No. But I will say that the Bush conspiracy crowd makes it harder for me to distinguish between solid issues and and issues that have absolutely no practical bearing on women's health. In the video it seems like the latter case. THAT is the problem with feminist movements indirectly funded by partisan people.
I highly doubt youd classify this video as having been part of any 'Bush conspiracy crowd'. Off the mark.
Until she makes it clear which "law" this is, I have absolutely NO way to counter it. A "proposed rule last month" says nothing to me. Give me the name of the law, which law-maker is behind it, how realistic it is that it's going to pass both House and Senate, and we can go from there. Then, were I an American citizen I might shoot off an e-mail to my congressman who's certainly voting against whatever Bush lobbies for anyway.
Here you go. It's a health and human services proposal, which does not go through the house. If it went though the house, it would not pass. It was leaked last month. http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/emailphotos/pdf/HHS-45-CFR.pdf
If it didn't go through the House then it was federally mandated. Is that what happened? That's what I mean. This person in the video gets PAID to do that. Instead I'm taking away from my own time to do my own research because she prefers to say "fuck you Bush" to giving me actual concrete facts. lode, what you gave me is a draft. I don't read drafts. It's hard enough to find the name of the actual proposed law in it.
I saw the website. I'm not negative at all. I guess I'm just responding to democratic politics in general. It always annoys me that in democracies you have to appeal to people's hearts and make shit real emotional at the expense of concrete political action. I wouldn't even get a job in a place like where she works even were I a female. Because I'd be making a video about law xyz and skip the fuck you Bush part altogether and nobody would listen to it.
There is no law. It's a health and human service proposal. It doesn't go through the house. It is by the HHS, which is executive appointed. It is funding provided by the government which is never voted on by the house or senate. If you expect to see it in law form, you never will. Not a law. Never will be, and will still pass. HHS.
It's being exercised under the weldon and church amendments. Passed in the 70's. So the HHS isn't overreaching it's constitutional authority here... They're just redefining words. Like 'contreception' to mean 'abortion'. http://www.usccb.org/prolife/issues/abortion/h-backgrounder.pdf
wow. you guys are crazy if you saw anything bad about that and how she presented it. that was the LEAST annoying angry feminist i've ever seen.
Ok. Wasn't aware of that. That is serious, in fact. It just struck me that the video is promotional, and in promotion the LAST thing you want to do is focus on concrete facts as I should know. So I apologize. It's a lofty video with a lofty goal. At first I misinterpreted it as an informative video. Cate: I'm sorry to hear that. That would be a shame. Let me just say that you're misinterpreting my position badly. I am 100% in favor of women's reproductive rights. I'm just annoyed by the American political process because everything is soooooo incremental and status-quo.
maybe I just wasn't paying attention all that well, but she seemed FAR from pissed, and I thought she was actually kinda hot. But what she was saying: fuck that, I'm on her side with this one. I don't believe in abortions. However, classifying contraceptives as a form of abortion? If Bush is seriously considering this, (don't know haven't and don't plan on doing any further research, because mostly I just don't care) He is already way up there on my shit list so I don't think this changes my opinon on him at all, simply because he just couldn't be any bigger of a piece of shit.