Anti-abortion rights bills advance in Minnesota Legislature
Thursday, March 17, 2011 at 1:46 pm
- 35 Comments
After two days of testimony, a pair of anti-abortion rights bills passed key committees in the Minnesota House this week, one to ban abortions at 20 weeks of pregnancy and another to ban taxpayer funding for abortions. Religious leaders came down on both sides of the issue, while legal and medical experts said the bills were poor policy. In the Senate, yet another bill to ban abortion at 20 weeks was introduced on Thursday bringing the total bills in the legislature to curtail abortion rights to nine so far this session.
On Tuesday, the Health and Human Services Reform Committee passed a bill to ban abortion at 20 weeks on a voice vote. Andrea Rau of Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life told the committee, “This legislation is not so much about stopping abortions as it is about protecting the ‘pain-capable unborn child.’”
She added, “This is mainstream common sense kind of legislation. There is a consensus that at 20 weeks an unborn child feels pain.”
Republican Rep. Mike Benson of Rochester asked, “How many babies would we be saving from this procedure?”
“In 2009, there were eight abortions that took place after this 20 week threshold. Admittedly this is a small portion of abortions in Minnesota.”
The Archdiocese of of St. Paul and Minneapolis sent a priest, Fr. Andrew Cozzins, to testify in favor of the ban.
“Abortion is too often a permanent solution, an easy solution, and not treated like it should be: a very difficult painful thing,” he said.
But for Alicia Hemple that decision was the most heartbreaking of her life.
“This past summer, I became pregnant with what would have been my second child,” she said. “My baby showed signs of a chromosome disorder. I was having a baby girl and she had Trisoma 18. Fifty percent don’t make it to full term, only 10 percent live to see their first birthday.”
She and her family decided that terminating the pregnancy was the best option.
“With this proposed bill I would have not been able to save my baby from the pain she would have endured from hours, maybe days and possibly even months until she died,” Hemple said.
Hemple’s story mirrors another mother in Nebraska — the only other state with a similar ban on abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy — who was prevented by the law from having an abortion after complications arose in her pregnancy.
It was Hamline law professor David Schultz’s testimony that created some tense moments at the hearing.
Schultz said that the bill was unconstitutional based on precedent in Minnesota (his testimony can be read here).
Republican Rep. Glenn Gruenhagen of Glencoe asked if Schultz had a problem with a hospital performing fetal surgery in one wing and “tearing that child to pieces” in another wing.
“I’m asking you as a human being, does that not concern you?” he asked.
Schultz responded, “Whatever my personal beliefs may be, I am here speaking as a constitutional law professor.”
Gruenhagen took that answer as an excuse to slam the public education system. “If our education system is creating experts with that type of response in regard to a human being, it is a sad day for our educational system and higher educational system.”
Dr. Carrie Terrell, a gynecologist at the University of Minnesota testified that there is not a consensus on fetal pain at 20 weeks and said that that may not even matter.
“If we suspect that vaginal birth to be painful [for the fetus] would you pass a law outlawing vaginal birth and requiring c-sections?” she asked.
The bill passed the committee by a voice vote.
On Wednesday, the committee heard another bill on abortion, this time to ban taxpayer funding for abortion procedures.
Republican Rep. Peggy Scott of Andover, the chief author of the bill, said, “This bill is common sense and mainstream. It does not address the right to abortion. It seeks to protect women from gratuitous free abortions and the taxpayer from paying for free abortions.”
Jordan Bauer of MCCL testified, “State tax money is used for a lot of very good things, but in recent years our dollars have been diverted to the purpose of killing unborn children… to end the lives of Minnesotans.”
Doug Donley, pastor of University Baptist Church, testified against the bill. “The choice to have a child is a sacred one,” he said, adding that comprehensive sex education and lifting women out of poverty “are the best tools to stem the need for abortions.”
He added, “To ban abortion would lead to desperate measures by women; abortion would still occur. In a perfect world no woman would choose abortion, but we are not in a perfect world yet.”
He concluded, “As a person of faith, I am duty-bound to advocate for the health and rights of all people.”
DFL Rep. Tina Liebling of Rochester drew a comparison to war funding. “Some of us don’t like war but we pay for war through our tax dollars,” she said. “As long as abortion is legal, we should let women make those decisions whether they are wealthy or poor.”
DFL Rep. Rena Moran of St. Paul noted that the committee had already discussed cutting welfare for poor women.
“I am a mother of seven who chose to have seven children and that was my choice,” she said. “We want to turn around after we have capped benefits for poor women, and then we want to force a mother to bring life into this world — and I love babies, there’s nothing better than that, but that’s my choice — but then we don’t want to support the lives that are here.”
Republican Rep. Kathy Lohmer of Lake Elmo noted, “Jesus was an unintended pregnancy. We aren’t God and these are human beings.”
Republican Rep. Joe McDonald of Delano added, “This bill is not an attack on women. This bill is to stop the attack on babies.”
The bill passed 13-4.
Follow Andy Birkey on Twitter35 Comments
Comment posted March 17, 2011 @ 1:53 pm
“There is a consensus that at 20 weeks an unborn child feels pain.”
There is also a consensus that humans are the cause of global climate change and that the earth is getting warmer.
I don’t think I need to wonder about this knuckledragger’s opinion on that matter, despite the “consensus.”
Comment posted March 17, 2011 @ 2:28 pm
So, given the Citizen’s United ruling would bankrupting a business in it’s first twenty weeks be murder?
Praise Jebus, God hates failed start ups, Amen.
Comment posted March 17, 2011 @ 2:47 pm
“This legislation is not so much about stopping abortions as it is about protecting the ‘pain-capable unborn child.’”
MCCL needs new leadership, if this is there standard for stopping Minnesota abortions. There’s a great DEAL of evidence that a full grown woman feels pain. We like to ignore that fact when we deal with unwanted pregnancies.
Don’t make poor women give birth to babies they don’t want, can’t feed, won’t nurture and don’t know how to care for. Don’t call these pregnancies “unintended.” No such thing. Every pregnancy is either “wanted” or “unwanted.”
Face it – - these pregnancies are unwanted. And when they are full term, so will be their children.
Shame on us for forcing anyone to bring suffering, neglect, harm and burden to themselves and others.
Comment posted March 17, 2011 @ 5:46 pm
The only “consensus” of any sort regarding fetal pain is that reached by the Republican legislators.
“Electroencephalography suggests the capacity for functional pain perception in premature infants probably does not exist before 29 or 30 weeks; this study asserted that withdrawal reflexes and changes in heart rates and hormone levels in response to invasive procedures are reflexes that do not indicate fetal pain.”
Pro-life activists don’t protect women. Their rhetoric is suffused with hate for women.
Comment posted March 17, 2011 @ 5:48 pm
This is concentrating on creating how many jobs???
I am so proud of my daughter and son-in-law for the new Granddaughter that was born on Monday! My new Granddaughter was so wanted and is so loved by her family.
Babies are precious, but they are also a lot of work. The actions of the Legislature is atack on Women and their right to choose a LEGAL Medical procedure to end a pregnancy when deemed by a Doctor that the fetus has no chance to live once born, be it before or after 20 weeks.
Comment posted March 17, 2011 @ 11:43 pm
I think these bills could better be called “anti-abortion” instead of “anti-abortion rights”. Abortion rights refers to the Roe v. Wade established right to an abortion. These laws aren’t impacting Roe v. Wade and would have to be subservient to it. So they aren’t actually going against the rights established under Roe v. Wade but rather abortion.
Pingback posted March 18, 2011 @ 7:58 am
[...] I’ve been angry a lot lately. And angry, and angry, and more angry. Oh, hey, did I mention angry? [...]
Pingback posted March 18, 2011 @ 11:18 am
[...] Minnesota Anti-Abortion Bill Advances [...]
Comment posted March 18, 2011 @ 11:23 am
People are still having abortions at 20 weeks? Are they insane? I’m 20 weeks pregnant today and just felt my baby kicking me. How in the world can anyone in their right mind even consider aborting a baby at 20 weeks. I didn’t even realize that was legal.
Comment posted March 18, 2011 @ 11:52 am
If you follow the link for the Nebraska story you’ll get one reason why a mother might consider an abortion at 20 weeks, Alison.
Comment posted March 18, 2011 @ 2:04 pm
I am sick and tired of the regressive, draconian, backwards policies being introduced by the GOP. Why do they hate women, why?
Comment posted March 18, 2011 @ 3:07 pm
An amnio confirming chromosomal abnormalities is done at 16 weeks. There is no excuse for having an abortion after the 20 week mark. And certainly tax payers shouldn’t be funding such a barbaric practice. The whole thing is sick.
Comment posted March 18, 2011 @ 3:28 pm
There are rare cases where an abortion might be medically necessary at different stages in the game – i.e. the life of the mother is at risk.
The problem is that too many people use these laws permitting abortion simply to avoid the consequences of their own irresponsible behavior. People abort babies instead of using birth control or they wait too long to make a decision about whether or not to keep their baby.
If people used abortion as it should be used- only in cases of dire medical necessity, there would be no need for laws limiting it. Unfortunately, people misuse it and therefore limits are necessary.
Comment posted March 18, 2011 @ 3:31 pm
@Alison-
You’re exactly right. I mean who wants to save the life of the mother? Why should we care about women with irregular menstrual cycles and no signs or symptoms of pregnancy until after 20 weeks? And shouldn’t that victim of rape be required to experience the labor and delivery of a child whose existence she neither wished for nor can support? It’s the most unsick thing we can do. And empathy? Why that’s just barbaric.
Praise Jebus, God hates a uterus with a brain, Amen.
Comment posted March 18, 2011 @ 4:40 pm
Here we go again…different day….same liberal justifications for killing….yes boys and girls..abortion results in the death of a human being. The unborn have worth only if DEEMED worthy by another human being. According to the pro-aborts…innate value does not exist. Watch out for those elements of society DEEMED less than human due to inconvenience, the elderly, disabled, the “unwanted.”
Pro-aborts won’t argue medical facts (wait, they will if it can be spun or lied about). The unborn human has NO VALUE to pro-aborts unless the male or female deceased victim in their “right” to kill is wanted.
Roe v Wade is crumbling under the weight of it’s own ignorance….FROZEN to 1973 knowledge and fact. NOTHING will change the minds of these pro-aborts…even the grizzly events surrounding the Philadelphia abortionist who stabbed aborted babies (yes some survive the attempted killing) in the back of their necks and severed their spinal cords.
Ah yes…freedom. Deny, Deny, Deny, Deny, Deny and justify!
Comment posted March 18, 2011 @ 8:31 pm
Alison is right.
“How in the world can anyone in their right mind even consider aborting a baby at 20 weeks.”
How could a real man help choose his wife’s life or health over a fetus, dying or healthy?
Comment posted March 19, 2011 @ 6:09 am
The scientific consensus is:
1: Infants born do not feel pain before 29-34 weeks with a pretty wide variation.
2: There is no such thing as viability at all before 22-25 weeks – and it’s arguable that there isn’t before 26 weeks, because only *one* premature infant born before 24 weeks and only a handful before 26 weeks has ever survived.
3: It’s highly probable that in-utero, there is no consciousness, period, and thus no pain, because fetuses in utero are subject to a constant wash of hormones and chemicals, some of which function to… wait for it… suppress consciousness! The actual scientific consensus is that human consciousness begins at birth, when the supply of those hormones and chemicals ends.
So yes. The “consensus” that fetuses feel pain at 20 weeks is a consensus of *Republican legislators,* not of scientists.
Comment posted March 19, 2011 @ 11:59 am
Minor factual correction: The dates for these two committee meetings should be reversed. The hearing on HF201, which would overturn Doe v. Gomez guaranteeing abortion rights for women on Medicaid, took place on Tuesday, March 15, and the hearing on HF936 banning abortions after 20 weeks took place on Wednesday, March 16th.
Comment posted March 19, 2011 @ 6:40 pm
Oh Good. Thanks Katie B. for clearing that up….not. Pro-aborts don’t state sources for their contrary information.
Pro-aborts prefer a reference to the unborn human being as a “fetus”……this is done for multiple reasons, principally to “de-humanize the unborn human being. When de-humanized, the baby is so much less of a baby because of the word to describe the baby defines the baby. The baby has NO RIGHTS…including their continued existence. Their crime for being killed….their existence. The same technique and is still used today – in describing African-Americans. The handy dandy word……the “N” word eased the consciences and made it sooooo much easy to view them as property.
I feel so much better knowing that the baby may be feeling no pain at all as they are being SUCKED APART…limbs, head…etc…all of that nasty detail. The pro-life movement is the majority (substantiated by poll after poll) and that status is growing. Why? The blinders of ignorance are being removed with medical data…contrary to the pro-aborts desperate attempt to continue this grizzly and barbaric act of killing. Crush the skull…suck out the brains, burn the unborn with saline solution and if they happen to survive the attempts at killing them and are born alive….take a scalpel…slice a large cut in the neck below the back of the head and severe their spinal cord.
The pro-aborts who defend the killing… at one time in the same position as these unborn….in the developing stages of their unique lives are becoming desperate…they are losing the argument. Justifying and rationalizing death, on such a massive scale, is meant to numb and distort. It isn’t working anymore.
The veil on the BIG LIE of abortion is being lifted…….and pro-aborts know how powerful new and revealing medical facts threaten their crumbling world of the “right” to kill.
The GROWING consensus among Americans is PRO-LIFE in the abortion debate (Gallup, Rasmussen and other major polling reveals this trend)…it is NOW THE MAJORITY and is growing.
Factual, scientific evidence – including heartbeat, sleep patterns, gender, the feeling of inflicted pain, 3-D ultrasound and many others – rarely challenged, are relevant.
Unable to repudiate this relevancy, rebuttals generally rely on rhetorical justifications or rare circumstance; designed to undercut any compelling empathy for, or any meritorious value of the unborn human being.
Roe vs. Wade is crumbling under the weight of its antiquated ignorance – perpetually frozen to 1973 understanding and knowledge.
Information and images, able to pierce biased media filters, starkly remind us of what’s been tolerated, encouraged and subsidized; relevantly identifying the unjust denial of a fundamental, inalienable right from which all other rights flow.
The pro-aborts are in a shrinking minority and the courageous legislators who face character assassination, ridicule, vile rhetoric and disdain should view such attacks as badges of honor.
Comment posted March 19, 2011 @ 7:38 pm
Hey Alison….the pro-aborts on this site wouldn’t take the time to do this…but I suggest you research the life of the man who led the abortion charge many years ago (he later admitted that many of the “facts” that were presented – as arguments for persuasion – were made up)…Dr. Bernard Nathanson.
Nathanson recently died, and for the past two decades led the growing effort to expose abortion for what it is…the unjust, grizzly, horrific killing of an unborn human being (as you once were Alison….as all of the pro-aborts once were). Needless to say, when Dr. Nathanson turned…he was hammered, relentlessly, by the pro-aborts.
A brave individual Alison, who had tremendous courage.
Comment posted March 19, 2011 @ 9:57 pm
I have quite a lot of experience with conservatives like RJO who reject scientific consensus in favor of their own made up misbeliefs.
You are entitled to your own opinions, RJO – NOT your own facts.
If I cited – and I have citations handy – it wouldn’t matter because you would dismiss the papers as “biased.”
The anti-woman pro-forced-pregnancy crowd has only one desire: to punish women for sex.
Comment posted March 20, 2011 @ 12:02 pm
“The anti-woman pro-forced-pregnancy crowd has only one desire: to punish women for sex.”
That can’t be right! If that were true, these people would claim the pill an abortion, too, and probably tell people that condoms don’t work , even though that would mean more abortions. And nobody with a brain is that crazy.
Comment posted March 20, 2011 @ 2:03 pm
Really Katie B.? A lot of experience huh?
Most progressives and die (pardon the pun) hard pro-aborts are. The facts that you site are not referenced…and they remain a mystery. If your unknown sources have an “ax to grind”…a “horse in the race”…you bet that they are biased.
Pro-aborts self-describe themselves as “pro-woman”…leaving out the “fact” that the unborn who are killed are either male or female….meaning, the claim that pro-aborts are “pro-woman” is a bald faced lie. The females that are deceased through abortion will never have the opportunity to continue their established, unique existence….their right to their OWN LIVES…that EXIST. That’s why the abortion procedure is performed…to take that life….FACT!
Save your lectures and analysis of motivations…they don’t fit…but then again pro-aborts relish labels and stereotypes to protect their justifications for killing.
“Punishing” the unborn for their mere existence ties into the lie that the unborn are disposable property….and that their lives hinge on the wishes and whims of another human being.
For pro-aborts…the “sacrament” (had to throw that in for the anti-Christian bigots) of abortion is sacrosanct….if it wasn’t they would have been the first to defend the females who are brutally killed due to their existence and location.
Pathetic.
Comment posted March 20, 2011 @ 3:29 pm
Neglected to add another FACT that may disrupt the Katie B. propaganda flow:
On a consistent basis ~ according to Gallup, Rasmussen and other reputable polling services…over 70 PERCENT of Americans DO NOT want their tax dollars used to pay for abortions.
Comment posted March 20, 2011 @ 3:37 pm
RJO you are a sad and sick person to be more concerned about potential human beings than about living humans. Your impolite rhetoric proves how little you actually care about life and how your only concern is power or control.
Read your Bible and listen to the words of Jesus because you are spouting everything the devil wants you to right now.
Comment posted March 20, 2011 @ 4:42 pm
Nothing potential about life before birth “Amuseinc” (including your own time prior to birth)….the unborn human is REAL and EXISTS ~ that’s why the twisted logic of pro-aborts is becoming less and less effective.
On the religion suggestion………another method of distraction, along with the name-calling, stereotypes, generalizations…..can’t argue medical knowledge and facts…so spin and attack the “enemy” by “flipping” the topic (old political trick).
The mark of how well a society maintains its civility can be measured by how it protects its members who cannot speak for themselves. Abortion causes the death of an innocent, unique human being….punished by death – for his or her mere existence.
OK Amuseinc…I’ll take the bait of your distraction tactics…try this in your Bible: Jeremiah 1:5 “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.”
Pro-aborts prefer to make this into a debate on religion…again as a DISTRACTION from points that are fact. Knowledge – that identifies the humanness of our lives before birth and knowledge that exposes the act of abortion for what it is. Death of an unborn human being.
Comment posted March 20, 2011 @ 8:27 pm
RJO…
This is so obvious to any Christian… I see what you are trying to do.
John 8:44 (King James Version)
44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
Comment posted March 21, 2011 @ 11:46 am
YA SEE! This is the tactic that I mentioned in an earlier comment. Spin..distract…distort…and above all – FLIP THE ARGUMENT!
Sorry Amuseinc, nice try….not going to play your game of diverting attention – to a debate on RELIGION. This has been done by pro-aborts soooooo often. Pro-aborts lose the original argument through facts and persuasion and then resort to “well…according to the Bible.”
Ya can’t refute…so you dilute.
For decades, liberal news media have been able to strangle, smother and spike news stories they didn’t like; defining what “news” was and what it wasn’t. Objectivity is often sacrificed for subjective relevance.
A majority of news coverage related to abortion and the pro-life movement is spun and framed to reflect a political template. Civil, peaceful, massive public demonstrations in defense of life are habitually ignored. The growing MAJORITY status and cultural impact of said movement fails a media litmus test of relevance as well.
Regardless, the scale of death over 38 years is staggering and is relevant. Individuals, who are marginalized, questioned on personal motivation and face contempt for defending unborn life, are relevant.
Factual, scientific evidence – including heartbeat, sleep patterns, gender, the feeling of inflicted pain, 3-D ultrasound and many others – rarely challenged, are relevant.
Unable to repudiate this relevancy, rebuttals generally rely on rhetorical justifications or rare circumstance; designed to undercut any compelling empathy for, or any meritorious value of the unborn human being.
Roe vs. Wade is crumbling under the weight of its antiquated ignorance – perpetually frozen to 1973 understanding and knowledge.
Information and images, able to pierce media filters, starkly remind us of what’s been tolerated, encouraged and subsidized; relevantly identifying the unjust denial of a fundamental, inalienable right from which all other rights flow.
Media bias on this issue and others plays a significant role in journalism’s self-inflicted decline. The restoration of credibility for a majority of national and regional news media, electronic and print, is achievable.
The long way back in re-establishing public trust begins with the relevant principles of professional integrity and honesty – and the ability to openly acknowledge previous and existing premeditated bias.
Any expectation for sincere media transformation appears improbable. The struggle remains.
For the pro-aborts…who live in a world of 1970′s slogans, bigoted stereotypes, character assassination and lies….the veil is being lifted on the death/killing that abortion is.
Comment posted March 21, 2011 @ 3:33 pm
Eight abortions past 20 weeks in 2009, and they have to pass bills?
How about creating jobs for those of us who have been unemployed for the last 6 months, a year, even longer? I am SO GLAD you have your priorities straight, Minnesota.
On the upside, I now know who not to vote for in the next election!
Comment posted March 21, 2011 @ 7:04 pm
Jobs? Great point.
Let’s start where the buck begins…Congress. Their actions and policies have a tremendous influence over state governments and the national economy as a whole. Our economy is in the TANK and has been for over two years. We as a nation have spent billions to “turn things around”…..the result….an economy in the TANK and we are buried in debt.
So who’s responsible for the last 2-plus years on federal legislation and “jobs” policy? Democrats. Liberal/Progressive Democrats who controlled the House, Senate and of course the “chosen one”…”Mr. NCAA Bracket Man”…..the one, the only B.O. in the White House.
Funny…(not really)…B.O. has been dabbling in the “social issues” arena since the day he took office. I doubt if Krystal was or is upset about “priorities” when the hard-left was and continue to do doing their thing on the “social issues” front…..
Save the self-righteous act of contempt for what the Minnesota Legislature is doing.
Comment posted March 22, 2011 @ 1:55 pm
“This bill is common sense and mainstream. It does not address the right to abortion. It seeks to protect women from gratuitous free abortions and the taxpayer from paying for free abortions.”
I strongly question the veracity of these statements.
I don’t understand what Rep. Scott meant by common sense and mainstream. Does it mean that this bill has populist or emotional appeal?
According to Andrea Rau, eight abortions in Minnesota took place after the 20-week threshold. She even said that “Admittedly this is a small portion of abortions in Minnesota.” In other words, these abortions are performed in rare instances in Minnesota.
What exactly is a “gratuitous free abortion”? For Alicia Hemple, although making the decision to abort was backed by facts that only she need be privy to, it was an extremely hard choice to make and not at all gratuitous. With respect, who is Rep. Scott that she should be the judge of what is the best, most common sense decision that someone else should make about their body, their health and their life?
How does trying to withhold someone like Ms. Hemple’s right to make a decision about her pregnancy not address the right to abortion? If Rep. Scott’s bill was in place when Ms. Hemple found out that she would give birth to a child with Trisoma 18, is Rep. Scott saying that Ms. Hemple still would have had the right to choose whether or not to abort?
If it comes down to choosing between saving a woman’s life or the fetus, and the woman happens to be uninsured, should taxpayers be paying for “free babies” and also making it their right to choose the life of the fetus over that of the pregnant woman? Why is making a choice between a fetus and the woman who is pregnant up to Rep. Scott and the general public?
This bill does much more harm than good. It keeps female citizens of this state and this country from practicing their right to pursue life, liberty and happiness.
Comment posted April 1, 2011 @ 1:57 am
My question is why are the people who are against abortions so uncaring? They want these unwanted children to be born. Are they going to make them part of their families? Are they going to raise them and pay all the bills and love them? Will they make the life long commitment to these unborn children so they will have loving arms waiting for them when they are born? No they don’t do a damn thing except vote for candidates that cut every program that might help these unborn. I read your anti-abortion posts and you are just filthy. Clean yourself up and realize it takes love and money to raise a child! Provide the love and the money or shut up because your ignorance is showing big time! Try to find out what real love is! Hint: It has something to do with caring and giving!
Comment posted April 8, 2011 @ 6:11 pm
In a place of honesty I can say that I am pro dead babies, and more so, I’m for the selected culling of the human herd across the board. Think of the sweet parking spots, and the potential for legroom on airplanes if only we went all out and put RU-486 in the communion water of every church and every segregated ‘browns and gayz” drinking fountain and every place that serves anusburgers and corn syrup.
“Oh, it’s a living thing, what are we doing?” A genital wart is a living thing. If it’s gonna irritate you for life, burn it off, right? Bladder cancer is alive and growing like a baby in you, if you try to remove that I’ll protest you and say “stop playing god with that tumor in your bladder.”
I have the right to do what ever the hell I want to my own body.
Pingback posted May 24, 2011 @ 11:31 am
[...] has been full of promoting bigtry and hate towards women and gays by passing bill after bill against abortions and also attempting to ban gay marriage through the state [...]
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
