Author: has written 5301 posts for this blog.

Jill began blogging for Feministe in 2005. She has since written as a weekly columnist for the Guardian newspaper and in April 2014 she was appointed as senior political writer for Cosmopolitan magazine.
Return to: Homepage | Blog Index

5 Responses

  1. Rebecca
    Rebecca November 13, 2008 at 7:26 pm |

    Funny how all those rightwingers crying that Prop H8 is the will of the people seem to disappear when the will of the people is that women not be treated as baby receptacles.

  2. Daniel Martin
    Daniel Martin November 13, 2008 at 10:42 pm |

    Chris Smith, Chris Smith… where have I heard that name before?

    Oh, that’s right. He’s my representative. Or at least, he’s the representative of the congressional district in which I reside, no matter how often I vote for anyone running against him.

    So… Rep. Smith is an odd case. On the one hand, this is totally in character for him – on abortion, he’s smack in the middle of wingnutville. If you look at his speeches from a decade ago, he’s right there with the people who’d want to ban or restrict many forms of birth control, if it were politically viable to attempt something like that. Again, going back over a decade you can find him doing things like attaching riders to funding bills that tried to re-establish the Global Gag Rule through Congressional action during the Clinton years. (He’s been in congress since 1981)

    And yet, he was one of the few Republicans who voted for the Paycheck Fairness Act, to fix the awful Ledbetter decision. When VAWA came up for reauthorization most recently, he not only voted for it, he was one of the speakers urging its reauthorization. In 2000, he wrote the law that reauthorized VAWA. (As a section of a larger bill he authored, the Trafficking Victims Protection Act)

    I was just cleaning out all the paper recycling for the past month, and ran across various bits of junk mail from before election day. From the “re-elect Chris Smith” material, you’d never even know he was pro-life. In 2000, he was running around talking about how awful it was that women were not being informed about the link between abortion and breast cancer, and was not at all shy about his pro-life creds.

    This time? Not a peep. The only vague hint is how all his mailed campaign materials trumpeted his support of women, both legislatively and through what he’s done under the general heading of “constituent services”. (e.g., when war broke out between Russia and Georgia, he flew to Georgia to negotiate the safe passage of two NJ girls who had been visiting relatives and been trapped by the fighting) These tell me that some campaign advisor told him he needed to focus on getting women to not hate him. (Not that he had anything to worry about – because of district boundaries, he still won with over 70% of the vote)

    Even his official biography on his site mentions pro-life in only one sentence at the end.

    So what is this? The possible beginning of an honest change of heart, or at least a softening of his former extreme positions? A wingnut trying to go stealth because it isn’t politically a good move anymore?

    I hope it’s the first, because although I plan to keep voting against him I’m also pretty certain this district will keep re-electing him.

  3. Joe
    Joe November 15, 2008 at 10:19 am |

    “Forty percent of all pregnancies in Uruguay end in abortion. ”

    That sounds rather high. A “pro-life” sort really should focus on contraceptive use and other things, but straight logic doesn’t often work in this area, does it?

  4. Rebecca_J
    Rebecca_J November 15, 2008 at 6:36 pm |

    I think this hypothetical “pro-lifer” would say that if the ladies were doing their darn job as baby factories none of that would need to happen. In the world of pro-lifers, everything would be fine if not for them murderin’ wimmin. They bring it upon themselves don’t cha know!

  5. FIA » some recent things of interest/citeva stiri recente

    […] Uruguay Congress takes steps to legalize abortion; President likely to veto […]

Comments are closed.

The commenting period has expired for this post. If you wish to re-open the discussion, please do so in the latest Open Thread.