tikiera: (Default)
Nebraska recently passed a "Safe Haven" law.

A parent could abandon a child a designated "Safe Haven" without legal prosecution.

Apparently, they left the world "child" undefined.

There have about 30 instances of parents dropping off children that are above toddler in age.

Nebraskans are appalled by this and want the law rewritten, limiting "child" to a child under 30 days old.

By all that is bright and shiney, why?

Seriously. If a parent abandons their child at a safe haven, that's a kid that is not on the street, not being abused, not being neglected. It is a child that safe.

It's not like a parent is going to wake up one day and decide that they don't want their children anymore - and if they did, do you really want them to be parent? Really?

All of the parents in the families of the older abandoned children had mental health issues, were unable to feed/clothe/shelter their children, or had other serious issues. None of the children have been given back to their original parents - all of them have been sent to foster care, or placed with relatives.

These parents don't want their children. Some of them drove from out of state to abandon their child safely.

It sucks to be the kid your parent doesn't want. You know what sucks more? To be the kid that is neglected or abused because your parent doesn't want you.


Nov. 14th, 2008 02:09 pm
tikiera: (Default)
I never really thought that Prop 8 would pass. I donated money, talked to people who were undecided, encouraged people to vote.

I fretted and stressed over Prop 4, was ready for disappointment.
(Also did the same as the above - often with more passion, because this was the one I thought we would get wrong).

I just never thought that here in California, we could vote to strip rights from adults. It was just outside of my world view, you see. I had faith in my fellow Californias that they couldn't get something so basic as the right to marry wrong.

Oh, I knew the history of it, but this was the election were the students, the young people, the liberals were going to go out and vote for Obama, so I thought... this is so basic, people will do the right thing.

I rarely have faith in my fellow man. I am from bible-belt Pennsyvlania, and I quite familiar with the religious right's need to take away rights.

But I didn't see this one coming.

And now somehow I am going to have to find time to work on getting this one overturned.

And I am really, really close to joining in the let's have a term other than marriage for the civil law, and leave marriage as a word that only has religious meaning, if the religious extremists are going to appropriate the word group.

and if you voted for Prop 8, and consider me a friend, this is the kind of thing I don't need to know about you - won't ever be able to look at you the same.
tikiera: (Default)
“You’re feisty and I like that, but you’re wrong,” Obama to Dallas Timmons, a Albuquerque, New Mexico Democratic Party ward chair.

Someone really, really, really needs to tell that man to reign himself in. 

This really is his election to lose, and if he doesn't get his foot out of his mouth, I won't be the only one who just can't bring herself to vote for him.  I _want_ to see him lose now.  I didn't want to see him win, before, but now I WANT to see him lose.  Maybe the next democratic candidate won't be an idiot.

Feisty.  For goodness sakes, feisty.

Is he trying to be an ass?  Or does it just come naturally to him?
tikiera: (Default)
The Department of Health and Human Services  is circulating a memo that defines abortion as follows: “any of the various procedures — including the prescription, dispensing and administration of any drug or the performance of any procedure or any other action — that results in the termination of the life of a human being in utero between conception and natural birth, whether before or after implantation.”

This describes the birth control pill.  It describes the morning after pill.

Also in this memo are guidelines for refusing "any federal aid to individuals or entities that discriminate against people who object to abortion on the basis of “religious beliefs or moral convictions.”"

So, in other words, it's okay to discriminate against women on religious grounds.  It's not okay to discriminate against those individuals who discrimate against women.

Think about this.  Think about this hard.  Think about the amount of hospitals that get federal funds.  Think about the state laws that requires rape victims to be able to get emergency contraception.   

Here's a link to the NY Times article :
Twistedchick is a blogger who is a news aggreator.  She lists the pdf of the memo, contacts for congresspeople and the contact for the Department of Health and Human Services.



tikiera: (Default)

July 2014

  1 2345


RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sep. 20th, 2017 07:32 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios