Reproductive rights week planned to oppose new Okla. legislation
In response to a new Oklahoma legislation, some students at OU have planned a reproductive rights week beginning today that will culminate in a statewide protest on the state capitol Friday, according to a press release.
“This is not about being pro-choice or pro-life, Republican or Democrat,” Sandra Criswell, English and women’s and gender studies senior, stated in a press release. “We were hearing plenty of outrage, but there seemed to be no place to focus all of this energy. Hopefully, this protest will do that.”
House Bill 1595 is a new provision on Oklahoma abortion laws requiring an official record and reporting system for all abortions occurring within the state. This information would be made public and includes demographic information on the women.
Students from the OU Women’s and Gender Studies Student Association led this initiative, but students from other campuses across the state have joined with them against this legislation.
“There is power in numbers, so it is pertinent to come together, especially in a state that has continually ignored a serious call for change amongst its younger citizens,” Cait Thompson, Oklahoma State University graduate and founding member of Oklahomans for Reproductive Justice, stated in a press release. “We will no longer be silent or inactive.”
Pro-choice
Elizabeth Rucker, international and area studies and interdisciplinary perspectives on the environment sophomore, said she thinks reproductive rights week is a great way to start what could be an uncomfortable conversation but one that is important to address.
“I think this is a really good response to this bill,” said Rucker. “There wasn’t any publicity around this bill and there wasn’t a response in Oklahoma.”
Rucker said she views reproductive rights as a human right.
“Think of women in domestic violence situations or women who live in small spiritual towns,” she said. “It could be very damaging for them.”
Rucker said she really likes the idea of a march on the state capitol.
“What we’re hoping to get from the rally is to see people from everywhere there,” she said. “It’ll bring people together who are women’s activists in a place where women are shamed for having sex or getting an abortion.”
Rucker said she wants this state’s government to know that if they want their votes, they aren’t going to be able to pass this kind of legislation.
“I hope people on both sides — and this is a very hot-button issue — remember that we are talking about people and women who have had real experiences,” she said.
Rucker said she is trying to get the word out about the event.
“We need to respect everyone’s experiences and everyone’s viewpoints, and don’t attack people personally,” she said. “We need to listen to women because women are the ones not being listened to, on both sides of this, especially women who have had this experience.”
Lindsey Pease, letters junior, said she thinks Reproductive Rights Week is something really important and is glad the Women’s and Gender Studies Student Association have put so much work into it.
“Whether it is effective or not, I think it’s important that the Oklahoma community see that there is a body of women and men who find women’s rights important,” Pease said.
Pease said this legislature is something she had known about before, but she was excited to know that someone was doing something about it.
“I think it is imposing on women who are already in a fragile state, especially women who live in small towns,” Pease said.
Pease said she thinks this bill allows people in small towns to identify women, and she said it gives a lot of organizations within Oklahoma ways to judge other women based on race and class.
“I’m looking forward to educating other people, as well as myself, on this issue,” she said.
Pro-life
Cacey Myrick, international and area studies sophomore, said she believes once the reproduction actually happens, no one has the right to stop that.
“A lot of people, when they think of the right to reproduce, they think of the right to abort, but once you have an abortion something has already been reproduced,” she said.
Myrick said she thinks the information should be made public as long as the individual woman is held in confidentiality where the information would be pure statistics.
“I don’t think this restricts women’s rights because women still have the first choice of whether they have sex or not,” she said. “And whether or not to have an abortion would be a second choice.”
Myrick said in the matter of domestic violence, she thinks it is the responsibility of the mother to get herself out of that situation because it is harmful for anyone to be in.
“I think it’s a very hard issue that needs to be discussed,” she said. “But it needs to be discussed in a civil way and not so much by yelling like we saw a lot of at the ‘Justice for All’ event last year.”
Andrew Magnus, classics senior, said he thinks any bill that would slow down the abortion rate is good and worth any price.
“I believe when it comes to abortion, you have to look at the rights, not only of a woman, but the fetus, as well,” Magnus said.
Magnus said he realizes there are two sides to this issue, but if people view the fetus as a person then there shouldn’t ever really be more than one side.
“That’s a basic right, to live,” he said. “I view abortion as genocide because it kills millions of people.”
Magnus said he thinks women should have rights, but when it comes to abortion, unless the woman’s life is in danger if she carries the child to term, she shouldn’t have the right to kill it.
“If there is a question as to when a human being gains personhood, it would be truly horrifying to end that life,” he said. “Why would anyone take the chance to murder?”
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size
Print Story
Mail to Friend
More Stories
Comments
This is an extremely disappointing article. Nowhere does it mention dates and times for said events, and the opposing opinions presented in the article have nothing to do with Reproductive Rights Week. Lets keep it a little bit more focused and balanced next time, please.
Reproductive rights aren't just about abortion- it's about having proper sex education, access to condoms and birth control, and being able to get affordable health care for women. Women have different needs than men simply because they have reproductive organs.
The legislation regarding collecting statistics is absolutely horrid. Nowhere in the United States do state governments collect such data on medical procedures. We can't forget that that is what an abortion is- a medical procedure.
Andrew Magnus- you ought to open a textbook and read the definition of "genocide". Here, I'll do it for you.
Genocide is a term that was coined in the early 1940's by Raphael Lemkin. Genocide consists of "acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group."
Doesn't anything like abortion. Abortion is not the systematic killing of babies because they are babies. I get livid when ignorant people compare abortion to the Holocaust or the Armenian Genocide because it is not even close to being the same thing.
I hate this article so much. I don't understand the utility of student journalism if it can't even blandly report on student activism.
Who are the rando "sources" on slut shaming? It seems like Goodell just turned to her roommates and asked "You hate abortions, right? Quick give me some quotes on 'baby-killing bad' before deadline".
Myrick and Magnus have virtually no relevance to reproductive rights week. If they do have something to do with either the passage of HB 1595 or a possible student response to RRW, that should have been articulated. Instead we are presented with an overwhelming bias of the Daily that feels it necessary to remind students at OU that if there is any feminist presence, "real" Oklahomans think abortion evil. Apropos?
What is most enlightening, and which obviously escaped Goodell, is that rank and file women-haters don't see HB 1595 as a means to an end of ultimately getting enough information so that more sensitive steps can be taken to address the terrifying situation women find themselves in when they are pregnant with an unwanted child. Myrick and Magnus see the bill itself as a way to reduce abortions. They acknowledge and celebrate the fact that the bill violates the right to privacy.
Who are the random anti-choice people interviewed? Are they affiliated with a pro-life organization? Does Goodell keep a rolodex full of uneducated, anti-woman sources?
This is unfortunate. What could (and should) have been an article about student activism on campus was dumbed-down to a pathetic and irrelevant pro-choice v. pro-life debate.
Wait...what is going on for Reproductive Rights Week?
I'm glad there is finally going to be action taken against this ludicrous legislation. The bill is an obvious attempt by conservative lawmakers to stop abortions and harass women who have them. Not only is the legislation morally wrong, it's illegal. Patient-doctor confidentiality prohibits such information from being collected and posted as public information. Despite the fact that names won't be posted, it is still a violation because it asks for information such as race.
I find it interesting that some pro-lifers feel that women who are raped or subject to abuse are willingly letting it happen. Yes, because women just walk around with their legs spread asking to be impregnated agains their will. It's not always easy to get out of abuse situations for one reason or another so I think that argument is invalid.
Pro-lifers also seem to be under the impression that women just go around getting pregnant so they can have an abortion. This could not be further than the truth. Most abortions happen because the pregnancy will end in a stillborn, a baby with serious disability that is expected to die within the first year of life, or when the baby causes so much damage to the woman's body that she may die if the baby is born.
In these cases, why should an unborn mass of cells take precedence over a fully grown adult woman? As a society, we don't give life certificates, we give birth certificates. A person isn't a person in the eyes of society until it is born either through C-section or natural birth. It's not murder. Here's food for thought, many abortions happen naturally because the body recognizes there is something wrong with the fetus. Is that murder? Are you going to start charging women for murder by natural selection?
There are very few people out there that like abortions and many women would rather have their baby than not. However, in some extreme cases it is necessary.
"Myrick said in the matter of domestic violence, she thinks it is the responsibility of the mother to get herself out of that situation because it is harmful for anyone to be in."
This person completely fails to understand the complexities of abusive situations - what if the abuser threatens to kill the victim if they leave? What if the victim is financially dependent on their abuser? Abuse is not a cut-and-dry situation.
Also, this entire piece completely diverts the issue - Reproductive Rights week is a direct response to HB 1595, and this article barely addresses - and does not explain - what that is.
HB 1595 is a law that, if allowed to take effect, would require a woman seeking an abortion to fill out a 10 page questionnaire including questions about their relationship to the father, the county the abortion is performed in, etc. Then all this information would be placed on a publicly viewable database that would cost taxpayers well over $300,000 to maintain over the next two years alone.
This is an attack on reproductive rights because it creates busywork for doctors and violates women's privacy by posting details (that in many counties in Oklahoma) would make it possible to identify the woman having the abortion.
"I don’t think this restricts women’s rights because women still have the first choice of whether they have sex or not,” she said.
This is not the case when it comes to rape.
I can see the point of reporting illnesses as a public health issue, but abortion isn't a communicable disease. This is a private matter between a patient and her doctor and is not anyone's else business. If this law is passed, I hope it goes to the Supreme Court.
"Doesn't anything like abortion. Abortion is not the systematic killing of babies because they are babies. I get livid when ignorant people compare abortion to the Holocaust or the Armenian Genocide because it is not even close to being the same thing."
So killing millions of random people is better than killing specific people? It kills babies not because they are babies, but, why?
Here's a similarity:
"A person isn't a person in the eyes of society until it is born either through C-section or natural birth. "
Society deciding who is, and who is not, a person.
"Most abortions happen because the pregnancy will end in a stillborn, a baby with serious disability that is expected to die within the first year of life, or when the baby causes so much damage to the woman's body that she may die if the baby is born."
Most? Define "Most"
"It's not murder. Here's food for thought, many abortions happen naturally because the body recognizes there is something wrong with the fetus. Is that murder? Are you going to start charging women for murder by natural selection?"
By that logic, murder is okay because accidents happen, or theft is okay because people also lose things from time to time.
Since the article isn't about the bill or the event, but abortion in general:
Do the anti-life people have anything to offer except name calling?
Is being against groups that protect rape, against women?
Is being against groups that will do anything to promote abortion for their own profit, against women?
Or is it just easier to label people you disagree with, and come up with reasons why they don't have the right to their opinion, than it is to openly talk about things?
I think this was a poorly written article. I was expecting to read about actual events, so i might actually go , but instead it's just a typical debate about for or against abortion.
HB 1595 is a law that is going dehumanize women by exposing them to the world. This exposes a woman's privacy and whether you are pro-choice or pro-life you have to agree to extent that that's wrong. I mean how would you like it if all of your medical history was exposed to the world?
@landsend
Rape actually only accounts for about half of one percent of the cases of abortion: http://www.abortiontv.com/Misc/AbortionS...
When 99.5% are for results of a choice, I think she's allowed to make that statement.
Post a comment
Commenting requires registration.