Articles from our Latest Issue:
The presidential candidacy of George W. Bush is a greater threat to choice than his media image shows. Bush and his handlers have been carefully crafting an image of a new ‘compassionate conservative.’ Many components of the media has downplayed not only his scandals (past cocaine use, racist real estate dealings, to name a few), but also his support for the agenda of anti-choice and religious right groups.
Bush has visited anti-choice fake clinics (‘pregnancy care centers’) and spoke to ‘abstinence-only’ advocates and declared his support for their efforts. Further, he has advocated that the precious little amounts of funding that would go towards reproductive services and education be directed to such propaganda efforts.
Bush manages to keep his support for such efforts away from public scrutiny by carefully wording his stands and not creating fanfare around such issues. His campaign is largely about remaining vague and minimal communication on anything with substance. The Bush campaign is mostly about image crafting and deceit.
One of Bush’s campaign advisors is Mr. Ralph Reed himself. Reed was Executive Director of Pat Robertson’s Christian Coalition and has long been a proponent of eliminating choice, pushing the agenda of the religious right, and the pursuit of theocratic goals. Reed’s tactics are well suited for the Bush campaign. When Reed became a media figure for the Christian Coalition, he openly advocated a ‘Stealth Strategy.’ That translated to being silent about his group’s true agenda and the extent of their extremism. The idea was to create a moderate and mainstream image while working to create a movement to replace democracy with a theocratic dictatorship and eliminate numerous rights of targeted groups.
Bush currently has an astronomical campaign budget and large-scale support from conservatives. His presidency, combined with a Republican dominated Congress that is hostile to reproductive rights, would be a disaster. With anti-choice terrorist groups threatening and attacking clinic personnel outside of the political process, and forces in the federal government working diligently against reproductive health care, abortion rights under Bush would be in greater danger than in the 1980s.
Emergency Contraceptive Pills or ECP-
What's the LATEST NEWS?
By Diane Imelda Fleming
All information given here is for informational purposes only and is
not a substitute for the health care exam and advice of a medical
provider. Some people have expressed moral concerns about the use of
Emergency Contraception. Describing all mechanisms of action can help
women decide if this method is best for them.
The new Emergency Contraceptive Pills or ECP that have been added to
the market recently have made information about ECP confusing. Now
there are several types and combinations of ECP, all of which are very
effective if taken within 72 hours of unprotected sex. Here is a quick
reference guide for using ECP. Keep this phone number for locating a
dose of ECP to keep on hand or to get ECP within 72 hours of
For an ECP Provider in your area, call the Reproductive Health Technologies Hotline at:
- ECP reduces the risk of pregnancy by up to 75%.
- Almost every woman can use ECP, even women who have medical contraindications to using birth control pills on a regular basis.
- Women who are already pregnant should not use ECP, it will not be effective.
- The latest research published by Contraceptive Technology (Ardent Media) has stated that no matter what form of ECP you choose to take, treatment should begin as soon as possible after unprotected sex, preferably within 12 hours. Having ECP on hand makes this much easier.
- ECP does not provide any sexually transmitted disease (STD) protection. It is important to make a future plan for a STD screening exam, if needed.
- Researchers believe that ECP can work in a number if ways, by delaying or inhibiting ovulation or by changing the way that sperm move in the fallopian tube. ECP may also interfere with implantation by changing the lining of the uterus, making it less hospitable to implantation.
- Side effects of ECP can vary from woman to woman. Side effects may include, but may not be limited to nausea, vomiting, breast tenderness, irregular bleeding and headaches.
- The newer progestin-only ECP, also known as Plan B (marked with an * below) is much less likely to cause the side effects listed above.* Costs for ECP can vary from provider to provider but the current range is between 8.00 to 30.00, some clinics work with sliding scale fees.
- If you choose to use ECP, you need to take two doses, meaning one dose as soon as possible after unprotected sex and the second dose, twelve hours later.
- If menstruation does not begin within three weeks or if there are symptoms of pregnancy, the woman should return to a clinic or provider for a pregnancy test.
Types of pills that can be used as Emergency Contraception:
BRAND MANUFACTURER PILLS PER DOSE
- Alesse Wyeth-Ayerst
5 pink pills
- Levlen Berlex
4 light orange pills
- Levlite Berlex
5 pink pills
- Levora Watson
4 white pills
- Lo/Ovral Wyeth-Ayerst
4 white pills
- Ovral Wyeth-Ayerst
2 white pills
- Ovrette Wyeth-Ayerst
20 white pills
- Nordette Wyeth-Ayerst
4 light orange pills
- Tri-Levlen Berlex
4 yellow pills
- Triphasil Wyeth-Ayerst
4 yellow pills
- Trivora Watson
4 pink pills
- Preven Gynetics
2 blue pills
- Plan B* Women's Capitol Corporation
1 white pill
Also in this issue:
For more information about ECP, contact Family Planning Council at http://www.familyplanning.org/. Click on ASK NURSE KATHY.
- Armegeddon Times?
- Farewell tribute to Body Politic
Articles from our Previous Issue:
SCANDALS AND MORAL CRUSADERS
Many components of the media have decided to remain lost in space. The majority
of the media has long conceded that most rational Americans are bored and/or
indifferent to the President's 'sex scandal.' However, there continues to
be an ongoing obsession by the same broadcasters and columnists to bombard
us with this story. Thank you Molly Ivans for your Earth to Media column
that addressed this subject. There is not much we can add except to point
out some of the more ironic developments, since last January.
Linda Shaw, a national Republican committeewoman from North Carolina, expressed
shock that President Clinton maintains high approval ratings, especially
with women voters. Ms. Shaw wants to know what happened to 'moral issues.'
The sentiment is echoed not only throughout the GOP, but through a broad
variance of moral crusaders. How long can they remain clueless?
Most people feel for Hillary Clinton and would probably laugh if she took
any kind of action in response to the behavior of her husband. However,
the rest of us deal with our own personal lives and concern ourselves with
issues that are not on the Religious Right and Republican concern lists.
They would include Social Security, Medicare, appalling HMOs, child care
and education to name a few.
But if we are supposed to be obsessed with 'moral issues'...
Didn't we have two former Presidents lie to us about selling advanced weapons
systems to a hostile foreign government (clue: a theocracy run by a fundamentalist
Islamic sponsor of terrorism)? Didn't those same two former Presidents lie
to us about illegally using hundreds of millions of dollars to support covert
warfare in Central America and Africa (resulting in the deaths of tens of
thousands of non-combatants)? Didn't those same two Presidents lie to us
about not having any knowledge of drug smuggling being one of the means
of financing those mercenary armies (the most recent exposure being Gary
Webb's powerful book Dark Alliance). Doesn't the total of every accusation
against President Clinton resemble Jay-walking, when compared to the betrayals
of our nation and Constitution from Reagan, Bush, and Nixon? Haven't the
actions of those former Presidents effected millions of Americans, instead
of two? Without the consent of the citizens of America, over 40 million
dollars was spent for a biased, unelected independent counsel, who was called
to investigate real estate deals. A subsequent sexual inquisition and media
voyeurism resulted in some Congressional Republicans getting excited at
the thought of impeachment proceedings.
And speaking of moral crusaders...
Haven't Bakker, Swaggart, Robertson, Falwell, Lyons, Roberts and Dobson
grossly violated their own 'moral' codes? How many evangelicals have been
exposed with mistresses and sex workers? How many priests (including numerous
'pro-life' activists) have been proven to be perpetrators of child sexual
abuse (it is now in the thousands)? How many of those cases were covered
up or otherwise grossly mishandled at every level of the hierarchy of the
church? Were Roger Stone's swinger ads what he had in mind when he wrote
'family-values' campaign speeches for both Reagan and Dole? How many prominent
Republicans have gone through divorce, affairs, liaisons with sex workers
and/or ethical scandals? When Rep. Dan Burton (R-Ind) called President Clinton
a "scumbag," did he forgot about the son he fathered outside of
his marriage in the 1980s? When Rep. Helen Chenoweth (R-Idaho), who has
been calling for President Clinton's resignation since April, admitted that
she had an affair with her married business partner in the 1980s, what did
she mean when she said that her case was different (Amusingly, Chenoweth
was elected in 1994 after campaigning on 'family-values.' One week prior
to the election, the disclosure of an affair involving her opponent was
disclosed)? Which brings up Rep. Hyde, a hero of the Puritans and 'moral'
crowd for three decades. Are we supposed to say that his extramarital affair
in the 1960s was also 'different?' Shall we expect a Hyde Chasing Hide video?
And finally, as Mother Jones Magazine asks, how many reporters and editors
have been fired for adultery?
Yes, there could be immeasurable irony giving unlimited attention to all
scandals, particularly those involving the most fervent moral crusaders.
We need not lose a pro-choice President because of the opportunistic and
partisan rantings of hypocrites.
One final chuckle: National Public Radio announced that a teacher in California
initiated a campaign for people to send Ken Starr stained dresses and dirty
END-TIMES FOR THE CHRISTIAN COALITION
One can only speculate how Ralph Reed feels these days. After years of attempting
to craft a moderate image for the Christian Coalition, during his tenure
as Executive Director, the Christian Coalition has now publicly gone full-speed
into open extremism. Pat Robertson, who has yet to believably explain his
past anti-Semitism, especially in his New World Order book, made a very
interesting speech at an insiders conference recently. Robertson was probably
unaware of the presence of media people, including one writer from Church
and State Magazine. Robertson discussed the future role of Christian Coalition
and made analogies to Tammaty Hall and Boss Tweed. We'd like to know some
of their other role models, as they attempt to eliminate abortion rights
and implement most of the agenda of the hardcore Religious Right.
In the tradition of David Koresch, Charles Manson, Jim Jones, and Heaven's
Gate, Robertson has manipulated people through fear, via end-times propaganda.
The latest dire predictions of Robertson: that natural disasters and meteors
shall strike our nation because Disney World has annual Gay Day events,
as well as gay-friendly employment policies. Even the Hard Copy television
program expressed amazement that a presumed rational leader made such pronouncements.
As membership and influence decline, it seems the only end-times we are
going to see are for the Christian Coalition itself.
Also in this issue:
- SJCDC goes inside Promise Keepers event
- New Jersey abortion restriction bills (pending)
- RU486 available at SJWC.
- RICO victory.
- Religious Right vs. Disney.
- New cartoons and more.