President Obama has just done one of the most important acts, perhaps the most important act, a president can do. He has nominated someone to the US Supreme Court – a position for which there are no term limits, other than death.

As the GOP was sure they would oppose whomever Obama might nominate, the Democrats were equally confident they’d be cheering.

Well, today the announcement came and constituents of neither party should have any clue how they feel.

We know very little if anything about nominee Federal Appeals Court Judge Sonia Sotomayor’s position on abortion and reproductive rights.

As A Candid World, A Short Series about Sotomayor; Abortion wrote, “In today’s judicial confirmation battles, there’s really only one subject that matters: abortion. Justice Souter’s confirmation taught the right not to simply trust a nominee to vote the preferred way on the issue, and Democrats ought to have learned the same lesson.”  

Reproductive rights groups should be very nervous because even Steven Ertelt, editor of  anti-choice LifeNews.com, does not have any concrete problems with her and sees no reason that Republican senators will oppose her.

Sotomayor has not directly issued any rulings on abortion rights but has been involved in three cases:
1. Center for Reproductive Law & Policy v. Bush, 304 F.3d 183 The plaintiff was a public interest organization that challenged the “Mexico City Policy,” a.k.a. the “global gag rule” and its provisions that denied  U.S. aid to foreign non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that informed about or performed abortions.  Sotomayor authored the opinion which dismissed the case for lack of standing.

The anti-choice group Americans United for Life was pleased with the decision.

2. Port Washington Teachers’ Association v. Board of Education, 478 F.3d 494 (2d Cir. 2007). was the second case. Teachers challenged a school district policy which was trying to get teachers to report student pregnancies to the student’s parents.  The case was dismissed for lack of standing because the policy was considered voluntary and thus no consequences could befall teachers who did not adhere to it.

3.  Amnesty America v. Town of West Hartford was the third case. The anti-choice demonstrators argued that police had used excessive force against them at a demonstration. Sotomayor, the sole author of the decision, found in favor of the anti-choice group and against the police.

Not surprisingly, anti-choice groups applauded each of these decisions.

After eight long years of a right wing administration that worked tirelessly to strip women of their independence and right to privacy, we cannot risk a mistake by President Obama.

There is an old line from The Odd Couple: “When you assume you make an ass of u and me.” We cannot afford to ass-u-me.

 Knowing that she is a woman and an hispanic woman at that, is not enough. We need to know that she is a woman’s  woman.

Yesterday was President Obama’s 100th day in office. He made the following comments regarding his pro-choice position:

“The reason I’m pro-choice is because I don’t think women take that — that position casually. I think that they struggle with these decisions each and every day. And I think they are in a better position to make these decisions ultimately than members of Congress or a president of the United States, in consultation with their families, with their doctors, with their clergy.

So — so that has been my consistent position. The other thing that I said consistently during the campaign is I would like to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies that result in women feeling compelled to get an abortion, or at least considering getting an abortion, particularly if we can reduce the number of teen pregnancies, which has started to spike up again.

And so I’ve got a task force within the Domestic Policy Council in the West Wing of the White House that is working with groups both in the pro-choice camp and in the pro-life camp, to see if we can arrive at some consensus on that.

Now, the Freedom of Choice Act is not highest legislative priority. I believe that women should have the right to choose. But I think that the most important thing we can do to tamp down some of the anger surrounding this issue is to focus on those areas that we can agree on. And that’s — that’s where I’m going to focus.”

First off, we wish he wouldn’t use the term pro-life. Pro-life is not the opposite of pro-choice.  The use of the term pro-life implies that we are pro-death. The opposite of pro-choice is anti-choice. The use of the term pro-life is a political capitulation to abortion-rights opponents.

And while his middle-of-the-road approach sounds like the voice of reason, there is a lack of acknowledgment of the fact that the same groups that oppose abortion also oppose birth control and education that teaches people how to prevent pregnancy.

• Anti-choice forces believe in abstinence-only education because they claim that contraception is ineffective. They grossly distort the effectiveness rates of condoms to try scare teens into celibacy. When the teens do have sex, they are unprotected — which only results in more teen pregnancies and more abortions.
• Anti-choice forces distribute the mis-information that Plan B emergency contraception is an abortafacient and work to pass legislation that makes it harder to get. Confusion about Plan B plus limited access results in more unintended pregnancy and more abortions.
• Anti-choice forces are currently, actively, working to allow pharmacists the right to refuse to dispense contraception.
• Anti-choice forces oppose efforts to help impoverished women around the world understand how to use birth control and to provide funding for birth control, which results in unsafe abortions, poverty and and maternal deaths.

At this point Choice Matters spends more time and effort on expanding access to Plan B, supporting real sex-education, and preventing unwanted pregnancies than we do protecting abortion rights.  We work daily to reduce the abortion rate by fighting to implement policies that help to prevent unwanted pregnancies. Anti-choicers tell women to abstain or to suffer the consequences. That’s not pro-life–it’s anti-sex and anti-woman.

On March 30th, Rev. Dr. Katherine Ragsdale was appointed to the position of  president of Episcopal Divinity School (EDS) in Cambridge, MA. Ragsdale–an outspoken advocate of abortion rights–was the unanimous choice of the Board of Trustees and will begin her duties on July 1, 2009.

Below is an interesting speech Ragsdale gave in 2007 in which she describes abortion as a blessing. It’s refreshing and wonderful to hear a person of faith speak openly about her support of abortion.

Rev. Katherine Hancock Ragsdale’s remarks:
Birmingham, AL
July 21, 2007

“Well Operation Save America came, they saw, they harassed, and they annoyed; but they did not close the clinic. The clinic stayed open, no patients were turned away, and the doors never closed. We remain victorious. And that victory is a good thing – but, make no mistake, even though OSA has gone home; our work is not done.

If we were to leave this park and discover that clinic violence had become a thing of the past, never to plague us again, that would be a very good thing, indeed; but, still, our work would not be done.

If we were to find that, while we were here, Congress had acted to insure that abortion would always be legal, that would be a very good thing; but our work would not be done.

If we were suddenly to find a host of trained providers, insuring access in every city, town, village, and military base throughout the world, that would be a very good thing; but our work would not be done.

When every woman has everything she needs to make an informed, thoughtful choice, and to act upon it, we will be very close; but, still, our work will not be done.

As long as women, acting as responsible moral agents, taking responsibility for their own lives and for those who depend on them, have to contend with guilt and shame, have judgment and contempt heaped upon them, rather than the support and respect they deserve, our work is not done.

How will we know when our work is done? I suspect we’ll know it when we see it. But let me give you some sure indicators that it isn’t done yet:

– When doctors and pharmacists try to opt out of providing medical care, claiming it’s an act of conscience, our work is not done.

Let me say a bit more about that, because the religious community has long been an advocate of taking principled stands of conscience – even when such stands require civil disobedience. We’ve supported conscientious objectors, the Underground Railroad, freedom riders, sanctuary seekers, and anti-apartheid protestors. We support people who put their freedom and safety at risk for principles they believe in.

But let’s be clear, there’s a world of difference between those who engage in such civil disobedience, and pay the price, and doctors and pharmacists who insist that the rest of the world reorder itself to protect their consciences – that others pay the price for their principles.

This isn’t particularly complicated. If your conscience forbids you to carry arms, don’t join the military or become a police officer. If you have qualms about animal experimentation, think hard before choosing to go into medical research. And, if you’re not prepared to provide the full range of reproductive health care (or prescriptions) to any woman who needs it then don’t go into obstetrics and gynecology, or internal or emergency medicine, or pharmacology. Choose another field! We’ll respect your consciences when you begin to take responsibility for them.

– Here’s another sign. Did you notice the arguments that were being shouted at us in front of the clinic? They’ve been trying for years, and seem to be pushing especially hard now, to position themselves as feminists – supporters of women. You heard them – yelling that they understand that it’s all men’s fault. That men must do better at supporting women and children so that women, presumably, won’t feel the need to abort. They yelled that they understood that the women going into the clinic had been hurt by men and were reacting to that pain and betrayal. They pledged to help men be more responsible so that women wouldn’t want abortions.

Let me tell you something. Any argument that puts men alone at the center – for good or for bad — any discussion of women’s reproductive health that ends up being all about men, is not feminism. Nor, for that matter, is it Christian, or reflective of any God I recognize. And as long as anyone can even imagine such an argument, our work is not done.

– And while we’re at it, as long as a Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States can argue, as Justice Kennedy recently did, that women are not capable of making our own informed moral decisions, that we need men to help us so that we won’t make mistakes that we later regret; as long as a Supreme Court Justice can deny the moral agency of women simply because we are women – and can do it without being laughed off the public stage forever – our work is not done. What has happened to us that he could even think he could get away with publishing such an opinion? Our work most certainly is not done.

– Finally, the last sign I want to identify relates to my fellow clergy. Too often even those who support us can be heard talking about abortion as a tragedy. Let’s be very clear about this:

When a woman finds herself pregnant due to violence and chooses an abortion, it is the violence that is the tragedy; the abortion is a blessing.

When a woman finds that the fetus she is carrying has anomalies incompatible with life, that it will not live and that she requires an abortion – often a late-term abortion – to protect her life, her health, or her fertility, it is the shattering of her hopes and dreams for that pregnancy that is the tragedy; the abortion is a blessing.

When a woman wants a child but can’t afford one because she hasn’t the education necessary for a sustainable job, or access to health care, or day care, or adequate food, it is the abysmal priorities of our nation, the lack of social supports, the absence of justice that are the tragedies; the abortion is a blessing.

And when a woman becomes pregnant within a loving, supportive, respectful relationship; has every option open to her; decides she does not wish to bear a child; and has access to a safe, affordable abortion – there is not a tragedy in sight — only blessing. The ability to enjoy God’s good gift of sexuality without compromising one’s education, life’s work, or ability to put to use God’s gifts and call is simply blessing.

These are the two things I want you, please, to remember – abortion is a blessing and our work is not done. Let me hear you say it: abortion is a blessing and our work is not done. Abortion is a blessing and our work is not done. Abortion is a blessing and our work is not done.

I want to thank all of you who protect this blessing – who do this work every day: the health care providers, doctors, nurses, technicians, receptionists, who put your lives on the line to care for others (you are heroes — in my eyes, you are saints); the escorts and the activists; the lobbyists and the clinic defenders; all of you. You’re engaged in holy work.

Thank you for allowing me to join you in that work for a few days here in Alabama. God bless you all.”

On Wednesday, while appearing before a House Foreign Affairs Committee Hearing, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton single-handedly put the issue of  safe abortion services back on the U.S. foreign policy agenda. And that is huge!

Clinton said, “Family planning is an important part of women’s health and reproductive health includes access to abortion, that I believe should be safe, legal and rare.”

She presented this as the Obama administration’s perspective, and in response to Rep. Chris Smith’s (R-NJ) attack on Margaret Sanger and the full range of birth control including abortion.

By including abortion as an integral part of women’s healthcare, Clinton stopped the insane political dance that has been going on since the early 1980’s.  As  Jodi Jacobson, RH Reality,  wrote so clearly “…Clinton spoke the truth and thereby shattered the myth that has existed for so long that we could talk about family planning, reproductive health, women’s rights, women’s health or even human rights, and not say the word ‘abortion.’ ”

Clinton broke ground with her statement. Jacobs correctly said,  Clinton’s remarks were the  “most courageous a secretary of state — or any administration official — has ever made on reproductive rights and one of the most courageous statements made by a secretary of state of any kind, on any issue, ever.”

Clinton as First Lady, then as Senator, and now as Secretary of State, has relentlessly championed women’s healthcare.  She has been unrelenting in her understanding, commitment, and advocacy.

To watch and hear Secretary of State Clinton’s remarks and response to Rep. Chris Smith:

Today’s the Day! In compliance with the decision issued by Judge Korman of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York on March 23rd, the FDA will allow seventeen-year-olds to buy “morning-after” contraception known as Plan B without a doctor’s prescription–in other words, over-the-counter (otc). Men as well as women who are 17 or older can purchase Plan B.

That’s a big deal and the official end to this  protracted battle with the former  administration that placed its anti-birth control agenda  over the sound medical advice of its own FDA advisory boards! 

Special thanks to:
1. Hillary Clinton and Patty Murray who forced the FDA to act on Plan B in 2006;
2. Former assistant FDA Commissioner Susan Wood for taking a public stand;
3. The Center for Reproductive Rights for challenging the FDA in court;  and
4. Aliza Lederer-Plaskett for having the courage and fortitude to be the sole 17-year-old plaintiff in this lawsuit that has resulted in such a powerful victory.

 To start the ball rolling, Duramed, the manufacturer of Plan B, will now submit an application to the FDA to sell Plan B to 17-year-olds without a prescription.

In addition, it has been reported that the FDA is not appealing any part of the court’s ruling–meaning that the FDA is required to go back and reconsider the Citizen’s Petition  to make Plan B available otc to all women regardless of age and without additonal restrictions. 

“We are pleased that the F.D.A. is taking the necessary steps to comply with the court’s order,” said Nancy Northup, president of the Center for Reproductive Rights, whose 2005 lawsuit against the agency led to last month’s judicial decision. “It’s time the F.D.A. restores confidence in its ability to safeguard the public health and put medical science first.”

FDA Statement

Gov. Sarah Palin admitted to an anti-choice audience last Thursday that she considered having an abortion when she discovered that she was carrying a fetus with Down’s Syndrome. The speech was given to the Vanderburgh County Right to Life in Indiana.

It appears that Palin’s speech was intended to show the depth of her opposition to abortion. But–probably much to her dismay–her speech can  be applauded by the pro-choice community because it shows yet another  woman making a  choice.

Gov. Palin also mentioned her daughter’s choice to bear her child.

We are happy that the Palin family was able to make decisions about their pregnancies. Imagine if they had been  forced to abort their pregnancies because one had Down’s Syndrome and the other was conceived out of wed-lock.

Choice Matters and the reproductive rights community support all choices–whether to continue the pregnancy or not — and we will continue to fight to make sure that all women, including the Sarah and Bristol Palins of the world, can continue to have a choice.

Sometimes, it feels like anti-choice extremists are everywhere and their sole purpose is to demonize abortion, and the women who have them.   They’re publishing books, pushing states to permit anti-choice license plates so that they can take the fees paid to benefit phony pregnancy crisis centers, and even building towns and developing colleges dedicated to eradicating the right to choose.

We have decided to fight back.  Choice Matters is launching  Pro-Choice Resources Online which will serve everyone looking to advocate for women’s rights.

Pro-Choice Resources Online  will be divided into two parts:
1. The Collective which is where we are assembling as broad a range as possible of pro-choice and progressive movies, websites, books, blogs, music, t-shirts, bumper stickers and more. Anything an advocate could want!

We are currently accepting suggestions of publications, movies, music–anything you think we should include. If you have one, please email it to us at prochoiceresources@choicematters.org.

2. Our Archives which is composed of Choice Matters’ unique collection of articles, magazines, newspaper clippings and more, dating back to the early 1970’s.  This collection exists nowhere else and is a phenomenal resources for the pro-choice community.  We believe it will serve as an invaluable resource for those individuals, women’s studies programs, and even the media, who are seeking accurate historical information on abortion rights.

Join our mailing list to receive an e-mail message letting you know that Pro-Choice Resources Online site has launched!

Gov. Tim Kaine is a leopard, an anti-choice leopard for that matter, and Obama’s pick to head the Democratic National Committee (DNC), a position that Kaine will assume in 2010.

Heading the DNC is not a small job, as Howard Dean will attest. A key component of the position is that the Chair represents the Party and what it stands for—its platform—a vital element of which is abortion rights.

How can Kaine be the DNC Chair?
Very honestly, he can’t be the DNC Chair as it has always been defined, and he proved that this week.

Tim Kaine, in his capacity as Virginia’s governor, has decided to sign legislation that allows the sale of “Choose Life” specialty license plates.

The revenue of these sales will go to funding anti-choice crisis pregnancy centers (CPCs)–the same type of centers that NY’s attorney general investigated in 2002 for deceptive advertising and/or practicing medicine without a license. A so-called pregnancy resource center will get $15 of the $25 annual fee for each license plate after the first 1,000 are sold and will then distribute those funds to 40 CPCs.

Shock and Awe
Some pro-choice groups responded with surprise and outrage.

Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL saying, “It is unfortunate that, … Gov. Kaine has opted to sign a bill that advances a divisive political ideology at the expense of women’s health.” Paulette McElwain, president of the Virginia League for Planned Parenthood, said, “It is surprising that Gov. Kaine would do this, but it’s all the more surprising that he would do it as chair of the DNC.”

Silence is NOT Golden
Why are groups like NARAL and Planned Parenthood objecting now when they stood silently by as Kaine received the DNC job? They knew Kaine’s position on Choice. Naral Pro-Choice Virginia refused to endorse him in his gubernatorial race in 2005 because of his anti-choice record. When Kaine was being considered for the VP slot, Choice Matters and others worked fervently to oppose him because of his anti-abortion rights position.

Since Obama has taken office it is as though a silence has fallen across our nation. No one wants to speak out. You can’t be in issue-based politics and be quiet.

History has taught us that silence leads to genocide, corruption, and a full-scale destruction of our civil liberties.

Helping Obama
Obama has a track record of responding to push-backs, so to speak. When it looked as if anti-choice anti-healthcare Tennessee Governor Bredesen was to be the Health and Human Services nominee, we really pushed back. Now we have Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius, as we have Biden, not Kaine, for VP.

We elected Obama and now we must help him govern. That means speaking up loudly in criticism as well as praise.

Monday, March 23, 2009, was a big day for Plan B!

Judge Korman of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of   New  York ordered  the FDA to reconsider its decision to limit the OTC sale of Plan B to 18 years of age and older. It also ordered the FDA to act within 30 days to extend over-the-counter access to anyone 17 years of age and older.

This was an amazing victory pursued by the Center for Reproductive Rights.

Further, it is one that I am particularly excited by because my daughter and I were plaintiffs.

Aliza Led, I Followed
I am the president of WCLA – Choice Matters, one of the oldest pro-choice advocacy organizations in the country-but I must confess that it was Aliza who led the way.  I simply followed her.
Aliza knew about Plan B and believed strongly that it should be available to her and her friends.  She also adamantly believed that minors have a right to privacy.  When she overheard me telling my husband about possible legal action against the FDA concerning Plan B restrictions, she was determined to join the suit.  In all honesty, we were not so sure it was a good idea because we were concerned for her privacy, but she was resolute.  So, when the FDA finally decided to make Plan B over-the- counter for people 18 and older, she was ready to act!

Aliza’s Age
Aliza was one of  the  three teenagers  involved in bringing the suit.   In that Aliza was 16 when the motion was filed and turned 17 before the motion was fully briefed, she played a key role in the decision.  (The other two teenagers were both 13.)

Part of the text of the Summary Judgment stated:
“Aliza will turn 17 before this motion is fully briefed, and   thus falls into the category of women (who all scientists at FDA agreed could safely and appropriately use Plan B as an OTC drug, but are barred from doing so by the BTC regime), which imposes an age cut-off of 18.”

To read the Summary Judgment Brief: summary_judgment_brief_final
The full decision, 3/23/09: sjdecision
Press Release: CenterForReproductiveRightsPressRelease

Why Her Age Mattered
The significance of Aliza’s age was explained by Nan Strauss of the Center, in April 2007:
“Being 17, she [Aliza] cannot access EC OTC, based on the final FDA decision.  However, prior to that last decision setting the age limit at 18 (on 8/26/06), during 2005 and the beginning of 2006 Steven Galson, the director of the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, had placed the age restriction at 17…”
“No one at FDA has indicated any problem w/ the data showing that 17 year olds can use Plan B safely and appropriately.  The only basis for the restriction on women 17-18, is that the FDA wanted to set the age limit so that it would be in accordance with already existing age limits on products like tobacco and nicotine replacement products.  So it’s helpful to have someone in that in between group, for whom the added year of the restriction (the shift from 17 to 18) is significant, and totally unrelated to health, medicine, or science.”
“Only Aliza falls into the group of women for whom everyone at FDA says can safely use the drug, but can’t have OTC access because pharmacies are already accustomed to restricting certain products to people over 18.”

Aliza’s commitment, courage and action led to results for all teens across the nation.  I am so proud of her!