Last week we spent two nights covering the battle over abortion rights in the Republican-controlled Wyoming legislature.
When we left off, the small-c conservatives of the Republican Party, led by strong-spoken, small-government ranchers Reps. Sue Wallis and Lisa Shepperson, had voted down a bill seen as restricting abortion rights. But then the same guy who'd introduced the first one came out with a second, slightly modified bill. The small-government Republicans couldn't vote this one down, so Rep. Wallis amended it into something, as she told us at the time, that she didn't like but believed she could stand. This modified bill passed the Wyoming House and it was on to the state Senate. Now Representative Lisa Shepperson, a rancher and mother-to-be, e-mails this update:
After passing the House…..HB – 251 has been passed to the Wyoming Senate and has been assigned to our Standing Committee – Agriculture, State and Public Lands and Water Resources!! Yes….our Ag Committee!! Now, we realize that sometimes bills get assigned to strange committees due to work load, etc, but that is NOT the case here. It has been assigned to this committee to try to make SURE it comes out and goes to the floor.
Needless to say, Sue and I and quite a few other women legislators are furious! I guess maybe some of these men think we are livestock!?!?! I am a 5th generation rancher and am used to dealing with livestock and the issues with them….so it will be an interesting committee hearing for me. By the way, Sue is also a rancher….both her and I have spent our lives on issues dealing with ag. We just never dreamed we'd be in the Ag Committee dealing with this issue. We are strategizing now….trying to decide if we should show up to the Committee Meeting with our cow-bells on and mooing! The bill is tentatively scheduled to be heard on Thursday afternoon, upon adjournment.
We just wanted to update you on the status of this ridiculousness. Thank you for your time.
We also got a very nice note from the Majority Floor Leader of the Wyoming House. He wanted to draw our attention to the civility, friendliness and general awesomeness of the Wyoming legislature, which is something Rep. Wallis called our attention to last week as well. Rep. Lubnau's message, after the jump:
Ms. Dryden:
Thank you for your fair treatment of the Wyoming Legislature. The description of the debates on the Brechtel bills was accurate. While I understand the focus of your story was on the abortion issue and the interplay between different factions of the Republican Party, there is another, deeper story, about how people in the lowest populated state in the union work together to create a state with billions in the bank, the lowest taxes in the country, the greatest spending per capita on education in the country and a balanced budget. It is a story about how Republicans and Democrats leave the floor after each day's session and dine together, discuss issues and are true friends. It is a story about how for the first 10 minutes of each session, the members shake hands, hug and chat about their lives before beginning a difficult day of legislating. We know that tension in ideas makes us stronger, but tension in personalities makes us weaker. I believe the free exchange of ideas, no matter the source, is the key to our success. We encourage you to look a our little legislature from the boondocks. Perhaps there is something to be learned from a place where partisan rhetoric takes a back seat to getting the job done.
Tom Lubnau
Majority Floor Leader
Wyoming House of Representatives
Leave a Comment:
An abortion-rights related bill goes to the Ag Committee. I know that's in the title here but I just had to type it again because it's so...surreal.
If it wasn't so f**ked up it would be funny.
To Cyberduckie- you said it's not about the baby..? I don't understand what you mean. How is deciding to kill your fetus..essentially your Baby..how is that Not About the Baby???? I think I understand a little what you mean, but I think you should remember that it IS ALSO about the baby. It seems to me that Some (not all) pro-choice people who actually care about woman need to remember it is also about the baby. And some pro-life people should remember that it is Not just about the Baby Either! Remember Both Lives people! Otherwise, you disprespect the true decisions that are being made.....because whether you choose to get an abortion or you choose not too....sometimes Both decisions Will result in Lives Destroyed. That is a sad fact both sides need to remember.
And to ElamCreek- you said that having sex and not using protection and all that is a choice. Well, you are so wrong. Not everyone is lucky enough to Say that. Some women are sleeping in their homes in the middle of the night..some women are walking to their car..some women are visiting a "friend"..and some more unfortunate women are not truly adult women yet and live with an evil man..and than these women are pinned down and punched in the face or cut and stabbed and forced to do things that make them want to die..and than society says, "Suck it up and SHUT UP and DO WHAT WE TELL YOU" and maybe they are sick and tired and BEING FORCED to do things. I'm lucky and very grateful not to be one of those women, but I think it is evil to force yourself and force your ideas onto another person.
thank you
Take the "H" out of CHATTEL and it's CATTLE (ok, you need to re-arrange the "E" & "L" as well, but...)
It's just unfortunate that is how women tend to be viewed by these people who won't allow them control over their bodies and their lives. To people like that, women are nothing but broodmares.
It would be hilarious if it were not so insanely wrong. How misguided can you get? You don't have to be gay, black, Muslim, you just have to be female to be a second class citizen with rights decided by those "so intelligent" men. Seriously?? SERIOUSLY?
Not even a second class citizen. Non-human apparently, since agriculture does not include humans, only livestock.
I would imagine that the baby that is KILLED would love to be able to be a second class citizen. He/She never gets a chance.
Let me be clear, I am PRO-CHOICE!!! The woman (and the man as well) has a CHOICE (in the overwhelming majority of cases), whether, or not, to drop their pants & do the very thing that CAN POSSIBLY result in a pregnancy. Then, the BABY (and it IS a BABY) has to pay for someone else's CHOICE, with his/her LIFE, period! The baby can't speak for himself/herself, so we must.
You really need to watch the YouTube video "The Silent Scream", and the "Dilation and Evacuation Abortion" video. May God have Mercy on Our Souls for the millions of babies that have been killed (against their will, I'm sure) in the name of women's freedom. Having a "freedom" doesn't make it right. What about the BABY's freedom? What about what the baby wants? Of course, to some, the woman is more valuable than the baby she has a doctor kill.
IT'S NOT ABOUT A BABY!!!
It's about my right to choose what's appropriate and right for my body.
You think abortion is wrong? Then don't get one! But keep your hands and your ideologies out of my uterus!
So, according to you, even though YOU are the one CHOOSING to engage in behavior that you KNOW could possibly result in the initiation of a BABY's life, it's appropriate for you to KILL an innocent BABY, whom YOU have assisted in implanted in your own body. No one else, except in the 1% of cases of rape/incest/imminent death of the mother, made you have the sperm injected in you.
Save your spin. A baby is a baby, and murder is murder. You do have a CHOICE, keep your pants up until you are ready to have children. It is done every day, and you could do it too. But, why should you exhibit any self-control, or responsibility when you can just do what you want, and if you get pregnant, just go get a doctor to KILL (oh, I'm sorry. I should say "abort") the BABY (or "pregnancy").
Women can do anything they want. What they should do is not allow any man to put his penis in their vaginae (PIV). Why should they allow it? Most women don't experience vaginal orgasm. So they should restrict all sexual activity to only what gives them sexual pleasure.
That would almost completely eliminate the need for abortion. It might leave men unhappy, but since men are the cause of women needing abortions, that shouldn't be women's concerns.
Of course, men could do as you suggest and "keep your pants up until you are ready to have children. It is done every day, and you could do it too." They could also "exhibit self-control and responsibility." But most of them don't. Otherwise we wouldn't have so many women needing abortions.
Of course, if a woman wants a baby, then she could engage in PIV but only when she's fertile, since "PIV is only for procreation." Women are only fertile one day a month and most women only want one or two babies, so their men won't be having sex more than a handful of times during their lifetime.
Think of all the money women could save. They wouldn't need birth control. They wouldn't need health insurance that includes pregnancy. They also wouldn't have to suffer the adverse health consequences inflicted upon them by birth control, pregnancy, birth or abortions.
So yep, you're right. Women should not engage in PIV, not even in marriage because a significant number of women seeking abortions are married. Let the men find their sexual outlet somewhere else.
Err what about rape?
If you're only pro-choice in the case of telling a woman to keep her legs closed then you're not pro-choice. Quit lying and be honest and admit that you don't consider women to anything more than breeding stock.
Well it's no surprise that you anti-choicers are gullible as well as delusional and ignorant.
Loretta,
Now, you get it. Couldn't have said it better, myself. Except, according to you, "since men are the cause of women needing abortions", a woman (according to your statement's implication) either doesn't have a brain/free-will/any-choice-in-the-matter,or she doesn't have to use it. So, your saying that the 98-99% of pregnancies that are NOT the result of (1) rape, (2) incest, and/or (3) to save the mother's life are ONLY the man's fault, huh? What if your mother didn't want to be tied down/bothered with having you? While I may not agree with the way that you think of another person's life, I am glad that your mother had the intestinal fortitude, as well as the strength of character, to follow thru with her responsibilities.
What it boils down to is that we, as intelligent beings, have legalized the murder of millions of boys & girls, over the years. And, we should all be ashamed of that fact. We need to imagine ourselves inside a imaginary womb, with a scalpel or scissors coming after you to cut you in pieces & suction you out of your safe place. Where is the baby's CHOICE??? And don't say the absolutely insane "it's not a baby" crap.
Auteur,
I am most definitely pro-choice. What choice is more important than LIFE? Women are 1/2 of the perfect couple, with men being the other 1/2. Men, AND Women should both excercise the utmost judgement where a baby could be conceived. But, if two people engage in an activity, then they should be prepared to accept the results, PERIOD! So, you see, I'm not the one who is lying, and I'd appreciate it if you would obstain from such statements.
LOL. Now I get it? As if I never "got it" before that religious busybodies want to continue controlling women like they have for centuries?
I repeat: women have the right to control their own bodies, including before and during pregnancy. They have the right to indulge in all sorts of sexual activities but no obligation to agree to PIV just because some religious busybody says that's "sex." No woman should engage in PIV unless she chooses to and that should be her last choice because none of the others include the dangers involved in birth control, pregnancy or abortion.
Women also don't have to follow the dictates of a religious busybody just because they don't like women having control of their reproductive choices. Too bad if you don't like birth control, abortion or any other reproductive choice. It's none of your business unless it's your body.
There is no scientific rationale that says "life" begins at conception. That's political nonsense. Life already exists in both the sperm and the ova before they meet up. So if you're going to make that argument, then all men need to quit jerking off and killing millions of "babies."
Even after they unite, nature doesn't value the result much. 70% of all fertilized eggs are aborted before the mother even knows she's pregnant and another 24% of the remainder are aborted by nature after the mother knows she's pregnant, so there is no scientific support for the religious busybody's irrational desire to shame women into doing the religious busybody's misogynistic bidding.
BTW, I agree with Autuer: you are falsely posturing as pro-choice. When you only want to allow one option, that is not a choice.
Loretta,
How old are you -- 5? Can you not read? See, you jump to too many assumptions. I SAID that women have a right to control their own bodies, absolutely! And, with that right comes responsibilities. And, yes, "they have the right to indulge in all sorts of sexual activities", but like I said, that right carries responsibilities. If they indulge in risky behavior, they need to step up to the plate & follow thru on their responsibilities.
Next, I DO like women having control of their reproductive choices. They need to use it, just as men do. Who said that I didn't like birth contro? I believe women should use birth control (condoms, the pill), but if you do the act, and a baby results, you knew there was that possibility before you did the act.
Next, your statement "There is no scientific rationale that says "life" begins at conception" is totally ridiculous & you know it. It has nothing to do with "rationale", it is a FACT! You are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts. Everyone was supposed to learn in 5th grade science class that when the egg is fertilized by the sperm, a LIFE begins. Oh, excuse me, you just made my point for me when you said, " life already exists in both the sperm and the ova before they meet up"! Enough said.
And, finally, nature is supposed to do what nature does, not a human playing god, deciding if a baby lives, or dies, without a chance at all. Thank you for proving my point. God Bless Everyone.
You contradict yourself. First you claim that life begins when the egg and sperm unite, then you say it begins at conception, then you agree that life is in both the egg and sperm before they unite. You can't claim three different points when life begins.
The truth is no one has scientific proof of "when life begins." That's all political nonsense. Life is continuous and has been since the first of our species. It will remain continuous until nature wipes us out as a species.
As to trying to separate humans from nature, you can't do that. We're part of nature, one lowly species among many. Any other belief is pure vanity.
We can choose how to conduct our lives any way we wish and nature does not care. Nature does not care if we choose to abort, choose to carry or if nature makes that choice for us.
Any other claim is just hogwash.
Like in your last post, you're only pro-choice if they don't have sex. If you don't want to be accused of being a liar then quit lying.
Fantastic--a personal attack. Have you run out of valid arguments?
He never had a valid argument to begin with.
Very true!
ElamCreek, you are suspended for a day for violating rule # 1 of the Code of Honor.
War on Women = Treason Just as Wars v US - Drugs Terror Middle East Torture Middle Class.
I really, really, want to be a fly on the wall for this one! I think these ladies are going to give them a run for their money!
I hope so!
Well, silly! Why would a cow want to abort her fetus? She has been artificially inseminated after all. If she didn't want to get pregnant, she should have just said "no" to the bull and practiced abstinence.
Who says the cow said no to the bull, or even needed the bull to have her calf? This is what happens when prayer is not allowed in the barn or pasture, and those cows are let out of the barn. They need to stay in the barn and let the bulls bring home the cud, and chew it with their mouths shut. Feminist cows and their ideas.
It's not uncommon for female non-human animals to abort their fetuses if conditions aren't right.
Auteur,
Now, I know you have no clue, whatsoever. Tell us, praytell, just how do they "abort their fetuses if conditions aren't right", without access to abortion doctors, or opposing thumbs? You can tell that you weren't raised in the country, or you would know that what I think that you are referring to is the fact that animals, like humans, sometimes suffer miscarriages due to many factors, like severe birth defects and/or trauma. Please, for the yet unborn's sake, get informed, and deal with reality, not pride or greed.
Because in scientific terms, "abortion" does not only refer to medically- and surgically-induced disruption of pregnancy. This word is used for any cause of pregnancy loss prior to a certain point in gestation, such as the 20 week point in humans. That's right, folks--if you miscarry at 19 weeks, that is a "spontaneous abortion."
Psychogenic pregnancy disruptions in mammals
Strange-male-induced pregnancy disruption in mice
Disruption of early pregnancy by direct and indirect exposure to novel
males in mice
No opposable thumbs required!
Female rabbits will often abort or absorb thier entire litter if the warren is sick or overcrowded or if there is no food. In fact, in times of drought or famine, many animals will spontaniously abort
"no" to the syringe, not the bull, I meant to say.
Wyoming??? Isn't this Cheney country???
Yes, yes, yes--Cheney Country--but we shouldn't overlook the fact that Wyoming was one of the FIRST women's sufferage states; it was even a "stumbling block" to their statehood when they were just a territory. Where have they gone wrong since???
That was long long ago now we are a state obsessed with banning Gay marriage or even recognizing gay couples married in other states. We have a legislature that is trying to pass a law that bans sharia law in WY. I believe we already have that taken care of with the constitution. This is a wacky state that leans way too far to the right. But UW is awesome!
With all the very serious stuff going on around the country and the world--a little humor goes a long way! The AG COMMITTEE? OMG! These GUYS (emphasis only) are never going to hear the end of it. Never!
From this day forth the Wyoming legislature will be called to session, not with a gavel, but a cow bell!
Okay.. wishful thinking..........
Sorry, but this just made me think that if women's reproductive rights are under "livestock committee", then men's are too...therefore...the men impregnating the women are perhaps playing a little to fast and loose with "animal husbandry". I say, "Bring On the Cowbells, and start castrating the inferior males that don't don't have the fortitude to care for their offspring."
Seriously, it's a ploy to slip something into law without anybody knowing about it, until after the fact--bravo to Ms. Shepperson for bringing this to light.
Good idea. Let's start castrating all inferior males. If women are livestock, then so are men.
Castration would go a long way to stopping violence against women too.
None of this be happening if men could get pregnant.
CHEMGIRL..... We wouldn't be able to stand the pain of childbirth!
If men got preg instead of women there would be abortion on demand at every Jiffy Lube. Birth controll would be covered under insurance and our species would die out due to no kids.
Which is another good example of evolution in action!!
Yes, with cowbells and mooing!! haha. You rock, ladies!
Lots of support coming at you from Seattle. Mwah!*
I hope every woman in Wyoming show up in cow bells and moo. An approriate response to stupid legislation.
coat hanger vasectomies: that will get their attention
Problem is, they don't need to get the vasectomies, as they're not the ones who will pay the price for the accidental pregnancies - they can just walk away.
Oh, Monica!
Ouch! Not that it's any worse than a coat hanger abortion, but dang--you're right, when you're right.
L.L.I.T.C.,
Exactly!!!
I hope they book these ladies on TRMS. That would be an awesome interview!
Too bad we don't have a Walk For Choice up there, but that is Dick Cheney country is it not?
For other cities on 26 February add your voice at
ok no html got it
walk 4 choice dawt tumblr dawt calm
I see this another way. In the state of Wyoming, agricultural matters are ever so much more important than women's rights, so tack the abortion issue on to the end of a really important bill and it will be sure to pass.
That's the tactic being employed. You can't hold up important agriculture a/k/a revenue building (or "money in our pockets") legislation for something stupid like woman's rights - oh pardon me, in their view, it's not about a woman's rights.
That's the other universal tactic employed in this fight. It is never phrased as an assault on women's rights. It's always pro-life - even when they advocate murder as being OK in order to protect life. Makes your head spin!
On every issue the GOP has put forth so far, each and every one of them has been about limiting the power of someone or some group. It is also designed in such a way to distract and fracture their opposition making it harder if not impossible to fight on many fronts. That's why it is being taken to the state level; many little battles so it seems like what happens in Wyoming isn't the business of citizens in another state.
This is a about power and who has it and how to make sure the core group behind this power play owns the foot the rest of us gets stomped with!
The fastest and easiest way to decrease the amount of abortions has always been and always will be to have all males over the age of 18 receive a vasectomy. This bypasses the fetus issue that Anti-Choice groups bring up as their reasoning. Unless Anti-Choice groups now consider sperm being alive. Vasectomies are simple procedures and can be reversed. If males are worried about having children in the future, then their sperm can be frozen and doled out at the time the male wants to have children.
/end sarcasm
I am still amazed at our government. And to think I was embarrassed to be a Floridian. Thanks guys, we don't look like the dumbest state anymore~!
If men could get pregnant they would have found a pill for it by now.
Moving the bill to the Ag committee seems more than odd to me, but it is probably just politics. As far as the letter written by the majority floor leader, that was awesome. If we had more responsible legislators, like this gentleman, our discourse would be so much better. I have always said as a man, my position on abortion is pro-choice by default - I can't get pregnant, so I can't tell a female what to do with her body...period.
Please see my blog about how Conservatives are dismantling women's rights wherever they can.
Click my name to get there.
Ladies; men are trying to legislate your vagina as their private property, so why not send the bill to the livestock comm. so that you are now totally chattel property? Time to take the men by the balls and take back what is rightfully yours. Their is a famous story of two countries at war, who fought for years, and the men would not end the senseless killing. The women of both villages got together, withheld sex from the men, and the war stopped. WOMEN OF AMERICA, STAND UP AND FIGHT..............
Eeeew private vagina property, is that the same thing as the pocket pu$$y made by ronco?
Lesman
I believe you are referring to anceint Greek play Lysistrata by Aristophones
A very fnny play even after over 2,000 years.
Tanzalone; I don't know your posts, I am sure that you are joking, but you are shouting the joke. I am hoping that your brain did not come from Ronco, and your post is still insulting as a joke. Everything, except race and gender is pretty much fair game, but you have to use the fun in context; your post is just crude, and I don't think that you contribute to this site. Please grow up and get your mind off of your penis!
What war was that, I am a student of history and have yet to read about this occurance.
The playwright Aristophanes lived at the time of the Peloponnesian War (a world war as far as the ancient Greeks were concerned). Lysistrata is, of course, fiction.
I've always said, if men got pregnant, not only would abortion be legal but you could get one at the Mcdonald's drive-thru. This is ridiculou!!
Any kind words for the preborn here--just hear callousness and cynicism on all sides. By the way, Casere, it's "number" of abortions, not "amount". Each is the death of an genetically complete individual. You could, however, refer to "the amount" of death occurring.
They did the same thing with the anti same-sex marriage bill. There's been an uprising of GLBTQ activism here, with straight people shredding their marriage licenses at Wyo State House. There was a march to the courthouse in Laramie on Valentine's day where same-sex couples applied for marriage licenses. There's been five rallies against the bills. We're fighting as hard as we can. We're working on all this anti-choice BS too. It's hard being progressive here.
Check out GetEqual WY on Facebook for more info!
RiotGrrlWyo-so glad you have the energy to continue to fight for equality (in the "Equality State" no less! Ironic...). Personally, I could never again live in Wyoming-people are just too narrow minded. I hope you and your supporters stay safe. I will be following you on GetEqual WY.
If men could get pregnant, they wouldn't have the power they now do. Or we'd have a very different culture. One that truly supports life.
It's sad to me how many "pro-lifers" are pro-death on everything else: from their support of guns, death row, and war to their opposition to basic anti-poverty measures. Why do we let them get away with calling themselves "pro-life"?
OregonMom: I have asked the same questions. Men love guns, war, are not concerned with poverty, believe it is OK to kill doctors who do abortions, BUT they still think they are pro-life!!!!! What a contradiction. Of course, as far as I am concerned men who do not believe in abortion for any reason knows he would never have to face the decision. It's easy to believe something if you aren't faced with the problem.
What is wrong with these people anyway? Why can't they just mind their own business rather than butt their noses in something as personal as being pregnant and faced with a problem that can only be that person's business and no one elses? BUT the pro-lifer seems to think it is his/her business and must keep hounding women over what is a very personal issue. GET A LIFE YOU PEOPLE AND MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS.
They're not "pro-life." They're "pro-forced-birth."
Actually, I believe they are more "pro-chastity" ... if people viewed sex as the significant and awesome thing it is (including the integral element of possibly creating new life), instead of as a form of recreation that everyone is entitled to as soon as they feel the urge, the need for abortion would go away.
If you're married, you aren't going to be chaste. You're going to be sexually active. And married women get abortions too.
There's no reason why any woman should be "chaste" until she's agreed to allow a man to control her life. Every women has the right to control her own life, including her sexuality. It's no one else's business what choices she makes.
The entire "women must be virgins until marriage" concept is rooted in the idea the woman's body and life doesn't belong to her. It's property for others to decide how to use and abuse even when she objects.
That's also the root behind trying to force birth: women don't have the right to decide for themselves.
People need to get over that idea. We're long beyond the days when women's bodies belonged to others and we're not going back.
Ah yes, the False Dilemma raises its ugly head once again. Did it ever occur to you that it could be both? Or would that mean that there is no simple answer to the question of abortion and thinking is hard?