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:

DATES: Submit written or electronic comment on the regulatory changes
proposed by this document by April 9, 2009.

ADDRESSES: In commenting, please refer to “Rescission Proposal.” To
better manage the comment process, we will not accept comments by
facsimile (FAX) transmission.

You may submit comments in one of four ways (no duplicates, please):

1. Electronically. You may submit electronic comments on this regulation to http://www.Regulations.gov or via e-mail to proposedrescission@hhs.gov. To submit electronic comments to http://www.Regulations.gov, go to the Web site and click on the link “Comment or Submission” and enter the keywords “Rescission Proposal.” [Attachments should be in Microsoft Word, WordPerfect, or Excel;
however, we prefer Microsoft Word.]

2. By regular mail. You may mail written comments (one original and two copies) to the following address only:

Office of Public Health and Science
Department of Health and Human Services
Attention: Rescission Proposal Comments
Hubert H. Humphrey Building
200 Independence Avenue, SW
Room 716G, Washington, DC 20201

3. By express or overnight mail. You may send written comments (one original and two copies) to the following address only:

Office of Public Health and Science
Department of Health and Human Services
Attention: Rescission Proposal Comments
Hubert H. Humphrey Building
200 Independence Avenue, SW.
Room 716G, Washington, DC 20201

4. By hand or courier. If you prefer, you may deliver (by hand or courier) your written comments (one original and two copies) before the close of the comment period to the following address:

Room 716G
Hubert H. Humphrey Building
200 Independence Avenue, SW.
Washington, DC 20201

(Because access to the interior of the Hubert H. Humphrey Building is not readily available to persons without federal government identification, commenters are encouraged to leave their comments in
the mail drop slots located in the main lobby of the building. A stamp-in clock is available for persons wishing to retain proof of filing by stamping in and retaining an extra copy of the documents being filed.)

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.

If a woman is pregnant, I think she should be able to choose to (a) have the kid and raise it, (b) have the kid and put it up for adoption, or (c) not have the kid. But I think those choices should be more than legal and easily accessible—they should also be stripped of moral judgment.

Abortion is not wrong. And a woman’s personal, emotional reaction to her abortion isn’t wrong either. If a woman feels sad about her abortion, that’s fine. But if she doesn’t, that’s fine, too. The choice is difficult enough without having to feel bad or guilty for opting not to continue a pregnancy. Because for some women, abortion isn’t a moral compromise, a dark personal secret, or payment for past transgressions. It’s a relief. And branding those women as “evil” only increases the difficulty of making that choice.

So here’s a goal for the future of our pro-choice nation: When a woman decides to actually make that choice, try to refrain from assigning any sort of mythical baby-killing troll status to her.