One of a handful of anti-abortion demonstrators stands outside the Cannon House Office Building on Capitol Hill November 5, 2010 in Washington, DC. The demonstrators demanded that House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH), the presumed speaker of the House, pass aggressive anti-abortion legislation or they will find candidates to challenge the Republican leaders in the next primary elections. (November 4, 2010 - Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images South America)

Note from Anne. We’ve seen the power of Facebook operating in Egypt. I’ve met a wonderful woman Lisa Catherine Brown, who is as adamantly angry over the move of America’s patriarchy — led by House Speaker John Boehner — against American women as I am.

Lisa is a regular AOC reader who has been moved to action. Our Facebook friendship and Lisa’s excellent research and writing skills make her an articulate, reasoned and passionate contributor to the cause of women’s rights.

Lisa will be writing often on women’s issues for Anne of Carversville. I hope readers will be as impressed with her thinking as I am.

I’ve encouraged Lisa to be revealing, caustic, opinionated and blunt and as often she wishes. Like me, she is a religious fact checker, which is my own passion. Beyond that, Lisa Catherine Brown is on her own, without my intervention. Anne

PETITIONS. PETITIONS. AND THE ONE THAT MAKES MY BLOOD BOIL

My name is Lisa Catherine Brown. I am a Michigan-based, patriotic mother of four kids with a wonderful husband and two rapes in my personal history. I receive dozens of e-mails a day asking for support for everything from saving the whales, wolves and fish in the ocean to the ocean itself to political pleas to stop or support legislation of many kinds; environmental, humanitarian, political, local, national, global, etc. – so many decent and worthy causes and often so little time and resources to fathom and make sense of it all.

One request in particular that really riled me was a petition against new legislation introduced to Congress that would redefine rape in cases of federally funded abortion. I have an itchy trigger finger when asked to defend pro-choice issues because I am a rape survivor. But this isn’t about my story – I’ll save that for a future post perhaps. This is about how patriarchal, societal, dogmatic and very Christian rhetoric is still alive and well in 21st Century America, still trying to control women, still playing God with women’s bodies, in the name of God or One Nation Under God.

Since this legislation was first proposed wording has been changed as a response to public outcry against what was construed as an attempt to use language that would require rape victims to have their individual circumstances brought under scrutiny, to be defined and categorized before they could receive federally funded assistance in a timely manner to end an unwanted pregnancy. (Note from Lisa. Wrong! Although it was widely reported in the press, Boehner chose to leave in language that redefines rape as forcible only. If you submit to sexual assault as Anne or I did and don’t have the broken bones to prove that you fought back, your rape doesn’t count in Boehner’s patriarchal vision of women’s rights. He is controlling our bodies now. Read Anne’s Republican Men | Redefining Rape | Trolling Craigslist | Telling Women Our Lives Mean Nothing.)

The change in language in H.R.3 holds some good news for pro-choice advocates but dangers still lurk in the murky shadows of this bill- all the while new bills and attacks in pro-choice arenas are coming at us warp speed (H.R.385 introduced by Joe Pitts (R-PA) and new allegations attempting to discredit Planned Parenthood practices.)

On January 20, 2011, an assault on American women’s rights was introduced into the House of Representatives by Christopher Smith (R-NJ) as Bill H.R.3 which, if passed, will have far-reaching consequences, including a provision (SEC 303) that would deny tax credits to insurers who offer reproductive health coverage through current basic health plans.

This gives monetary incentive to insurance companies to remove abortion coverage from any packaged benefits programs and offer it separately, unfairly making healthcare less affordable for women and those with women as dependents. Also it will deny tax deductions to individuals – you, the consumer and taxpayer - for the purchase of medical care benefits covering you, your spouse, and dependents if the benefit package includes abortion coverage.

The sanctimonious posturing by republicans for the last two years in deference to healthcare reform as big government interference in the private lives and choices of Americans is completely contradictory to the restrictions and hardships they would require American women to endure. This legislation is major interference in personal decisions, restricts consumer freedom and will most affect those already struggling to maintain effective health coverage for themselves and their families.

An additional insidious factor to this proposed bill – it is redundant in all ways to laws already in working effect and sets out to cover federally funded abortion coverage across the board keeping the abortion issue out of annual congressional appropriations committee discussions. This action will take working, effective, flexible amendments and turn them into law that would not require annual review allowing the ‘faces’ of abortion to become largely invisible to our elected leaders.

Here are those faces: the Hyde Amendment (covers the Department of Health and Human Services, i.e. Medicaid, i.e. poor and disabled), the Helms Amendment (foreign assistance aid programs banned from using federal funds to pay for abortion counseling or abortions as a method of family planning), the Smith FEHPB (Federal Employee Health and Benefits Plan) Amendment, Dornan Amendment (bans funding for abortions in the District of Columbia) and further policies prohibiting federal funds for abortions for employees of the federal government including U.S. Military and their families, Peace Corps workers, Indian Health Services and clients (federally recognized tribes and Alaskan natives) and federal prisoners.

Did I miss anyone? I should mention that all these bans carry exceptions for rape, incest in cases of a minor, and instances when the mother’s life is in danger.

The American people responded in the elections of 2010 in answer to national economic upheaval and high unemployment rates. These were the issues that ushered in sweeping changes and tipped the House to a republican majority. Many new conservative seats were gained in the Senate as well. Fair enough. Thus far not one jobs or economic bill has been submitted by the House but they have certainly made some clear points – they are going to attempt to whittle away at health care and women’s rights in particular.

This proposed legislation, Bill H.R.3, has a short title citing it as the ‘No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act’ and is defined by the following line description:

To prohibit taxpayer funded abortions and to provide for conscience protections, and for other purposes.

Okay, I get the first part. Taxpayers are fed up with funding numerous national interest issues and projects that they don’t agree with but why the focus on abortion now? (Read Robin Marty’s article for excellent viewpoint)

And what conscience protection and other purposes do they specify and what is rhetorically eluded to?

Recent political history is the main reason that the H.R.3 bill has received immediate and priority attention in the newly elected, republican majority House of Representatives. Both before and after the 2008 Presidential election, Americans have found themselves in deep crisis, individually and collectively. Our nation was almost brought to its knees through bank and other major corporate failures. Jobless rates have been at the highest since the Great Depression.

The stimulus monies and bailouts began with the Bush Administration but ultimately the financial failures resultant of years of national economic negligence fell into the lap of the Obama White House and the democrats who held majorities in both sides of Congress. The hope and change ideologies soon became frustrating and stagnant realities stoking fiery far right pundit rebuttals to what wasn’t being done and fierce attacks on what was being done, mostly, healthcare reform – often referred to as <cringe> Obamacare.

So how does this legislative branch earn points and early gains with their constituents?

The first order of business for the 112th Congress is to repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) signed into law in March 2010 by President Obama. This is largely a gesture to placate those who have been uneasy and wary about the new law - largely due to misinformation. It has little to no chance of passing in the Senate and will definitely be met with a veto by the President should it get that far.

By harboring in the hot button issue of abortion, keying up the pro-life constituency, inferring that loopholes were created in the PPACA that would allow tax-funded abortions the republicans propose into law Bill H.R.3 that will restrict and prevent that from happening. Even if Mr. Smith and the 160 plus co-sponsors are right about the loopholes, which they are not, they’ve gone too far – this bill endangers women’s reproductive health and rights.

The Tea Party Conservatives don’t care that abortion was legal in colonial America. Their own sign reads: Life Before Liberty.HEIGHTENING THE RANCOR AND PISSING OFF THE POPE

Introducing the bill House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) said, “A ban on taxpayer funding of abortion is the will of the people and ought to be the law of the land. But current law - particularly as enforced by this Administration - does not reflect the will of the people.” Yes, he said that, and it is a direct slam on the Obama White House. Also, it is an untrue statement.

Depending on who you talk to ‘the will of the people’ and what ‘ought to be the law of the land’ is highly dependent on any one individual or group’s belief system. This divide falls greatly along religious, conservative ideals with the Catholic Church and Evangelical Christians being the fundamental backbone of the anti-choice movement. The pro-choice movement has had two small victories in the first two years of the Obama presidency which appears to be the source of his summary that the current administration does not reflect the will of the people. For some people, that is true, for others it is not.

In 2009 the Senate approved an omnibus bill which weakened the Dornan Amendment that bans federal funding for abortions in the District of Columbia. The new language keeps in effect the ban on federal funding but allows for locally collected funds to pay for abortion services. Since D.C. funds are constitutionally appropriated by Congress, Cardinal Justin Rigali, the former chairman of the USCCB Committee on Pro-Life Activities calls it a bookkeeping exercise. Other pro-life activists have weighed in similarly. Note: This budget approval is not connected to the passing of the PPACA.

Another area of taxpayer abortion funded concern known as Mexico City Policy, or Global Gag Rule, implemented first by Ronald Reagan and continuing through the G.H. Bush Administration bans non-governmental organizations (NGO’s) from receiving funds from the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) unless they abstain from promoting or providing abortion services as part of family planning services they provide.

Several international agencies that did not comply with standards lost large portions of their funding. Keeping in step with partisan preferences, the Global Gag Rule was rescinded during the Clinton years, reinstated and expanded under G.W. Bush and again rescinded by President Obama.

A Time magazine headline shouted, The Vatican Slams Obama Over Abortion, condemning his stance in favor of funding family planning services both domestically and abroad. The article states, “If he does speak out, the Pope is likely to use his representatives in America.” It seems he’s found his representatives in the form of the 112th Congress. Please note: This policy change is not attached to the passing of the PPACA.

None of the amendments have been impacted by the PPACA. In fact, President Obama signed Executive Order 13535 on March 24, 2010, that commits to preservation of the Hyde Amendment policy that restricts federal funding for abortion within the context of health care reforms, in a partisanship compromise to pro-life congressional members on both sides of the aisle, and in particular to appease supporters of the Stupak-Pitts Amendment.

THE FACES. REPRESENTING THE MANY BEAUTIFUL FACES

I reiterate that the current amendments are called into question and up for debate and reconsideration whenever budget appropriations are being made for the various oversight committees. If passed, the H.R.3 proposal would be law that blankets all the previous amendments, removing the divisions and individual oversights, in essence removing the annual questions and debates that could lead to ratifying any of the amendments currently under denial of abortion funding.

This is why complacency toward this proposed legislation needs to end and we collectively organize and become concerned and vocal in regard to the reproductive health and rights of women. Even with the “forcible rape” language removed this bill aims to further restrict a woman’s right of choice. This is the point in time when the erosion of women’s reproductive health begins unless we remain informed, aware and proactive.

Should all these amendments be lumped together into one law it will become difficult to, oh, say, appeal to allow Native American Indian and Native Alaskans the same rights of reproductive health that the rest of the national population has under their health care policies. Or federal employees, who are denied the same rights as the public they serve. Or female military personnel that are deployed overseas and cannot receive abortion counseling or other services on military bases – where are they to go? Women on the front lines of national and global protection forces themselves being forced to leave their posts and bound into maternal servitude because Congress disallows them the benefits to take charge of their own bodies.

Congressman Hyde once asked the Indian Health Services what gave them the authority to perform abortions and they answered that they had no basis not to perform them. If abortion is not clearly and definitively excluded then agencies and courts will mandate it.

These are faces of women’s reproductive health and rights that need to be in front of congressional consideration each and every year. Akin to annual parole hearings prisoner’s might face – women’s bodies being held prisoner by patriarchal rule with a chance to face freedom. It can still happen if we remain focused and vocal and ask and demand that our leaders continue to consider the issue.

CONSIDERING EXCEPTIONS TO THE RULE

Finally, I bring to your consideration the act of rape and incest resulting in pregnancy, and life-threatening events that occur to pregnant women, and girls, who then the have to make hard personal decisions while wrangling the political/legal/social service systems to get medical counseling and procedures they need in a timely manner.

— Consider statistics that tell us that women suffer traumatically at the hands of aggressors and health complications beyond their control.

— Consider that the majority of rape occurrences are perpetuated by someone the victim knows.

— Consider that often there are no outward indicators that a violent, oppressive sexual assault has occurred.

— Consider that if a woman suffered at the hands of an abuser when she was younger she is at higher risk of it happening again later in her life.

— Look the statistics up for yourself and consider what you find.

— Read or listen to women’s rape stories and consider them.

— Consider that it could be your daughter, sister, mother, wife, girl-friend, neighbor, co-worker, even grandmother or grandchild that is, or was, a victim.

— Consider those who suffer bravely silent, because surviving rape isn’t a medal of honor or topic of genteel conversation.

— Consider that any and all of the women dear to you in life as well as, and likely more so, those living alone with no support systems in place are at risk of becoming one of the statistically challenged victims of assault and that their only resources may be that of the community at large.

— Consider the uneasiness you feel as you read any part of this article.

— Consider having to live with the shame and guilt and regret of having to do what you had to do to survive and endure a sexual assault - forever.

Congress currently has more elected officials on both sides of the aisle that identify themselves as pro-life than ever before. The backlash of anger from constituents regarding the economy and jobs market demands action, but so far the House of Representatives does not appear to have a plan for following through with those campaign promises that ushered them into office.

The John Boehner House has made a top priority of undoing the progress that was made under the previous Congressional rule and, in the case of federally funded abortion, further restricting and limiting laws that have been efficiently in effect for years and years.

Women need to have the option to choose for themselves if a US Supreme Court right to abortion is an appropriate option for their situation. Women need to have the resources available if abortion is the decision they must make to live, to move beyond their personal tragedies, to pick up pieces of shattered moments, hours, months, years and make themselves whole again.

Liberty Leading the People (French: La Liberté guidant le peuple) is a painting by Eugène Delacroix commemorating the July Revolution of 1830, which toppled Charles X of France. A woman personifying Liberty leads the people forward over the bodies of the fallen, holding the tricolore flag of the French Revolution in one hand and brandishing a bayonetted musket with the other. The painting is perhaps Delacroix’s best-known work. Image via Wikipedia

Liberty and justice for all. We may be One Nation Under God, but we are not a Christian nation. We are a nation founded on the principles of freedom of religion.

We are a nation that protects equal rights and freedom regardless of race, gender, religion, origin. Women have had to fight against a patriarchal tide to earn the right to vote, to own property, to serve in the military, to work for equal pay and so much more.

Women and men alike must understand the importance and urgency for protecting women’s reproductive health and rights. Rights to choose and receive proper medical procedures. And the time to stand together is now. Now!

Don’t let a pro-life congress send women back to the alleys. Sign petitions. Call and write your Senators and Representatives. Call your state governors, because individual states are also proposing restrictive abortion legislation.

We have a President who has stated that reproductive care is “essential.” Essential!

Organize and inform others. Tell young women what it was like for women before abortion was legalized in 1973 and what they have to lose if we are complacent and let pro-life supporters and legislatures on all levels steamroll their beliefs on the rest of America.

Support rape and incest survivors and all women who have had to make gut-wrenching decisions while suffering tremendous emotional and physical wounding. Read our stories. And consider. Lisa

More reading: Anne’s Prior writing on Abortion in America