by Meghan Rapp, Sr. Program Manager, State Strategies

The Kentucky State Senate last week passed an ultrasound bill last week that is ridiculous, medically unnecessary, and downright insulting to women. Senate Bill 9 (passed 32-5) would require that a woman seeking an abortion in Kentucky wait 24 hours and also view an ultrasound of the fetus. If a woman chooses to avert her eyes from the ultrasound, a doctor would still have to describe the image to her. 

Restrictions like this aren’t uncommon – in fact, 20 states either require that an ultrasound take place or be offered to a woman prior to the abortion procedure.  What’s uncommon – and especially troubling – in this Kentucky bill is that women are required to view the ultrasound or to have a description given to them.  Not only is it insulting to think that a woman doesn’t understand what the decision she’s just made, but it’s flat-out a medically unnecessary procedure. On top of all this, the bill requires a woman to wait 24 hours after a consult before having an abortion. Insulting- again – as though a woman doesn’t understand what she’s doing an needs the government to force her to think about it. This is devastating, as well, for women who can’t afford to take the time off again to go back to the clinic in 24 hours, can’t afford to hire child care for another day, or don’t have access to reliable transportation.

by Nikki Serapio, Manager, New Media Strategies

Some of you probably remember the infamous tenure of former U.S. Senator Rick Santorum (PA), who was widely condemned time and time again for his anti-gay remarks, his extreme anti-choice views...basically, his entire out-of-touch and fundamentalist social agenda.

Well, Santorum is back on the political stage, ostensibly to position himself as a viable 2012 Republican Presidential nominee. And while other potential nominees have been criticizing the Obama administration lately on a number of economic issues, Santorum has differentiated himself by lasering in on what he thinks is truly outrageous: how an African American President could possibly have the gall to support abortion rights.

by Abby Rosenstein, State Strategies Coordinator

Mayor Joan Foster of Lynchburg, Virginia has announced a Day of Purity Proclamation, and in doing so, has joined the Liberty Council's "Day of Purity," to take place on February 14, 2011.

This year will be the eighth annual Day of Purity - "a day on which students can make a public demonstration of their committment to remain sexually pure, in mind and actions." Liberty Council encourages participants to wear white, sign a "purity pledge," and wear wristbands to signal their intention to remain abstinent outside of marriage. The Day of Purity's facebook fan page states that they "promote that you DO have the choice to remain sexually pure," but then goes on to state that the Day of Purity "is designed for students of all ages who commit to remain sexually pure until marriage." This isn't about an individual's choice to abstain from sex - this is about enforcing a singular ideology on everyone, regardless of whether or not it is right for them, or even includes them at all.

by Sarah Audelo, Senior Manager, Domestic Policy

This weekend the Senate voted on two pieces of legislation that we had mobilized our activists around: the DREAM Act and the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. 

The good news is that in a decisive 63-33 vote, the Senate decided to end debate on the issue of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell repeal (60 votes were needed), which lead to a 65-31 vote (51 were needed) that ultimately will repeal the measure. There is a 60 day window for the President and Joint Chiefs to move forward on “officially” repealing the measure (create a process, etc.), but overall this is great news to celebrate! 

On a sadder note, the Senate voted 55-41 to end debate on the DREAM Act.

by Sarah Audelo, Senior Manager of Domestic Policy, Advocates for Youth, and Lindsay McClusky, President, United States Student Association

 
As the Senate prepares to vote on the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and the passage of the DREAM Act, it would be wise for President Obama, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, and their colleagues in both houses of Congress to take a moment and recognize the joint significance of these two pieces of legislation. Together, these two bills are a basic test of social justice for our elected leaders and for the country – and a political litmus test for the Millennial generation. 

Exciting news! Applications to become a Great American Condom Campaign Spring Semester SafeSite are now open!

In case you forgot, The Great American Condom Campaign is a youth-led grassroots movement to reduce unintended pregnancies and the spread of HIV and other sexually transmitted infections by normalizing condom use on college and university campuses. Students from across the country apply to become SafeSites, individual condom distribution points, and receive a box of 500 Trojan condoms to distribute to their peers. SafeSites are also tasked with educating their peers about safer sex and advocating on campus and within their community for the sexual and reproductive health rights of young adults.


Sound like fun? Apply for the GACC NOW!

By Amplify Columnist Jaclyn Friedman, crossposted from www.amplifyyourvoice.org

I'm hardly the first person to say this, and I certainly hope I'm not the last, but what is up with Hollywood's movie-rating system?

The latest installment of MPAA madness is over the upcoming film Blue Valentine, starring Michelle Williams and Ryan Reynolds in a difficult relationship. The film evidently features three fairly-explicit sex scenes, though nothing that sounds outside of what I've seen in plenty of other places. Which is why the MPAA's recent decision to give it the feared NC17 rating is so outrageous.

A little primer on NC17: while “R” means the under-17 set has to be accompanied by a parent or other adult, “NC17” means no one under 18 is allowed in the movie theater, period. Because of that, it’s basically a box-office and award-season kiss of death, sending the message that the movie is just too sexually explicity to be taken seriously. (As if to prove my point, the highest-grossing NC17 film in history was the unintentionally campy classic Showgirls, which netted a paltry $30 mil domestically.) As far as I can tell, it's almost always used to steer "kids" clear of sex, rather than violence. Which is problem number one: why is watching sex more damaging to kids than watching violence?