Dear North Carolina State Senator:
You've heard of the "torture flights," I am sure. I wanted to let you know that most of the "torture flights" are departing from a civilian airport in North Carolina.
The government will pick out a person who looks like a terrorist (I believe that skin color is a prime determinant), abduct him, and fly him out of his country to a nation such as Syria, Morocco, or Egypt, where torture is commonplace, and he will be tortured there and kept in a tiny cell for anything from a year to the rest of his life.
We don't know how many people have been "disappeared" in this manner, how many are still being tortured, or how many have died in this international gulag.
We do know that innocent people have gotten caught up in this web and have been flown out of the United States for a year of constant torture in spite of their innocence. This has happened to a Canadian citizen, Maher Arar. Although we don't currently know of any other Canadian or US citizen to whom this has happened, if it has happened to one, it has probably happened to others.
Our state is being used as the source for these flights. The rented planes are here and the pilots are North Carolina citizens. I think any decent person who believes in America and the Bill of Rights would be as angry as I am that we are being used in this way to subvert the constitution and the promise of America.
As an aside, I must state that torture doesn't yield useful information even when it is applied to people who have knowledge that is needed. People will say anything to avoid pain, and smart but evil people will tell willful and misleading lies that can be more harmful than silence. Further, for the US to torture people of other nationalities opens the door for other groups or nations to abduct and torture Americans (soldiers, business people, diplomats, and tourists for example) and we will have no leg to stand on when we object, because we have behaved no better.
Imagine for a moment if North Korea abducted people on the street because they were identified as dangerous or opposed to North Korea or Kim Jong-Il, and were flown to some North Korean prison for torture. If this were to happen, it would be very difficult for us to say that it is improper, since we have done similar things ourselves.
There is a petition circulating in the North Carolina legislature which requests that the governor and the SBI investigate these torture flights and prosecute anyone who has broken the law. Could you find it in your heart to sign?
This petition makes no allegations, but only requests a thorough investigation of the civilian company (Aero Contractors) that is participating in this program of kidnapping, extralegal extradition, and torture.
I hope you will give it some thought. This is the Christmas season, the time when we celebrate the prince of peace, the one whose torture and execution has freed us from our earthly sins. If you can't see your way clear to sign on as a politician, please consider it as a duty to your savior.
Thank you and Merry Christmas.
Friday, December 15, 2006
Anti Choice Legislation
my letter to my NC state legislators:
To my two esteemed representatives in the North Carolina legislature:
I am very sorry that this has such an omnibus feel to it. I wanted to respond to these several anti-choice actions that have appeared before the NC legislature.
Anti-Choice License Plates/Anti-Choice Clinics, NC H 909
Relates to establishing "Choose Life" license plates; allocates funding for anti-choice clinics that are barred from providing women with access to the full range of reproductive health options.
Gillespie (R), Introduced: 03/28/2005; Last Action: Carried Over; Last Action Date: 01/06/2006
If I read between the lines correctly, this sounds like it's pretty well dead. I would have no problem with a plate that says "Choice" rather than "Choose Life"--maybe that could be offered as a compromise if this ever comes up for debate again. After all, choosing life is a choice, is it not? Without free choice, we could hardly choose life.
Second, I don't know of a single agency that provides for abortion that forces a woman to take that option. I am sure that all agencies discuss all options with all woman--except those "clinics" operated by anti-choice people. I can see a value in requiring those anti-choice "clinics" to provide information about and referral for abortion. Perhaps this could be offered as a compromise.
Biased Counseling and Mandatory Delay, NC H 1488
Requires women receive state-mandated lecture prior to obtaining abortion services; prohibits abortion unless women wait an additional 24 hours after receiving lecture
Johnson (R), Introduced: 04/21/2005; Last Action: Carried Over; Last Action Date: 01/06/2006
also NC S 549
Allran (R) Introduced: 03/15/2005; Last Action: Carried Over; Last Action Date: 01/06/2006
Are there any other medical situations in which people are required to have state-mandated lectures and then a 24-hour waiting period? I suggest that a compromise solution would be to require a state-mandated lecture and a 24-hour waiting time for every procedure. Removal of skin tags, for example, one mandated lecture and 24 waiting time before removal of each skin tag. Dentistry--one state-mandated lecture and 24-hour waiting time for each cavity drilling. Then another state-mandated lecture and 24-hour waiting period before filling the cavity. I think it would be a good idea to put Johnson and Allran in charge of delivering those lectures. I don't think people should be allowed to trim fingernails or pluck hairs without a 24-hour waiting period and a state-mandated lecture delivered by Allran or Johnson (they'll want to deliver the lecture personally, to make sure it's done properly, I am sure). So there's my preference. No one should be allowed to do anything without a 24-hour waiting period and a stern NC-mandated lecture delivered by either Allran or Johnson, or perhaps by both in an acapella Gregorian chant.
Insurance Prohibition for Abortion, NC H 289
Prohibits insurance coverage of abortion for state employees except in cases of rape, incest, or life endangerment.
LaRoque (R); Introduced: 02/17/2005; Last Action: Carried Over; Last Action Date: 01/06/2006
also NC S 106
Prohibits insurance coverage of abortion for teachers and state employees.
Brock (R); Introduced: 02/10/2005; Last Action: Carried Over; Last Action Date: 01/06/2006
I can't think of anything that state employees are prevented from having done medically that other North Carolinians can't have done medically, can you? This action is obviously unconstitutional because it is only applicable to women--why would men get a free ride while women are prevented from having insurance coverage for abortions? Perhaps as a compromise, you could suggest mandatory castration of male state employees and spaying of female state employees. We could have a leash law, requiring all state employees to be on a leash (and muzzled) when out in public, and a requirement that state employees from other states remain in isolation in a kennel for 14 days before being allowed to enter the state (to prevent them from bringing rabies or parvo into North Carolina and infecting our state employees).
Refusal to Provide Medical Services, NC H 1407
Allows certain individuals or entities to refuse to perform abortion services in all or most circumstances.
Barnhart (R); Introduced: 04/21/2005; Last Action: Carried Over; Last Action Date: 01/06/2006
My dentist refuses to perform a liver transplant. My chiropractor refuses to Roto-Rooter(tm) my hemorrhoids. I never realized before that individuals or entities were required to perform abortions. Sometimes OB's and GYN's have to perform abortions--for example, if the fetus is developing in a fallopian tube or the fetus is malformed in such a way that it might kill the mother. I would recommend individuals and entities that don't want to perform abortions stop being OB's or GYN's or offering OB/GYN services, because inevitably (and with surprisingly frequency) they will find themselves doing so. I have no problem with an OB or a GYN refusing to do the job of an OB or GYN, but of course, they should lose their license to treat people at the same time. If my dentist refused to perform extractions or my chiropractor decided to treat my knee instead of my spine, I would advocate the same for them.
Restrictions on Young Women's Access to Abortion NC S 1135
Amends existing parental consent mandate to place additional restrictions on young women seeking abortions by requiring notarization of the consent with no protections for the young woman's privacy.
Brock (R); Introduced: 03/24/2005; Last Action: Carried Over; Last Action Date: 01/06/2006
also NC H 1200
Amends existing parental consent mandate to place additional restrictions on young women seeking abortions by requiring notarization of the consent with no protections for the young woman's privacy.
Hilton (R); Introduced: 04/13/2005; Last Action: Carried Over; Last Action Date: 01/06/2006
Are Brock and Hilton notaries? It looks like they're trying to ensure a greater demand for notary services. I think that Brock and Hilton should be required to become notaries and personally notarize everything other than the parental consent of young women seeking abortions, so that notaries will not be overwhelmed. Brock and Hilton should be required to have their parents' consent for everything that they do, duly notarized by a notary in Cherokee County, North Carolina who has been selected by the World Court in the Hague.
Restrictions on Young Women's Access to Family Planning NC H 679
Restricts the privacy rights of young women by allowing doctors to notify parents after providing certain health care to a young woman, including contraception and STD treatment, without the permission of the young woman.
Capps (R); Introduced: 03/17/2005; Last Action: Carried Over; Last Action Date: 01/06/2006
Open up all medical records, notify everyone of everything. The state could mandate the publications of thick newspapers in every community that print the medical records of its citizens and any procedures performed on any given day. We can start with Capps, of course, since he's volunteered.
Separate Legal Status for Embryos and Fetuses NC H 1324
Amends portion of criminal code to allow an "unborn child" to be a victim of crime separate and apart from the pregnant woman.
Walend (R); Introduced: 04/20/2005; Action: Carried Over; Last Action Date: 01/06/2006
also NC S 200
Amends criminal code to allow a "child who is in utero...at any stage of development" to be a victim of crime separate and apart from the pregnant woman.
Webster (R) Introduced: 02/24/2005; Last Action: Carried Over; Last Action Date: 01/06/2006
In my life, I have been privileged to have met and known many children. So far, none of them have been unborn. If an "unborn" is a "child," can people claim them as dependents on their taxes? Are "unborn" counted in the census? I think any crime that results in the loss of a pregnancy should be dealt with severely. In most cases, it is probably a double tragedy. This opens up a real bag of worms, though. I don't think Walend and Webster have thought this through sufficiently. They need to look at the tax implications. And this needs to have some polishing--for example, what if a crime is committed that results in a pregnancy? Would that criminal be lauded for his contribution? No law is constitutional that applies only to one group of people, so this would have to have some means to apply to men and to women of non-child bearing age as well, as well as the pre-pubescent North Carolinians. What if, for example (as often happened) I were a child on a playground and a bully came up to me and, while his henchchildren held my arms, he kneed me in the groin, resulting in compromised fertility. It could be argued that this one action causes the death of several billion potential North Carolinians (six million per ejaculation--you do the math). Fortunately, I came through very fertile, but it could have gone another way. If, as antichoice people insist, abortion is murder, then vasectomy is mass murder on a cosmic scale. I think we should turn our attention away from the relatively paltry loss of a North Carolinian here and there through abortion or misfortune or assault and consider the huge genocide going on in urologists' clinics where vasectomies are cutting short the potential lives of trillions of North Carolinians EVERY SINGLE DAY.
I have done a bit of research and discovered that most pregnancies that are terminated are actually terminated through natural causes. Relatively few conceptions result in pregnancy, in other words. The fertilized ovum never becomes embedded in the uterine wall and is lost along with the endometrium during menstruation. What effort are Walend and Webster making to retrieve these unborns or to seek retribution for their loss? Should all used tampons and sanitary napkins be sent to their offices so that potentially viable blastocysts can be retrieved and frozen or implanted? Naturally, we can't lock God up in prison or sue God for damages, but North Carolina is home to thousands of churches. We could lock up ministers, priests, mullahs, and rabbis for the misbehavior of their Supreme Being and for their failure to influence Him to not spontaneously abort the unborn. The churches also own property and often have cash lying around, so we could wage hefty fines as well and condemn church property, perhaps for sale to religious groups that don't claim to have a Supreme Being (Buddhists, perhaps, or Scientologists) and so can't be blamed for the misbehavior of this entity.
Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers (TRAP)-Anti-Choice NC H 1201
Subjects abortion providers to burdensome restrictions.
Hilton (R); Introduced: 04/13/2005; Last Action: Carried Over; Last Action Date: 01/06/2006
I have no problem with this, so long as it applies to all practitioners of medicine in every medical procedure. In fact, perhaps we should look at subjecting all North Carolinians to burdensome restrictions. Perhaps we could be required to carry enormous boulders around as we perform our daily duties. We could have the hamstrings or achilles tendon of all North Carolinians severed so we would have to drag ourselves around by our hands. Another thing we could do would be to have all North Carolinians given a lobotomy. Of course, we need to start with Hilton, since he's been so kind as to volunteer.
Hope that helps. Thanks for your great service to North Carolina and Guilford County, your districts, and to me. I am very proud to tell people that Maggie Jeffus and Kay Hagan are my voice in Raleigh.
To my two esteemed representatives in the North Carolina legislature:
I am very sorry that this has such an omnibus feel to it. I wanted to respond to these several anti-choice actions that have appeared before the NC legislature.
Anti-Choice License Plates/Anti-Choice Clinics, NC H 909
Relates to establishing "Choose Life" license plates; allocates funding for anti-choice clinics that are barred from providing women with access to the full range of reproductive health options.
Gillespie (R), Introduced: 03/28/2005; Last Action: Carried Over; Last Action Date: 01/06/2006
If I read between the lines correctly, this sounds like it's pretty well dead. I would have no problem with a plate that says "Choice" rather than "Choose Life"--maybe that could be offered as a compromise if this ever comes up for debate again. After all, choosing life is a choice, is it not? Without free choice, we could hardly choose life.
Second, I don't know of a single agency that provides for abortion that forces a woman to take that option. I am sure that all agencies discuss all options with all woman--except those "clinics" operated by anti-choice people. I can see a value in requiring those anti-choice "clinics" to provide information about and referral for abortion. Perhaps this could be offered as a compromise.
Biased Counseling and Mandatory Delay, NC H 1488
Requires women receive state-mandated lecture prior to obtaining abortion services; prohibits abortion unless women wait an additional 24 hours after receiving lecture
Johnson (R), Introduced: 04/21/2005; Last Action: Carried Over; Last Action Date: 01/06/2006
also NC S 549
Allran (R) Introduced: 03/15/2005; Last Action: Carried Over; Last Action Date: 01/06/2006
Are there any other medical situations in which people are required to have state-mandated lectures and then a 24-hour waiting period? I suggest that a compromise solution would be to require a state-mandated lecture and a 24-hour waiting time for every procedure. Removal of skin tags, for example, one mandated lecture and 24 waiting time before removal of each skin tag. Dentistry--one state-mandated lecture and 24-hour waiting time for each cavity drilling. Then another state-mandated lecture and 24-hour waiting period before filling the cavity. I think it would be a good idea to put Johnson and Allran in charge of delivering those lectures. I don't think people should be allowed to trim fingernails or pluck hairs without a 24-hour waiting period and a state-mandated lecture delivered by Allran or Johnson (they'll want to deliver the lecture personally, to make sure it's done properly, I am sure). So there's my preference. No one should be allowed to do anything without a 24-hour waiting period and a stern NC-mandated lecture delivered by either Allran or Johnson, or perhaps by both in an acapella Gregorian chant.
Insurance Prohibition for Abortion, NC H 289
Prohibits insurance coverage of abortion for state employees except in cases of rape, incest, or life endangerment.
LaRoque (R); Introduced: 02/17/2005; Last Action: Carried Over; Last Action Date: 01/06/2006
also NC S 106
Prohibits insurance coverage of abortion for teachers and state employees.
Brock (R); Introduced: 02/10/2005; Last Action: Carried Over; Last Action Date: 01/06/2006
I can't think of anything that state employees are prevented from having done medically that other North Carolinians can't have done medically, can you? This action is obviously unconstitutional because it is only applicable to women--why would men get a free ride while women are prevented from having insurance coverage for abortions? Perhaps as a compromise, you could suggest mandatory castration of male state employees and spaying of female state employees. We could have a leash law, requiring all state employees to be on a leash (and muzzled) when out in public, and a requirement that state employees from other states remain in isolation in a kennel for 14 days before being allowed to enter the state (to prevent them from bringing rabies or parvo into North Carolina and infecting our state employees).
Refusal to Provide Medical Services, NC H 1407
Allows certain individuals or entities to refuse to perform abortion services in all or most circumstances.
Barnhart (R); Introduced: 04/21/2005; Last Action: Carried Over; Last Action Date: 01/06/2006
My dentist refuses to perform a liver transplant. My chiropractor refuses to Roto-Rooter(tm) my hemorrhoids. I never realized before that individuals or entities were required to perform abortions. Sometimes OB's and GYN's have to perform abortions--for example, if the fetus is developing in a fallopian tube or the fetus is malformed in such a way that it might kill the mother. I would recommend individuals and entities that don't want to perform abortions stop being OB's or GYN's or offering OB/GYN services, because inevitably (and with surprisingly frequency) they will find themselves doing so. I have no problem with an OB or a GYN refusing to do the job of an OB or GYN, but of course, they should lose their license to treat people at the same time. If my dentist refused to perform extractions or my chiropractor decided to treat my knee instead of my spine, I would advocate the same for them.
Restrictions on Young Women's Access to Abortion NC S 1135
Amends existing parental consent mandate to place additional restrictions on young women seeking abortions by requiring notarization of the consent with no protections for the young woman's privacy.
Brock (R); Introduced: 03/24/2005; Last Action: Carried Over; Last Action Date: 01/06/2006
also NC H 1200
Amends existing parental consent mandate to place additional restrictions on young women seeking abortions by requiring notarization of the consent with no protections for the young woman's privacy.
Hilton (R); Introduced: 04/13/2005; Last Action: Carried Over; Last Action Date: 01/06/2006
Are Brock and Hilton notaries? It looks like they're trying to ensure a greater demand for notary services. I think that Brock and Hilton should be required to become notaries and personally notarize everything other than the parental consent of young women seeking abortions, so that notaries will not be overwhelmed. Brock and Hilton should be required to have their parents' consent for everything that they do, duly notarized by a notary in Cherokee County, North Carolina who has been selected by the World Court in the Hague.
Restrictions on Young Women's Access to Family Planning NC H 679
Restricts the privacy rights of young women by allowing doctors to notify parents after providing certain health care to a young woman, including contraception and STD treatment, without the permission of the young woman.
Capps (R); Introduced: 03/17/2005; Last Action: Carried Over; Last Action Date: 01/06/2006
Open up all medical records, notify everyone of everything. The state could mandate the publications of thick newspapers in every community that print the medical records of its citizens and any procedures performed on any given day. We can start with Capps, of course, since he's volunteered.
Separate Legal Status for Embryos and Fetuses NC H 1324
Amends portion of criminal code to allow an "unborn child" to be a victim of crime separate and apart from the pregnant woman.
Walend (R); Introduced: 04/20/2005; Action: Carried Over; Last Action Date: 01/06/2006
also NC S 200
Amends criminal code to allow a "child who is in utero...at any stage of development" to be a victim of crime separate and apart from the pregnant woman.
Webster (R) Introduced: 02/24/2005; Last Action: Carried Over; Last Action Date: 01/06/2006
In my life, I have been privileged to have met and known many children. So far, none of them have been unborn. If an "unborn" is a "child," can people claim them as dependents on their taxes? Are "unborn" counted in the census? I think any crime that results in the loss of a pregnancy should be dealt with severely. In most cases, it is probably a double tragedy. This opens up a real bag of worms, though. I don't think Walend and Webster have thought this through sufficiently. They need to look at the tax implications. And this needs to have some polishing--for example, what if a crime is committed that results in a pregnancy? Would that criminal be lauded for his contribution? No law is constitutional that applies only to one group of people, so this would have to have some means to apply to men and to women of non-child bearing age as well, as well as the pre-pubescent North Carolinians. What if, for example (as often happened) I were a child on a playground and a bully came up to me and, while his henchchildren held my arms, he kneed me in the groin, resulting in compromised fertility. It could be argued that this one action causes the death of several billion potential North Carolinians (six million per ejaculation--you do the math). Fortunately, I came through very fertile, but it could have gone another way. If, as antichoice people insist, abortion is murder, then vasectomy is mass murder on a cosmic scale. I think we should turn our attention away from the relatively paltry loss of a North Carolinian here and there through abortion or misfortune or assault and consider the huge genocide going on in urologists' clinics where vasectomies are cutting short the potential lives of trillions of North Carolinians EVERY SINGLE DAY.
I have done a bit of research and discovered that most pregnancies that are terminated are actually terminated through natural causes. Relatively few conceptions result in pregnancy, in other words. The fertilized ovum never becomes embedded in the uterine wall and is lost along with the endometrium during menstruation. What effort are Walend and Webster making to retrieve these unborns or to seek retribution for their loss? Should all used tampons and sanitary napkins be sent to their offices so that potentially viable blastocysts can be retrieved and frozen or implanted? Naturally, we can't lock God up in prison or sue God for damages, but North Carolina is home to thousands of churches. We could lock up ministers, priests, mullahs, and rabbis for the misbehavior of their Supreme Being and for their failure to influence Him to not spontaneously abort the unborn. The churches also own property and often have cash lying around, so we could wage hefty fines as well and condemn church property, perhaps for sale to religious groups that don't claim to have a Supreme Being (Buddhists, perhaps, or Scientologists) and so can't be blamed for the misbehavior of this entity.
Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers (TRAP)-Anti-Choice NC H 1201
Subjects abortion providers to burdensome restrictions.
Hilton (R); Introduced: 04/13/2005; Last Action: Carried Over; Last Action Date: 01/06/2006
I have no problem with this, so long as it applies to all practitioners of medicine in every medical procedure. In fact, perhaps we should look at subjecting all North Carolinians to burdensome restrictions. Perhaps we could be required to carry enormous boulders around as we perform our daily duties. We could have the hamstrings or achilles tendon of all North Carolinians severed so we would have to drag ourselves around by our hands. Another thing we could do would be to have all North Carolinians given a lobotomy. Of course, we need to start with Hilton, since he's been so kind as to volunteer.
Hope that helps. Thanks for your great service to North Carolina and Guilford County, your districts, and to me. I am very proud to tell people that Maggie Jeffus and Kay Hagan are my voice in Raleigh.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)