Wednesday, January 23, 2008

WE NEED THE WOMEN'S LIBERATION MOVEMENT


It is (was) that time of the year when all the anti-abortion folks descent on the steps of whatever and wherever.

Last night in Washington the anti-abortion folks came face to face with women supporting abortion rights including some from Code Pink.

This seems to have pissed them off.

The article below is from a religious source which is anti-abortion. It was the only article I could find that mentioned anything about the little confrontation and, I have to admit, it was pretty balanced.

One thing the article mentions which I think is significant is how few pro-choice people showed up. Now, I grant you this isn't supposed to be the day millions turn out as someone from NOW replied.

BUT...

Where is the dynamic, grass roots, militant women's movement of the 60s and 70s. The women's liberation movement then didn't take crap and as a result it won so much for women that is now taken for granted by about everyone.

Months ago I wrote an article about how we needed a true Black Liberation Movement. Well, let me now add we need a true Women's Liberation Movement, too.

Too much is going on to leave it to what has become the oh so respectable "movements" of today.

Now, I ain't saying there isn't anything going on out there. There some damn fine, militant stuff that exists...but not nearly enough.

Women and African-Americans have seen so much of the gains made earlier rolled back especially these last eight years (but really the last two decades), and, god forbid, one of these nut jobs the GOP has running this year actually wins.

Reproductive rights are one of those rights that you'll really notice when their gone. They deserve to be fought for now just as they were fought for three and four decades ago...and that means on the streets not just in the courts.

Sisterhood IS Powerful!

The following is from
Crosswalk.com .

Anti-War Code Pink Rallies with Pro-Abortion Protesters
Josiah Ryan

In a tense meeting at the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court Tuesday night, pro-life and pro-abortion groups braved freezing winds and sleet to commemorate the 35th anniversary of Roe vs. Wade, the Supreme Court decision that said abortion is a privacy right protected by the Constitution.

Several women from the feminist anti-war group Code Pink were among the group of 50 pro-abortion protesters, the latter of whom comprised members of the National Organization for Women, its Action division, and the Feminist Majority.

"With regard to the war and this issue, it's very much the same thing," Liz Hourican, a Code Pink activist told Cybercast News Service. "This is about basic human rights - standing here and being able to take care of women. Take care of women first. This is my body. I should have the decision over my body."

In addition to the Roe v. Wade anniversary, Tuesday was the annual March for Life, in which tens of thousands of pro-life activists marched along Constitution Avenue in Washington, D.C., and up Capitol Hill to the Supreme Court building.

Hourican further said that the war in Iraq needed to end before the issue of abortion should be tackled. "So if we are really thinking about 'thou shall not kill,' let's close down the war machine first," she said.

When asked if she would join the pro-life cause once the Iraq war was over, Hourican, however, said no. She told Cybercast News Service she would be willing to educate people and work with family planning groups that want to help women.

Code Pink was formed in 2001, during the days leading up to the war in Iraq. A statement on the group's Web site says its goals include ending the war in Iraq, stopping new wars, and promoting "life-affirming activities." The Code Pink women outside the Supreme Court were dressed in bright pink clothing and carried large signs bearing pro-abortion messages.

The activists from Action, the National Organization for Women, and the Feminist Majority, along with the few Code Pink women, gathered at 5 pm outside the Supreme Court to voice their support for Roe v. Wade, frequently chanting pro-abortion comments.

A few yards away, the Silent No More Awareness Campaign - a pro-life group comprised of women who have had abortions but now regret having done so - watched the pro-abortion demonstrators. The group's co-founder, Janet Morana, told Cybercast News Service that the difference in numbers between her group and the pro-abortion activists was significant.

"They are supposed to be so happy," said Morana. "Their signs say 'the 35th year anniversary of Roe,' and they are happy and celebrating. Well, if they are so happy, where are they?" in reference to the relatively few protesters.

But Melody Drnach, vice president of the Action arm of the National Organization of Women, said her organization works at the grassroots level.

"We only expected a couple dozen," she said. "If we want to organize a march, we bring out a million people. This is not traditionally a day we bring out the masses. Our members are in their local communities stressing the importance of protecting women's rights at a local level."

Hourican speculated that the difference in numbers was because religious universities had had bussed students in from around the country. "I saw thousands of busses today," she said. "My young women are all working. They are going to school. I would say when your school is bussing you in that it is easier than my friends who have to pay for their college."

Organizers outside the Supreme Court said that, by and large, courtesy was exercised by activists from both the opposing camps. However, protesters did shout at each other and occasionally crossed lines.

A human-ring formed by pro-abortion activists was encircled by pro-life activists, and several people even penetrated the circle with large signs bearing pro-life messages.

Drnach called that "bad manners," adding that one of the pro-life men had tried to knock a sign out of one of her protesters' hands. Morana complained that the pro-abortion group was trying to shout over the people in her rally. "I just wish they would listen," Morana said.

3 comments:

moose said...

Words matter! I am not pro or anti abortion. I AM PRO CHOICE! I believe that women can and should choose how their bodies will be used. When those who are on our side use the language pro-life to describe those who want to abolish a woman's right to choose and pro abortion to describe those of us who are pro choice, they do us a great disservice.

Oread Daily said...

I agree and that's why you don't find it used the way to describe in the introduction which I wrote.

The article which came from the religious group obviously did. So I am not sure why you say "When those who are on our side use the language pro-life..."

Again in the part I wrote I used anti-abortion and pro-choice.

Honestly though I have no problem using the term "pro abortion rights" even though I didn't here.

Oread Daily said...

That first sentence I wrote in my comment above is a bit confusing. What I was trying to say is that I agree with you and used exactly the type of language which you insist upon. So I'm not sure why you are apparently critical of me.

I can't change what the anti-abortion people write or the language they choose.

And as I said in the introduction which I wrote, I was unable to find any other account anywhere that described what happened Tuesday night...so I used the one I did. Actually, their article was a fairly descriptive article of what transpired.