Wednesday, August 31, 2011

JCPenney's Girls Are Too Pretty For Homework T-Shirt Sends Worst Message Ever (PHOTO)

Sometimes something is so wrong you can't believe it's real. Case in point: this JCPenney back-to-school shirt for "Girls 7-16." We're sure it's made of the finest "imported" fabric, but the message tears apart in the common sense wash. We can only assume this is from the chain's new Courtney Stodden line of girls wear.

A word of advice to all clothing manufacturers, designers and stores: please don't use your clothing to encourage young girls to value being cutesy-pies over smarty-pantses. That's kind of not what we're going for as a species.

Texas Sonogram Law: Judge Strikes Down Key Provisions Of Abortion Bill

Texas Sonogram Law

JIM VERTUNO 08/30/11 08:42 PM ET AP

AUSTIN, Texas — A federal judge on Tuesday blocked key provisions of Texas' new law requiring a doctor to perform a sonogram before an abortion, ruling the measure violates the free speech rights of both doctors and patients.

U.S. District Judge Sam Sparks upheld the requirement that sonograms be performed, but struck down the provisions requiring doctors to describe the images to their patients and requiring women to hear the descriptions.

The law made exceptions for women who were willing to sign statements saying they were pregnant as a result of rape or incest or that their fetus had an irreversible abnormality. Sparks questioned whether the Republican-controlled Texas Legislature was trying to "permanently brand" women who are victims of sexual assault.

The law – one of dozens of anti-abortion measures that advanced through state capitals across the United States this year – takes effect Thursday. The New York-based Center for Reproductive Rights had sued to block it.

Supporters argued the law ensures women fully understand what an abortion entails and said some women have regretted having abortions. They said the law would lead to fewer abortions in Texas. About 81,000 abortions are performed every year in Texas.

Opponents argued that requiring doctors to describe a fetus' features would force them to say things against their will and would violate medical ethics requiring doctors to respect a patient's autonomy and act in the patient's best interest.

The Texas Medical Association opposed the law because it dictated when a doctor must perform a procedure and how the doctor must deal with a patient. While a pre-abortion ultrasound is routine, it is not considered medically necessary.

Sparks wrote that forcing doctors to discuss the results with a patient who may not want to listen "compels physicians to advance an ideological agenda with which they may not agree, regardless of any medical necessity and irrespective of whether the pregnant women wish to listen."

Sparks was particularly troubled by the requirement that victims of sexual assault or incest sign statements attesting to that fact to get around the provision. That would require women to disclose "extremely personal, medically irrelevant facts" that will be "memorialized in records that are, at best, semi-private," Sparks wrote.

"(It) is difficult to avoid the troubling conclusion the Texas Legislature either wants to permanently brand women who choose to get abortions, or views these certifications as potential evidence to be used against physicians and women," Sparks wrote.

Sparks also struck down several enforcement penalties for doctors who faced losing their medical license and possible criminal misdemeanor prosecution if they did not comply.

The ruling is a "huge victory for women in Texas and a clear signal to the state Legislature that it went too far when it passed this law," said Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights.

The group said it had already received notice the state plans to appeal.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry, a Republican who is running for president, was critical of Tuesday's ruling. Perry had made the law one of his top priorities for the 2011 legislative session.

"Every life lost to abortion is a tragedy and today's ruling is a great disappointment to all Texans who stand in defense of life," Perry said in a statement.

State Sen. Dan Patrick, R-Houston, a key sponsor of the measure, said he was confident the law would be upheld on appeal.

"It is clear to me, from the inflammatory language in the order, that Judge Sparks was predisposed to this decision," Patrick said.

Sparks represented doctors and hospitals as an attorney for about 30 years before being appointed a federal judge in 1991.

A similar Oklahoma measure, passed in 2010, has been put on hold there pending legal challenges.

News and Action Summary, August 30, 2011

Email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser.
NOW News and Action Summary

National Organization for Women:
News & Action Summary

AUGUST 30, 2011


Take Action: Take Action: Tell Obama "Jobs, Not Cuts"

Take Action!

Please call and email the White House immediately. Urge the president to support a strong jobs plan and also to reject cuts in Social Security, Medicaid, family planning, and other important programs. The president needs to hear that women need jobs, not cuts! Take action!

Hot off the Press: Love Your Body Posters!

2011 Love Your Body Day Poster, by Kyla Hollis, Poster Contest Grand Prize Winner

Join NOW Foundation in celebrating Love Your Body Day on Oct. 19. Get in the spirit by ordering the 2011 poster (and other products). Supplies are limited, so order NOW!

Webinar: Next Steps with Wal-Mart

Wal-Mart Always Discrminates NOW round

Take Action NOW: For over a decade, NOW has continued to speak out against the unfair treatment of women workers at Wal-Mart. NOW is partnering with Wal-Mart workers, UFCW, and other allies in moving forward. Please join us by webinar on Wed., Sept. 21, at 8pm for a strategic overview of coordinated efforts taking place around the country. Learn how you can get involved - Register NOW!

National Organization for Women Celebrates Women's Equality Day

On Aug. 26 we celebrated the anniversary of Women's Equality Day, in honor of the 19th amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which guaranteed women the right to vote. Read more »

NOW Applauds Diallo for Courage, Condemns Prosecutors, Defense and Media in DSK Case

NOW deplores the decision to drop Nafissatou Diallo's charges of sexual assault against Dominique Strauss-Kahn. This miscarriage of justice exhibits all the hallmarks of a society that tolerates sexual violence by blaming and shaming the survivors. Read more »

The Truth About the Debt Ceiling Agreement

You may have read that the debt ceiling agreement's budget cuts are prudent, responsible and an essential step toward righting the U.S. economy. It's not so. In NOW's view, the agreement is unfair, unbalanced, and will primarily hurt women, seniors, poor families and children. Read more »

Join or Give

Support NOW, Get Ms.

Support NOW, Get Ms.

Through Sept. 15, we are partnering with Ms. magazine, an award-winning feminist publication. When you donate $25 to NOW you can receive Ms. magazine for one year -- for free! And if you're not a NOW member, join today and get a Ms. magazine with your $25 join.


Find more on NOW's Media Hall of Shame and Say It, Sister! NOW's Blog for Equality


Twitter Facebook Flickr YouTube


Read more on NOW Read This

GET INVOLVED: Take Action | Join NOW | Find Your Nearest Chapter

SUPPORT NOW: Support NOW's Work | Monthly Giving | Shop Amazon

STAY CONNECTED: Say It, Sister! | The Media Hall of Shame | RSS | Twitter | Facebook

WAS THIS EMAIL FORWARDED TO YOU? Subscribe to our lists.

This email was sent to (Salsa Supporter Key# 30682434). You are receiving this email because you are subscribed to NOW's News & Action Summary. Visit your subscription management page to modify your email communication preferences or to update your personal profile. Unsubscribe from NOW emails.

empowered by Salsa

Friday, August 26, 2011

National Organization for Women Celebrates Women's Equality Day

NOW Press Release

For Immediate Release
Contact: Latoya Veal, 202-628-8669, ext. 116

National Organization for Women Celebrates Women's Equality Day
Statement of NOW President Terry O'Neill

August 26, 2011

Today we celebrate the anniversary of Women's Equality Day, in honor of the 19th amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which guaranteed women the right to vote. It took nearly 150 years for the women of this country to win the right to vote -- a right that was originally denied us by the founding fathers of our nation. And it wasn't until 45 years later, under the 1965 Voting Rights Act, when women of color won full voting rights.

Yet in the 21st century, our voting rights are under attack by conservative state legislatures. According to Campus Progress, seven states now mandate voters to produce a photo ID at the polls, up from just two in 2008. These requirements make it more difficult for women, seniors, low-income people and especially people of color to cast their ballot. As many as 32 million women of voting age do not have documentation with their current legal name.

NOW is outraged that women, who fought so hard for suffrage and particularly women of color, who were the last to secure that right, could now be the first to lose it. These laws could deeply impact women at a time when we need to stop the right-wing from continuing to wage its war on women. Simply put, we need more women at the polls in 2012 to elect leaders who will stand up for our rights.

### | Press Room | Support NOW's Work

CANCELLED - Saturday Rally & March

National Organization for Women

The rally and march that NOW President Terry O'Neill was scheduled to speak at on Saturday has been cancelled due to the impending hurricane. We will let you know when it has been rescheduled.

For your reference, here is the previous email we sent out about the now cancelled event.


Thursday, August 25, 2011

Saturday - NOW President Terry O'Neill Speaking At Rally & March on Washington

NOW Action Alert

NOW President Terry O'Neill to Speak on Saturday

take action

Join us on Saturday to celebrate the 48th anniversary of the historic March on Washington and the opening of the new Martin Luther King Jr. National Memorial.

NOW President Terry O'Neill will speak to our ongoing struggle to achieve the dream of full equality for all. We would love to have as many NOW activists as possible stand with us at this momentous event.

What: Rally and March for Jobs, Justice and the American Dream
Who: NOW, National Action Network, Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, and Allies
When: Saturday Aug. 27; Rally starts at 12pm; March steps off at 1:30pm
Where: Constitution Ave. NW at 17th St. NW

For more information:

take action and then donate

More Actions

From Women's eNews: USA Could Be Just 3 States Away from ERA

USA Could Be Just 3 States Away from ERA

By Bernadette Cahill

WeNews commentator

Thursday, August 25, 2011

Celebrations of Women's Equality Day are getting a little empty without passage of an ERA, says Bernadette Cahill. With a bit of help from Obama we could be just three states away. Join United 4 Equality and help pass HJ Resolution 47!

(WOMENSENEWS)--Nearly a century ago, women campaigning for the vote stood in the freezing snow, the blazing sun and the pelting rain outside the White House silently holding banners asking, "Mr. President, How Long Must Women Wait for Liberty?"

Now, as Women's Equality Day rolls around yet again tomorrow--celebrating 91 years of U.S. women's right to vote--the message of those banners needs resurrecting, but with a modern twist.

They should read: "Mr. President, How Long Must Women Wait for Equality?"

If President Barack Obama would get behind House Joint Resolution 47, his answer to us all could be: "Not long at all."

Rep. Tammy Baldwin, a Wisconsin Democrat, chose the 100th anniversary of International Women's Day to introduce the resolution last March. It seeks to remove the deadline from the original 1972 bill on the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) that passed both houses of Congress and was ratified by 35 states before the deadline expired in 1982.

The deadline was not part of the original ERA and by 1982 it had already been extended by three years.

HJ Resolution 47 would require passage by a simple majority of both houses.

After that, ERA ratification would need only three more states.

Those votes could come from any of these holdouts: Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Nevada, South Carolina, Utah and Virginia.

The ERA states: Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state on account of sex. In 2011, it's hard to think what lawmakers in these states should find controversial about that.

Carolyn Cook is founder and CEO of United 4 Equality, the Washington group that devised the HJ Resolution 47 strategy of removing the deadline. Cook and her colleagues worked on it for three years and they aim to have the final three states ratified by 2015.

Starting Over Fall-Back Strategy

The only other option is to start the ERA over again, destroying the work of women more than 30 years ago who campaigned for and won 35 ratified states.

"Ours is the new strategy. Start-over is the fall-back," said Cook.

She describes the group as "the voice of the 15 states that are working to ratify the ERA today." United 4 Equality also represents the 35 states that already ratified it and the 72 percent of the population who must not be disenfranchised, she said, referring to the percentage of the population in the states who have already ratified it.

ERA workers have encountered a huge obstacle at the state level in regards to the deadline. Its removal would allow women who fought for the ERA in the 1970s the chance to see it passed in their lifetime.

A speedy passage of HJ Resolution 47 by Congress would continue a long history of bipartisan support for the ERA, helping bring women under the protection of the Constitution faster.

Alice Paul launched the ERA 88 years ago. Paul was a Republican and the architect of the final groundbreaking campaign that won women the vote with ratification of the 19th Amendment in 1920. "Iron Jawed Angels," the HBO movie starring Hilary Swank, immortalized her story and that of other members of the National Woman's Party.

Republicans originally introduced the ERA in Congress in 1923 and the Republican party put it on its platform in 1940. The Democrats followed in 1944, and it remained in both platforms for several decades. With the ERA's apparent demise in 1982, neither party has seriously supported it, although Democrats have re-introduced the start-over measure in every Congress since 1982.

Obama should now be promoting a bipartisan vote on HJ Resolution 47. He relied on women's votes during his election and now he could finally repay the favor.

Increasingly Hollow Celebration

Women's Equality Day was first proclaimed in 1971, more than 50 years after the huge victory of the 19th Amendment. As the years pass and the ERA remains in limbo, the idea of celebrating women's equality because they won the vote nearly a century ago rings increasingly hollow.

For the sad fact in 21st century United States is that women – no matter what we might think to the contrary – do not have equal rights under the law.

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia stated the fact of women's continuing inequality in the United States clearly in an interview that appeared last January in California Lawyer magazine, when he said the Constitution does not prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex. He added that when legislators passed the 14th Amendment into law in the mid-19th century it wasn't with the intention to apply the equal protection clause to sex discrimination and that applying that clause in judicial decisions about sex discrimination is an error.

Many women's groups castigated Justice Scalia for what he said, but no amount of "shooting the messenger" will change the fact that equality of the sexes does not exist in the United States in 2011.

Some Supreme Court justices do interpret the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment to extend some protections under the Constitution to women, but as they do so with less stringent standards than they apply to race, by simple logic, equality for women does not exist.

Potential Changes

The ERA is important, because it would change that. If the ERA was already part of the Constitution, for instance, the Supreme Court might have made a different decision in the Wal-Mart equal pay class-action suit that women lost in June. Or President Obama might not have needed to sign the Lily Ledbetter bill into law in early 2009 if the Supreme Court had had the ERA's sex equality standards in Ledbetter's equal pay case.

Our lack of an ERA is a huge national failure.

It creates disabilities for both sexes. Take these examples. Federal laws that prescribe equality, such as Title IX, which has helped women with equal opportunity in sports and elsewhere, are vulnerable to repeal and modification because no equality exists in our nation's fundamental law, which is the standard that applies to all law.

The ERA may have also tipped the outcome of a recent case in favor of men. In June, in Flores-Villar v. United States, the U.S. Supreme Court endorsed apparent sex discrimination against men when its 4-4 vote allowed a federal law to remain in place that makes it harder for fathers than mothers to transmit citizenship to their out-of-wedlock children born abroad.

Women currently bear the greater burden of an unratified ERA, however, as they lack a key tool to fight unequal pay or other unequal penalties under the law even as they do not enjoy equal rights.

U.S. ambassadors have promoted equal rights for women in the Iraq and Afghanistan constitutions. Not having something similar here in the U.S. makes a mockery of the United States' position as a world beacon for human rights.

Bernadette Cahill is an author and journalist based in Little Rock, Ark., and Boone, N.C. She specializes in women's issues and women's history.

For more information:

United 4 Equality:

Wednesday, August 24, 2011

Women's eNews: NOW Sees Dangerous Deficit-Slashing Season Ahead

NOW Sees Dangerous Deficit-Slashing Season Ahead

By Sharon Johnson

WeNews senior correspondent

Wednesday, August 24, 2011

Given the chances that the 12-person "super committee" in Congress might cut into the mainstays of the social safety net, NOW and other advocacy groups are keeping a watchful, worried eye on the next three months.

(WOMENSENEWS)--The best outcome for the "super committee" of congressional deficit-slashers could be deadlock, says Terry O'Neill, president of the Washington-based National Organization for Women (NOW), the country's largest women's rights group.

That's because Social Security and Medicare--programs upon which women disproportionately depend--would be exempt from the automatic $1.2 trillion in cuts that will go into effect if the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction cannot agree on a plan or if Congress defeats its recommendations.

And Social Security and Medicare are too important to too many women to be on the table say O'Neill and other women's advocates.

The automatic cuts would be equally drawn from military and domestic programs, the latter of which O'Neill says should also be high on the watch-out list.

"Women's groups will have to work very hard to ensure that programs such as domestic violence prevention, women's health services, child care and job training are not cut," she said in a phone interview. "The next three months will determine the fate of many programs."

The super committee--equally divided among Democrats and Republicans--is charged with proposing at least $1.5 trillion in federal budget cuts over the next 10 years. A minimum of seven votes are needed to approve recommendations that will be sent to the House and Senate for fast track votes by Dec. 23.

O'Neill points out the poor representation of women on the super committee.

"Although women are 51 percent of the United States population and hold 17 percent of seats in Congress, only one woman--Sen. Patty Murray, Democrat of Washington--was appointed," said O'Neill.

In the past, women's groups were able to defeat proposals to privatize Social Security and transform Medicare into a voucher program by appealing to the 535 members of Congress, she added. "But this time, all it will take is the vote of seven members of this committee to recommend changes in programs such as Social Security, which has been the bedrock of women's financial security for seven decades."

Tax Cut Predictions

Marcia D. Greenberger is co-president of the Washington-based National Women's Law Center, which proposes new laws and litigates cases protecting women. She predicts the committee won't recommend tax increases for the country's wealthiest people, even though President Barack Obama and Democratic leaders in Congress have said that additional revenue must be part of any deficit reduction deal.

"All six Republicans signed the pledge not to raise taxes, which was proposed by Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform," she said in a phone interview. "Lobbyists for powerful interest groups that want to keep tax increases off the table will be targeting the committee."

Members of the Super Committee






Max Baucus



Chair of Finance Committee

John Kerry



Chair of Foreign Relations Committee

Jon Kyl



Deputy Majority Leader

Patty Murray



Democratic Conference Secretary and Democratic Co-chair of Super Committee

Rob Portman



Former White House Budget Director under George W. Bush

Pat Toomey



Member of Senate Finance Committee


Xavier Becerra



Vice-chair, Democratic Caucus

Dave Camp



Chair of Ways and Means Committee

James Clyburn



Assistant Minority Leader

Jeb Hensarling



Chair, Republican Conference and Republican Co-chair of Super Committee

Fred Upton



Chair, Energy and Commerce Committee

Chris Van Hollen



Senior Democrat on Budget Committee

The Washington-based Center for Responsive Politics, a nonprofit organization that tracks campaign spending, reports that the finance, real estate and insurance sectors--all of which oppose tax hikes on the country's highest income earners--have contributed more than $50 million to the campaigns of the dozen super committee members since 1990.

Like O'Neill, Greenberger is worried about the super committee.

"Older women who rely on their Social Security checks to survive during retirement and younger women who would have no health care without Medicaid will be in dire straits if this super committee recommends the proposals floated by the deficit hawks during the recent stalemate in Congress over increasing the national debt limit," she said.

Although Social Security has not contributed one penny to the deficit and has sufficient funds to pay full benefits to every American for the next 25 years, the committee is expected to consider a Republican proposal to change the inflation formula for cost of living adjustments for beneficiaries.

The typical 65-year-old's benefits would drop by $130 a year if this so-called chained formula were adopted. This would take a heavy toll on the 1-in-4 older women who depend on Social Security for 90 percent of their income.

By age 95, the annual benefit would drop by almost $1,400, a 9.2 percent reduction from the current scheduled benefits. Two-thirds of Social Security recipients over age 85 are women.

'Cruel Ponzi Scheme'

Republican co-chair Jeb Hensarling of Texas, who has labeled Social Security a "cruel Ponzi scheme," will need the support of two Democrats on the committee to change the cost of living adjustment formula.

Republican Rep. Fred Upton of Michigan announced Aug. 16 that he would oppose cuts in Social Security to current beneficiaries because "it is hard to tell an 82-year-old that he must go back to work."

However, Upton did not rule out support for a proposal by Obama's deficit reduction commission, headed by Erskine B. Bowles, President Clinton's former chief of staff, and former Republican Sen. Alan K. Simpson, that the age of eligibility for full Social Security benefits be increased to 69.

Although Democratic committee members Senators Murray, Max Baucus of Montana and John Kerry of Massachusetts have voted to preserve Social Security over the years, they have expressed interest in changing Social Security during the recent deficit negotiations because of concern about the impact of longer life spans on Social Security reserves.

Obama singled his readiness to adopt a new cost of living adjustment formula during the debt limit talks with House Speaker John Boehner, Republican of Ohio.

"The recommendation by the Bowles-Simpson commission met strong opposition from Democrats in Congress because many workers in physically demanding jobs cannot work until age 69," said O'Neill of NOW. "Unfortunately, it is going to be far easier to push proposals like this through this time because there will be no amendments to the bills considered by the House and Senate. The vote will be a simple yes or no; so many members of Congress who have strong objections to these changes will end up supporting them."

Sharon Johnson is a New York freelance writer.

For more information:

National Women's Law Center:

Center for Responsive Politics:

National Organization for Women (NOW):

Tuesday, August 23, 2011

NOW Applauds Diallo for Courage, Condemns Prosecutors, Defense and Media in DSK Case

NOW Press Release

For Immediate Release
Contact: Latoya Veal, 202-628-8669, ext. 116

NOW Applauds Diallo for Courage,
Condemns Prosecutors, Defense and Media in DSK Case
Statement of NOW President Terry O'Neill

August 23, 2011

The National Organization for Women deplores the decision to drop Nafissatou Diallo's charges of sexual assault against Dominique Strauss-Kahn. This miscarriage of justice exhibits all the hallmarks of a society that tolerates sexual violence by blaming and shaming the survivors -- but the real shame belongs with the perpetrators and the prosecutors who allow them to walk off scot-free.

NOW applauds Ms. Diallo for bravely coming forward to tell her story. Despite attempts to bully her into silence, Ms. Diallo did not back down, and she stands as an example to all women that we can, with dignity, demand justice for ourselves -- that women who are sexually assaulted need not be perfect in order to be believed.

The Manhattan prosecutors, Mr. Strauss-Kahn's lawyers and the media all deserve to be condemned for their shameful conduct in this case. Sexist, racist, classist and ethnic stereotypes were all called into play in order to discredit Ms. Diallo. These attacks not only helped ensure that Mr. Strauss-Kahn would escape criminal prosecution, but they also help foster a climate where women victims of sexual violence fear being re-victimized by law enforcement and the press.

This case underscores the fact that we still have a long way to go in ending violence against women, and NOW will not rest until we achieve that goal. Ms. Diallo's courage gives us inspiration to hold our heads high and keep striving.

### | Press Room | Support NOW's Work

Wednesday, August 10, 2011

Fox News contributor compares birth control to manicures and pedicures

Dear Maddalena,

Don’t let Fox News commentators attack no-cost birth control.

Send a message to HHS now to say that all women should have access to contraceptive coverage, regardless of their employer.

take action

It’s just plain insulting. A Fox News contributor from Family PAC Federal compared no-cost birth control to getting manicures and pedicures.1

But it’s not just right-wing groups that are leading the attack. Rep. Steve King of Iowa spoke out against birth control on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives. He said the new no-cost birth-control regulations would make us "a dying civilization."2

Bottom line: we can’t let anti-choice distortions like these go unanswered. Please send your comment to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) in support of contraceptive coverage for all women.

Birth control is used by nearly all women in the U.S. In fact, 98 percent of women use birth control at some point in their lives. It’s incredible that, thanks to the Obama administration, expensive copays will be a thing of the past. Women are going to feel the magnitude of HHS’s decision every time they go to the pharmacy counter and pick up their birth control without paying a copay.

It’s such a tremendous leap forward. But there is one piece left undone: certain religious employers may be allowed to opt out of the requirement to cover birth control at no cost.

HHS is accepting comments on this refusal provision, and we have a brief window of time to weigh in. Send a message to HHS now to say that all women should have access to contraceptive coverage, regardless of where they work.

This potential opt-out provision is the last chance for anti-choice activists to weigh in – and you can bet that the smear campaign we’re seeing is part of their strategy. It’s up to us to stop them from turning the public against no-cost birth control.

Here are the facts that we must get out: 98 percent of women use contraception at some point in their lives. Under the health-care law, women can choose the birth-control method that she and her doctor agree works best for her, whether that’s a pill, patch, IUD, or something else, without a copay. When more women use birth control, we should see fewer unintended pregnancies and better health outcomes for women.

It’s up to us to stand up for all women who use birth control, regardless of where they work. Please send your comment to HHS in support of near-universal coverage for contraception.

Thank you for your unending work to improve women’s access to birth control.

My best,

Nancy Keenan

Nancy Keenan
President, NARAL Pro-Choice America

1 - "Fox ‘Expert’ Blasts Expanding Access To Birth Control: ‘Are We Going To Do Pedicures And Manicures As Well?’," Think Progress, August 2, 2011

2 - "Steve King: Covering Birth Control Will Make Us ‘A Dying Civilization’," Talking Points Memo, August 2, 2011

Wednesday, August 3, 2011

Stand Up in Support of Dr. LeRoy Carhart on Sunday; Thursday Hill Event Canceled

NOW Action Alert

Stand Up in Support of Dr. LeRoy Carhart on Sunday;
Thursday Hill Event Canceled

Join us at the Summer Celebration of Choice

Please join us in supporting abortion provider and women's health activist, Dr. LeRoy Carhart in Germantown, Maryland, on Sunday, Aug. 7, at 1:30pm.

NOW has been standing strong in Germantown all week in response to protests led by the anti-abortion extremist group Operation Rescue. While we encourage you to sign up for other daily shifts at, we want as many people as possible to join us on Sunday to demonstrate our support for a woman's right to choose. If you have questions, please call 202-628-8669.

What: Peaceful pro-choice presence
Where: Wisteria Drive and Father Hurley Blvd., Germantown, Md.
When: Sunday, Aug. 7
Time: 1:30pm
Questions: 202-628-8669

Important: Please wear comfortable clothing (i.e. tennis shoes, clothes with pockets, hat) and bring sunscreen, snacks and lots of water.

Note: The previously scheduled press conference for Thursday, Aug. 4, on Capitol Hill has been canceled.

take action and then donate

More Actions