Last week, Governor Eliot Spitzer introduced the Reproductive Health and Privacy Protection Act, a bill that would ensure New Yorkers’ right to choose.
Although New York is generally viewed as a “safe state� in regards to reproductive rights, its actual current legislation is totally outdated. Abortion is even technically criminalized under New York’s homicide statute.
Not only would the bill make sure that women will be able to make decisions about their own health and private decisions, it could serve as an model to other states. There’s not much we can do to change the SCOTUS decision, but we can at the very least we should do what we can to protect the rights we have left.
Check out the actual bill and the Governor's memo here.
P.S. Spitzer also introduced a bill last week that would legalize gay marriage. Go, Gov.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: New York introduces reproductive rights bill..
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/5200
Weekly Feministing Newsletter
Feministing RSS Feed
I'm so happy to have Spitzer as my Governor! I saw him speak at the Family Planning Advocates conference in Albany a month ago, and he promised us that he would introduce this legislation . . . I was so thrilled to see that he's actually following through :)
I wish someone would pass a bill that states that no law that endangers the health or safety of women (aka the SCOTUS decision last week) is permissible under state law. Therefore, there would be a Constitutional testing of that law and the SCOTUS would either have to reverse itself or acknowledge that the Federal Government can and will limit the safety and health of women in regards to their "reproductive" decisions. Okay, high in the sky thinking...and probably not legally sound, but just putting it out there.
Yet another reason why I never should have left New York for Tex-Ass.
Yet another reason why I never should have left New York for Tex-Ass.
the SCOTUS would either have to reverse itself or acknowledge that the Federal Government can and will limit the safety and health of women in regards to their "reproductive" decisions.
I kinda like the idea, Heather, but I would be extremely worried that--in the current climate--the Supreme Court might actually strike down such a law and strengthen it's anti-medical/anti-women precedent.
It's true that the South Dakota voters struck down a law that didn't have life/health & rape/incest exceptions . . . but the population of a whole state is a lot more wiggle room than the opinions of 9 justices.
I have never been prouder to be a New Yorker. Go Spitzer.
:-)
Go Spitzer!!
In Texas, the legislature just blocked the requirement of the HPV vaccine for schoolkids.
Can we swap? I think Perry is trying not to be an asshat, but the good ol' boy network is just full of "family values."
Grr.
I would like a ticket for New York, please :)
I wish someone would pass a bill that states that no law that endangers the health or safety of women (aka the SCOTUS decision last week) is permissible under state law.
Wouldn't that eliminate the death penalty? I think that would be great, but it could collapse on that issue alone.