serving of cute

bthny:

shorterexcerpts:

motherjones:

“Taking away insurance coverage of abortion interferes in a woman’s ability to make personal, private decisions with her doctor,” says Ted Miller, spokesman for NARAL Pro-Choice America, which produced the map.

Plus, an interactive map that shows which states use scare tactics, guilt trips, and discredited science to keep women from getting abortions.

What particularly worries me about these laws, especially the really restictive, the guys (and they’re always guys)-who-proposed-it-should-be-hit-in-the-nuts-with-a-baseball-bat-the-bills-are-so-shitty bills, I think those bills are written with a “please, challenge this in the courts” mentality.

Because these misogynistic assholes can see what a conservative piece-of-crap the Roberts court is, and probably has visions of a 5-4 ruling largely overturning Roe dancing in their heads.

It’s true that a lot of these laws are written with the intention of challenging Roe in the Supreme Court, but I think I remember reading somewhere that the Roberts court had previously declined to hear abortion challenges. That kind of indicates to me that it’s not a priority for this court. If a challenge did get in front of the Court, I’d be worried, but they tend to get stalled long before they reach that level. Awareness of the existence and prevalence of these laws is good, though.