How Facebook Activism is Changing the G.O.P. In the US, and Others Abroad

Activism and Facebook: A New Face of the People

Kay Balbi
2/9/2011 -Last week, the GOP attempted to change the law regarding the definition of rape, so that Medicaid as well as other government -funded health care could exclude paying for abortions that were the result of any rape considered "not forcible." The bill, introduced by Republican Congressman Chris Smith, narrows the use of the term "rape" to cases of 'forcible' rape but not statutory or coerced rape.

According to Rep. Debbie Wasserman, Schultz (D-Fla.) in an interview with Huff Post's Jason Linkins reported, "What were they trying to exclude? Well, if you are a woman coerced, drugged, or otherwise incapacitated by a rapist, too bad! Unfortunately, if you are a teen, statutory rape is off the table, too, unless incest is involved and you are a minor. (Huff Post)

Initially the idea behind the change sounds like the law is forcing women who choose to have an abortion to fund it themselves. However, it is even worse than that.

Political Activist, Kat Barr

According to Move-in political activist Kat Barr's public request in an e-mail:

The GOP bill is an attack on women's reproductive freedoms. Their legislation would:

  • Effectively ban abortion coverage in the new health insurance exchanges even if people pay for coverage with their own money.
  • Impose tax penalties on small businesses that pay for health plans that cover abortion and people who pay for abortion care.
  • Force the District of Columbia to impose all of the above laws, instead of letting the city decide its own laws.
  • Permanently ban abortion care for women insured by the government
  • Allow hospitals to deny a woman a life-saving abortion.
  • If this bill passes, hospitals will be allowed to turn away a woman seeking an abortion, even if she will die without it -a major change from current law. (Move-In)

Here is the deal. The U.S. Government is over 14 trillion dollars in debt and congress challenged to reverse this trend. If you want to see how the debt breaks out in the US. Check out this U.S. Debt Clock.org.

Citizens knows that the U.S. needs to do something about its debt to income ratio. Many accept the fact that the U.S. needs to cut back on spending. What American's cannot seem to agree upon is where to make those cuts.

With last year's passage of the Health Care Bill, it was the beginning of constraining health care costs by introducing the laws of supply and demand by opening up the market to all Americans. Theoretically, the risks are spread and the costs should go down for all.

That is the smart way. Get everyone on the same plan, and then you have power. The GOP's attempt to mess with Roe vs. Wade and the current rape terminology, which is still rather deficient, is a poor attempt to try and cut costs. Fortunately, the attempt by some congress members to change the terminology of what constitutes rape halted due to a large and quick response by the people. In less than 24 hours, over 325,000 signatures joined in a petition to raise up various concerns, per Kat Barr, MoveOn.org Political Action.

Political Activism is going Virtual

A few years ago, it was Ross Perot's suggestion that the Electoral College and congressional representatives replaced with an actual voting of the people. Wouldn't that be something to see happen in our lifetime? While it may be hectic and crazy at first, considering all the filibustering and pork belly-aching we have seen and not approved of, I think direct Facebook Political Activism is a quicker and more effective way of being heard than calling a congressman. There is no public record of who called and what they said. I would prefer to see a voting mechanism that is transparent and allows for the people, not just the highly motivated and highly funded corporation Political Action Committee's (PACs) to be heard.
Maybe we need to reconsider and cut back on the need for congress, and instead move to a 20th century approach. Sound far-fetched? Probably, but no more crazy than thinking any kind of rape is consensual.

Political Activism on Facebook - in Egypt

At the same time the republicans were trying to change the laws regarding women's health in America, Wael Ghonim and others were using Facebook to get publicity for their cause. They wanted freedom from a dictatorship, and their self-appointed leader Mubarak. Fortunately, the relatively peaceful uprising has been successful but not without costs to those fighting to make a difference.

The group 'we are all Kahled Said, has over 87,000 members. See the link here:
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=189567301064799&set=a.149085515112978.21703.100000345904186#!/elshaheeed.co.uk

For a YouTube Video on the 18 day revolution, see here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J56oGIznUOQ

Sources:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/03/republicans-forcible-rape-abortion-bill_n_818014.html

http://www.moveon.org/r?r=205950&id=25991-18374344-ahDaV6x&t=1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J56oGIznUOQ

Published by Kay Balbi

"Life is a journey, not a destination. You only get one life-are you living it?" Freelance writer and business management consultant Kay Balbi has many passions and interests to share. She is an author, insp...  View profile

7 Comments

Post a Comment
  • Betty Asphy3/10/2011

    Yes many government officials are using facebook including Obama.

  • Kay Balbi2/25/2011

    The confusion may lie in the next line that says women who can pay would still be denied. I was pregnant and changing jobs. I had three days without insurance. When I started spotting I went to the emergency room. They wanted to send me home saying i was going to lose the baby. They did not test or call the doctor until we threatened to call the media. If I had gone home, I would have died. My tube would have burst. Yes, they had to do an abortion, and I didn't want it, but it was the lesser of two evils.

  • John Wilson2/20/2011

    I'm confused. The article says, "Initially the idea behind the change sounds like the law is forcing women who choose to have an abortion to fund it themselves. However, it is even worse than that." as if that is an obviously bad thing. Clearly the alternative is that other people should have to pay for the abortion. Why is that a good thing? I don't think that other people should be forced to pay for abortions that have nothing to do with them.

  • Bill Hanks2/18/2011

    A tough topic to talk about.

  • Kay Balbi2/18/2011

    Fair enough Michele. I look at 3rd world countries and see how they treat their women, and realize it is only because of women's health rights, and education that that things look different in the US. In China, still, female babies are put on the curb as trash.

  • Michele Starkey2/18/2011

    Kay - you and I have differing opinions on abortion. I see it as a genocide of the 21st century - you see it as a woman's right to choose. Let's just say we agree to disagree. cheers

  • Charlotte Kuchinsky2/18/2011

    Interesting piece. I enjoyed it very much.

Displaying Comments

To comment, please sign in to your Yahoo! account, or sign up for a new account.