can say that the development of education, tolerance and freedom are still issues to improve in Russia.


In 2014 the Winter Olympics will be held in Russia, more precisely in Sochi. Of course to not allow any person who is homosexual to participate which generated quite a stir in the world, is an insane concept, it is presenting a serious dilemma for many. Both in the Americas, and Europe, marches and protests are held over this, as many of us believe in the fact that we are all human. Personally I do not care nor is it my problem whom wants to get married to who, or who dates who, or who you want to sleep with.

I’m from Argentina and in my country, as in many others in the world, people of the same sex can marry and have the same rights as any heterosexual couple. And the reality is that there is no reason to be otherwise since we are all human.


At least of course unless you’re a bigot, fascist, retrograde thinking that homosexuality is an illness.

So Putin has several problems these days. The differences between him and Obama on this issue is just one of many. And for some of us that he wants peace in Syria while pursuing all those who think differently to him in his own country is at least one big warning more trouble is to come.


The War On Women: It’s More Than A Buzzword

By: Amanda Fox

The term “War on women” is tossed around so much lately that you could easily begin believing it is nothing more than a hollow buzzword being used to attract attention. As a woman, I wish that was the truth, but the fact of the matter is that there is a very real war on women being waged in the US. It is going on abroad as well, but this week we want to focus on what is happening right here at home.

6935023423_f67b6ba58c_zWhat is the “War on Women”? Depending on who you ask, it can be any number of things. Generally speaking, however, the war on women is being loosely defined as a concerted effort to deprive women of self sustaining upward mobility by denying them the ability to make the basic choices needed to control their lives. Plenty of people would claim that is far fetched. They would tell you that it is impossible to be done and even if it could be done, it would be so evident that everyone would rage against it – something those people would claim is not happening.

Those naysayers would be wrong. There is a concerted effort to keep women from having the same control of their destiny afforded to men and there is an evident and very vocal uprising against it. The problem is that too many people are choosing to ignore it – or they are actually in support of it. It’s easy to say that, but what people want is evidence.

We can begin with a recently concluded study in the New England Journal of Medicine that has tracked the effect of the 2/3 budget cut ($111m to $38m) to birth control spending in Texas during 2011. Usually, it would take a few years to track demonstrable changes, but in this case the changes were so drastic the impact was immediately felt. For starters, due to actual family planning services being the last in line to receive available funding, 53 clinics that provided birth control and family planning initiatives closed in one year.

10703550-largeKeep in mind, the remaining clinics did not magically make up for the shortfall in service provision. There was no phantom money that was diverted from elsewhere in the budget to help defray any of the shortfall. The simple fact is fewer people were served and in some of the less urban areas of Texas, there was no service at all. Just a long drive with the hopes of being seen in another county. Even then, some of the clinics that once provided services for free had to begin charging for services just to keep their doors open.

That has opened up another set of issues such as women choosing less effective means of birth control, taking chances by skipping the pill now and then to try to stretch out the time between purchases and women foregoing birth control altogether. Many are also opting to do without being tested for STDs as their cost is rarely covered by clinics anymore due to cutbacks. The short term result is more unplanned pregnancies, a rise in the level of STDs and healthcare programs for the indigent run by county hospitals being pushed far beyond their breaking point. And this was all done in an attempt to de-fund Planned Parenthood.

We’ve seen the impact on the small scale, but now it is time to change gears and look at the big picture. How much legislation aimed at women’s health and rights has really been proposed or gone through? What do they all really mean to women in the right here and right now?

War_on_WomenThe biggest issue, to many women, has been the immediate threat to reproductive rights. During 2011/2012, 1100 provisions related to RESTRICTING the reproductive rights of women were introduced at the state level. Of the 944 provisions in 2012, over half were aimed at restricting abortions. The main focus of these bills has not been to defeat Roe v. Wade so much as circumvent it by narrowing the legal window to obtain an abortion, allowing limits on insurance coverage of abortions and implementing mandatory invasive ultrasounds prior to being granted the ability to obtain an abortion.

Speaking of abortions, as we can’t avoid them in this discussion, in 2011, 135 pieces of legislation were passed which aimed to restrict the ability of a woman from obtaining a legal abortion.


Government mandated transvaginal ultrasounds became a mandatory procedure prior to abortion in some states during 2011/2012. For those unaware of the how and why of this, if a woman’s pregnancy is not very far along, a traditional ultrasound produces no image. To rectify that, a transvaginal probe is inserted in the woman’s vagina to capture what is essentially an image of a blob or something a bit egg-shaped. The procedure serves absolutely no medical purpose and is very close to the definition of rape in almost every state. In states like Louisiana where that was already the law, they have tried to push it a little further to get a bill passed requiring that the fetal heartbeat be listened to as well even if it has to be audio enhanced to the point of being more an interpretation of the machines software than an actual heartbeat.


The “fetal pain bill” passed in Georgia (HB 954) states that no abortions may occur beyond the 20th week of development with NO exceptions – even cases of rape or incest. Not surprisingly, Arizona passed an even more restrictive measure that states no abortions beyond 20 weeks, but they start the clock on that at the time a woman completes her last menstrual cycle meaning the window is trimmed down to about 18 weeks in all actuality. Ohio wants to go even further with their “fetal heartbeat bill” which would not allow an abortion if a fetal heartbeat can be detected. That would cut the window to obtain an abortion to about 6 weeks.


And now for the quick and dirty rundown of the presentation:

The 2011 budget proposed by House Republicans included a $758m cut to the WIC program which assists low-income pregnant women and children under 5 meet basic nutritional needs.

In 2012, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker repealed the state Equal Pay Enforcement Act which provided the victims of workplace discrimination the ability to reek redress in court. Support for the repeal was provided by Sen. Glenn Grothman (R) on the basis that young men are more money conscious about their earnings because they may be breadwinners one day.

war-on-women-432x250In an epically failed move to save money prosecuting domestic violence cases, Topeka, Kansas, decriminalized domestic violence using the logic that since it was still a crime at the state level, Shawnee County would be forced to absorb the legal costs. The result was 18 people that were charged with domestic violence were released because there was no one to provide them with a swift trial while everyone argued over jurisdiction and who was really responsible for picking up the bill.

In a move to cut the amount of Medicaid money spent on abortions, the GOP has tried to redefine rape creating categories like, rape, forcible rape, violent rape, legitimate rape, illegitimate rape, date rape, acquaintance rape, non-forcible rape and rape reduced to lesser sexual assault charges. You can thank the Republican proposed 2011 “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act” for this gem of illogical thought.