Health and Human Services published President Obama’s official proposal to rescind Bush’s “conscience rule” in the Federal Register today. Bush’s rule expanded protections for healthcare providers who are morally opposed to performing or aiding in certain procedures—abortions, sterilizations, birth-control prescriptions, treating gays and lesbians, etc.

For the next 30 days, the public is invited to comment on Obama’s proposed rescission of the rule. Love it? Hate it? Tell the Obama administration through one of four easy ways (no faxes, n00bs). Once Health and Human Services opens comments for review, I’ll post the highlights here on the blog. And stay tuned for this week’s City Paper, where I’ll have more on the short-lived regulation.

For now, get to commentin’! Instructions are after the jump:

Read More “Comment on Obama’s Reversal of the “Conscience Rule”” »

Yesterday, Connecticut’s Bristol Press published an op-ed by Alicia Watkins, a District resident-turned-Bristol columnist. The piece, titled “‘Take responsibility’ not effective answer,” detailed why Watkins was against abortion, but supported its legality. Fine. But while Watkins’ piece—targeted at the pro-life set—argued for keeping abortion legal and accessible, it also suggested that women who aren’t opposed to the practice are “wicked,” “evil,” and even “fictional.”

I’m against abortion. But then, I don’t know anyone who considers herself “for” abortion. To my knowledge, I’ve never met a woman who was happy about having one. I suspect these women are fictional, like Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny—only, you know, evil.

Yoo-hoo, Alicia. Over here. Me. I’m not against abortion. And the only reason that I wouldn’t say that I’m “for” abortion is because I don’t value any pregnant woman’s choice over another.

Read More “Is Abortion Wrong?” »