Well, this is interesting. Democrats must realize they aren’t really winning the war on abortion, and have to find a way to whip up the base
Democrats pivot to same-sex marriage
Congress has its hands full this week as the House pushes ahead with a vote to codify same-sex marriage and Senate Democrats continue to wonder what to do about Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) amid a last-gasp effort to pass a budget reconciliation bill of any type.
For the second time in less than a week, House Democrats are focusing on responses to the Supreme Court as the chamber will vote on a pair of bills: the Respect for Marriage Act, aimed at protecting same-sex marriages, and the Right to Contraception Act, which would cement the ability to obtain contraceptives.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and other top Democrats have framed the vote as a rejection of Justice Clarence Thomas’s opinion in last month’s ruling striking down Roe v. Wade that the court should reexamine those two items as rights.
“This week, the House will pass two more bills to protect freedom in our nation, as extremist Justices and lawmakers take aim at more of our basic rights,” Pelosi said in a note to House Democrats on Monday.
“Our Right to Contraception Act will preserve the essential protections found in Griswold v. Connecticut. Our Respect for Marriage Act – which, proudly, is bipartisan and bicameral – will defend the right to marry whomever you love, as found in Obergefell v. Hodges and Loving v. Virginia,” she added.
The Respect for Marriage Act is set to be voted on today, with the contraceptives vote expected later this week (The Hill).
In regards to the marriage act, that might be something for which the federal congress has authority, since it would be equal treatment under the law, so, everyone would be entitled to at least a civil union. It’s a pretty simple bill that says two people can get married, and only two, and utterly usurps all power of the states. Might it lead to “activists” suing churches, mosques, etc, which refuse to perform a gay marriage?
As for contraception, it’s nice to see Democrats re-discover them, after years and years of treating abortion as contraception. Is any state attempting to restrict it? I haven’t seen any news on that. It appears as if the one they are going to vote on, and there are a whole bunch that have been submitted, is the one from Kathy Manning (D-NC), HR 8373, for which there is no text at this time. Nor a CBO cost analysis. Manning’s press release states
Specifically, the Right to Contraception Act would:
- Create a statutory right for people to obtain contraceptives and engage in contraception;
- Establish a corresponding right for health care providers to provide contraceptives and information related to contraception;
- Allow the Department of Justice, as well as providers and individuals harmed by restrictions on contraception access made unlawful under the legislation, to go to court to enforce these rights; and
- Protect a range of contraceptive methods, devices, and medications used to prevent pregnancy, including but not limited to oral contraceptives, emergency contraceptives, and intrauterine devices.
This bill is endorsed by the following organizations: National Women’s Law Center, NARAL Pro-Choice America, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association, Power to Decide, National Partnership for Women & Families, Reproductive Health Access Project, Association of Maternal & Child Health Programs, Catholics for Choice, National Organization for Women, National Center for Lesbian Rights, National Women’s Health Network, Urge: Unite for Reproductive & Gender Equity, Jewish Women International, National Council of Jewish Women
Hmm, the federal government would be able to go after anyone over this? That’s an over-reach. The big one, meant to be also be a poison pill for Republicans, is codifying “emergency contraceptives”, meaning abortion pills, so states cannot block their use. Hence why so many abortion groups support the bill.
Wow. Just Wow. Respect for marriage act. Wasn’t it just a few administrations ago that the Republicans passed a “protection of marriage act”? And wasn’t it the Obama administration that over-ruled it by the simple expedient of not defending it in court? And they can’t ever envision a Republican AG doing the exact same thing to their own law? It’s like Democrats have not only the memories of guppies, but also the vision of moles.
[edit] Defense of Marriage Act.
Virtue signalers gotta virtue signal. It’s not as though there were any attempts to make contraception, interracial marriage or same-sex ‘marriage’ illegal.
Of course, homosexual ‘marriages’ should be made illegal. If two, or more, homosexuals wish to live together and do whatever it is they choose to do, that’s none of anyone’s business. But giving it legal recognition has opened up a whole can of worms.
Teach typed: The big one, meant to be also be a poison pill for Republicans, is codifying “emergency contraceptives”, meaning abortion pills, so states cannot block their use.
This is incorrect. Emergency contraceptives are not abortion pills. Plan B and generic levonorgestrel are contraceptives and do not cause the loss of an implanted embryo. Levonorgestrel (1.5 mg) is available OTC and is used up to 72 hr after unprotected intercourse or suspected failed contraception.
Abortion pills are the combination of mifepristone (progestin antagonist) and misoprostol (prostaglandin that stimulates uterine contraction) used together to induce a therapeutic abortion up to 10 weeks gestation.