Tara Tainton

(The following is extracted from NARAL Pro-Choice America's newsletter.)

"Most Americans think mid-term elections are a big yawn. But you and I know differently.

This year's Congressional elections are an exciting, high-stakes opportunity - a historic chance for you and your friends to stop the radical right in its tracks.

We've seen what 6 years under President Bush and an anti-choice Congress means for women. We have less access to both birth control and honest information about preventing unintended pregnancy. At the same time, Bush and his allies are doing everything in their power to make it more difficult and dangerous to access abortion care.

Now is the time to get started. We have exactly 6 months to let our friends, neighbors, and colleagues know why they have to act - and vote - on their pro-choice values this election cycle. This is our opportunity to turn the anti-choice tide.

Go ahead. Wake them up and say you're voting to elect a pro-choice Congress because:

• We must block potential anti-choice Supreme Court nominees now that Roe v. Wade hangs by just one vote.
• For more than three years, Bush's FDA has refused to allow the "morning-after" pill - a safe and effective way to prevent unintended pregnancy - to be sold over-the-counter.
• More than half a billion taxpayer dollars have been spent on ineffective abstinence-only programs since Bush took office.
• We need the votes to pass the Freedom of Choice Act so that we never have to fight for the right to choose again.
• With only two years left in his term, Bush will use his anti-choice Congress to pass as many anti-choice bills as he can. This is our chance to stop him (and them)!

Thank you for all you do to protect a woman's right to choose."

Comments

Add New

Anonymous | 2009-12-14 00:23 michael g.b. 05/21/2006 08:09 AM my thoughts: whether one is morally opposed to "abortion" or "tolerant of abortion" as an option, the current wave of "reactionary closed-minded horse-blindered conservatism" is the wrong direction for dealing with ANY issue or problem. more harm than good has been accomplished regarding everything from "free-speech" (just look at Howard Stern's "fines" and the internet "fear tactics" as small examples) to health care (ha! now there is a joke that ISN'T funny! . . . what a disaster they have made of that!) . . . i believe "choice" is just that: the individual gets to call the shots in his/her own life, not the "law" or "the government" or "a group of legally brain-dead legislators" . . . a person has the right to judge abortion etc as "moraly wrong" and follow that precept in his her own life . . . and there are others who believe differently in dealing with their own life issues . . . i can see one trying to convince the other in the "arena of conversation", but NOT in the arena of legislation. back in the late sixties two New Yorkers ran for local office under the banner of the slogan, "Vote The Bums IN" . . . maybe that's waht we need again now . . . michael g.b. 05/21/2006 09:04 AM p.s. did i mention the two candidates in New York City were: Norman Mailer and Jimmy Breslin? :) michael g.b. 05/21/2006 09:06 AM p.p.s -- and did i mention that 'they lost" :( but hey . .campaigns send a message . . even if one loses, the message was spoken and "some people got it"! :) Tara, your Pro-Choice WebMistress 05/21/2006 01:21 PM My thoughts exactly...conversational debate is great and brings out the points one party may not have considered, allows us to be all the more knowledgable, etc. Yet, I'd never judge another or try to limit their own rights/actions for THEIR decision. I only know when the same wouldn...

Write comment
Name:
Email:
Website:
Title:
UBBCode:	-color-aquablackbluefuchsiagraygreenlimemaroonnavyolivepurpleredsilvertealwhiteyellow -size-tinysmallmediumlargehuge
	Please input the anti-spam code that you can read in the image.

 

3.23 Copyright (C) 2007 Alain Georgette / Copyright (C) 2006 Frantisek Hliva. All rights reserved."