Out of three full days of coverage of the DNC convention, Bill O'Reilly focused on one, and only one, speech, given by Caroline Kennedy on the subject of the Republican Party's threat to women's reproductive rights and was supremely offended by this passage:
As a Catholic woman, I take reproductive health seriously, and today, it is under attack. This year alone, more than a dozen states have passed more than 40 restrictions on women's access to reproductive health care. That's not the kind of future I want for my daughters or your daughters. Now isn't the time to roll back the rights we were winning when my father was president. Now is the time to move this country forward.He says he doesn't see women's rights under assault at all:
Fox's Bill O'Reilly dismissed the sustained Republican attack on women's rights. While criticizing Caroline Kennedy's speech at the Democratic National Convention, O'Reilly said: "I don't see any women's rights under assault at all. I don't see it."Well technically, of course, he 'doesn't see' it. He would have to be looking for it in order to see it. As is well known, many laws have been proposed and passed that limit women's reproductive rights, so his claim is patently absurd.
He had noted women's rights expert Karl Rove on his show to help provide analysis of the non-existence of the assault on women's rights, and Caroline Kennedy's attacks on the Catholic church and opened the segment by saying:
"I am stunned, stunned. As a Catholic woman. And then she went on to object about 40 states implementing restrictions on abortion like a 24-hour waiting period. And the restrictions aren't you can't have one, it's just wait a few days...That just made my head snap back."So even though there are no restrictions, the restrictions are - to wait a few days. That's not contradicting yourself at all, Bill.
At which point Rove joins in and declares that
It was a direct attack on the Church. "I disagree with the values of my Church". Remember, no one is seriously talking about ending abortion..
No, of course not. Not 'seriously'. He conveniently ignores, of course, for example Todd Akin's recent faux pas and his own attempts to get him out of the Missouri race for Senator. Perhaps he hasn't been introduce to the GOP party platform just adopted at their convention where a ban on abortion was approved. (Well he's right about one thing, they are not serious people).
He goes on to say the argument is about the administration's effort to 'expand choice' by requiring employers to include contraception in their health insurance plans. They have a long discussion about how this "attack on religious liberty is masquerading as an expansion of choice", completely disregarding the actual war on women's rights that the Republican party has sustained.
Rove reserved his harshest criticism of the convention for Kennedy, the daughter of former President John F. Kennedy, calling her comments on Republican efforts to restrict abortion rights nothing short of “an attack on religious liberty that’s masquerading as an expansion of . . . choice.”
The two of them are so offended and 'concerned' at Kennedy's use of her political position to share her 'personal opinions' on dismissing her church's beliefs, and how doing so gives people of the same faith permission to do the same. Oh, the angst! Anything that gets under these old men's skin is alright with me. Obviously, it's okay to restrict women's rights, because even when they are, those aren't really restrictions. Just don't say anything bad about the Catholic Church, cuz them's fighting words!
h/t to Flint in the comments detailing what a Romney/Ryan presidency would mean for women's rights.
h/t to cobaltbay in the comments for a comprehensive list of recent restrictions on women's reproductive rights
In 2011, legislators have introduced 916 measures related to reproductive health and rights in the 49 legislatures that have convened their regular sessions. By the end of the 1st Quarter of 2011, seven states had enacted 15 new laws on these issues, including provisions that: