Who are the Victims? RAPE, Abuse and INCEST

Presidential Candidate Rick Santorum

When a 12 year old  girl is the subject of rape or incest, shouldn't the parent of this child have the right to seek the medical assistance necessary to ensure that the child who may become pregnant does not bear a child whom she would not be ready for?. Under the Person-hood bill supported by Congressman Paul Ryan and Presidential Candidate Rick Santorum and passed by the Republican Congress would make it a crime a crime to seek the medical care necessary to prevent that pregnancy.

While Mitt Romney did not support Person-hood in 2007 his expressed this thought on meet the press, Romney’s “Political Perspective” In 2007: Life Begins At Conception. Romney: “I believe from a … political perspective that life begins at conception…. I don't pretend to know, if you will, from a theological standpoint when life begins.”

As Mitt Romney evolve as a candidate for President Mr Romney's views continue to shift to the far right in order to gain their support,  Romney was asked if he would support of a dangerous proposal, commonly called a “person-hood amendment,” that could potentially ban common forms of contraception like the birth control pill, as well as prevent a pregnant woman experiencing complications that threaten her life or health to obtain safe abortion care. Said Romney, “absolutely.” [Concord Monitor, 11/9/11]

1 out of every 6 American women has been the victim of an attempted or completed rape in her lifetime (14.8% completed rape; 2.8% attempted rape).

Who are the Victims? | RAINN | Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network

7% of girls in grades 5-8 and 12% of girls in grades 9-12 said they had been sexually abused.

Republican and Tea Party support person-hood

PERSON-HOOD BILL

“A ballot measure going before voters in Mississippi on Nov. 8 would define :- 

The term ‘person’ in the State Constitution to include, "fertilized human eggs" and grant to fertilized eggs the, "legal rights and protections that apply to people". 

• Besides outlawing all abortions with no exceptions for, rape or incest or when a woman's life is in danger, 
• banning any contraception that may prevent implantation of a fertilized egg, including birth control pills, the amendment carries many implications,
•  It could curtail medical research involving embryos, shutter fertility clinics and put doctors in legal jeopardy for providing needed medical care that might endanger a pregnancy. 
• Pregnant women also could become subject to criminal prosecution. 
• A fertilized egg might be eligible to inherit money or be counted when drawing voting districts by population. 
• Numerous laws use the terms '’person’' or ’'people,’' there would be no shortage of unintended consequences… 

This extreme measure would protect zygotes at the expense of all women while creating a legal quagmire -- at least until the courts rule it unconstitutional, as they should.” [New York Times, 10/28/11]

Mitt Romney"s Flips and Flops the, "Blunt Amendment"

The White House policy requires employers to include contraception in their employees’ healthcare plans without charging a co-pay or deductible, but exempts churches and houses of worship. Religious-affiliated employers such as Catholic hospitals would not have to directly cover birth control in their healthcare plans, but their employees could still obtain it, without a co-pay, from their respective insurance companies.

The Blunt Amendment Creates a Huge Loophole, Allowing Employers and Plans to Use Religious or Moral Convictions to Eliminate Critical Health Care Services

The Blunt Amendment allows employers and insurance companies to refuse coverage of any health care service required under the new health care law based on undefined “religious beliefs or moral convictions.”  This creates a huge loophole in the new health care law’s coverage requirements.  For example, any corporation whose CEO opposes contraception based on his “moral convictions” could deny all coverage of contraception or any other service to the company’s employees.  Even more disturbing, a CEO’s view of “morality” could potentially include concern for the cost of a particular benefit.  Such broad, undefined refusals would result in millions of individuals losing vital health service coverage.

http://www.nwlc.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/blunt_amendment_fact_sheet_march_2012.pdf

Opponents of the Blunt amendment pointed out that the bill not only would have allowed employers to cherry-pick women's health care options based on moral beliefs, but it also would have rolled back some of the basic anti-discrimination protections in the Affordable Care Act. For instance, under the amendment, an employer could refuse to cover things like HIV/AIDS screenings, prenatal care for single mothers, mammograms, vaccinations for children and even screenings for diabetes based on objections to a perceived immoral lifestyle.

Flop!
“I’m not for the bill (the blunt amendment), but look, the idea of presidential candidates getting into questions about contraception within a relationship between a man and a woman, husband and wife, I’m not going there,” Romney answered.

Flip!

 “Of course, I support the Blunt amendment".

Flop!

“I didn't understand his question,” Romney said on a Boston radio show later Wednesday. “Of course, I support the Blunt amendment.” And in a statement Thursday, Romney praised senators who backed the measure.

Romney: You know, I made it very clear when I was being interviewed by George Stephanopoulos in a debate a while ago.



 Contraception is working just fine, let’s just leave it alone.

Republicans contend that the Blunt amendment, which is expected to come up for a vote in the Senate on Thursday, would reverse the national health-care law’s requirement that all employers, including religious-affiliated institutions, provide health coverage that includes contraceptive care at no co-pay cost to employees.

 “Governor Romney supports the Blunt Bill because he believes in a conscience exemption in health care for religious institutions and people of faith.”

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), came out in support of the measure Wednesday. But most national Democrats have hammered Republicans over the amendment, arguing that it would give employers broad discretion to deny their employees any type of coverage by citing the conscience exception