heh.
i've been getting most of my info from democracy for virginia but the well-timed period also has work on it (she's a doctor!).
cosgrove's withdrawal, though admirable for recognizing what a shit-storm his poorly worded legislation would provoke, is still dishonest. it fails to acknowledge what the real purpose of his bill was. since virginia already has a safe-haven law on its books, what was the point? if it was to stiffen the penalties for dumping babies in traschcans and dumpsters, why not just change the language of the original bill?
the language of the cosgrove bill was not confusing (for those of us who could read, anyway.) it stated very clearly that women who failed to report a spontaneous miscarriage to the authorities would face legal action. it outlined very clearly the ways the state would have been able to invade virginia women's privacy and bodies. there was no misinformation, no convolution or misunderstanding.
whatever cosgrove's intent behind the bill, its implementation would have been an attack on women's reproductive autonomy.
1 comment:
patriarchal control usually is. but what was beautiful was the way the word spread so quickly and effectively among women and allies.
this thing totally would have slid under the radar if it wasn't for democracy for virginia, bitch and others like them.
Post a Comment