Hey HHS, get OUT of my uterus! >:

[modernwizard]

According to the NY TImes, "The Bush administration wants to require all recipients of aid under federal health programs to certify that they will not refuse to hire nurses and other providers who object to abortion and certain types of birth control." This same proposal also wishes to define the use of common contraceptives as abortifacients because they terminate "human life" "before...implantation." 

Thanks to tikva's highlight of the especially galling sections of the report and to hammercock's link to NARAL, I E-mailed my Congresspersons.

Subject: I oppose the proposed HHS ruling where contraception = abortifacients

Dear [Decision maker],

I'm writing to express my opposition to a proposed new Health and Human Services regulation that could discourage doctors and health-care clinics from providing contraception to women who need it.

Not only does the proposal interfere with women's rights to do as they wish with their own reproductive systems, but it also makes no sense, as on p. 30, lines 8-11. In this section, "abortion" is referred to as "the termination of the life of a human being...whether before or after implantation." This definition equates an unimplanted embyro with a fully developed human being, which it is NOT. The proposed HHS rule would thereby privilege the unimplanted embryo over the fully developed, autonomous woman that carries the embryo.

Such discrimination against women should not be tolerated. Oppose these regulations and support reproductive rights for women. Thank you for your attention.

Of course, this won't do anything, but I feel a tiny bit better for spitting in the hurricane. And look...I did it without swearing.

Comments

[dollsahoy.livejournal.com]

Ugh. By that reasoning, every time a woman--or pubescent girl--is not having sex, she's having an abortion, since that means implantation is being prevented.