Yep. You read that right. It's the title of a story detailed in Salon and also discussed at Think Progress about a new law ( to borrow from the I couldn't have said it better myself language in the Salon article)
(yes, law, not "proposed legislation" or "some kind of sick joke")
set to go into effect ( as in not being debated, or up for a vote but set to go into effect) in where else, Oklahoma (sorry droogie) on :
Nov. 1 that would collect detailed data about each abortion performed -- and post it all on a public Web site
That's right women of Oklahoma. The state that brings us climate denier batboy Inhofe, and Tom "secret keeper" Coburn is now going to publish the following about women who have had abortions which, last time I checked, were still legal in this country:
- Date of abortion
- County in which abortion performed
- Age of mother
- Marital status of mother
(married, divorced, separated, widowed, or never married)
- Race of mother
- Years of education of mother
(specify highest year completed)
- State or foreign country of residence of mother
- Total number of previous pregnancies of the mother
Live Births
Miscarriages
Induced Abortions
Yep. You read that right too. Oh but they're not going to publish the name so your privacy's not actually violated right? Right. I know the right has done its darndest to eradicate critical thinking but not sure where they are on basic deductive reasoning allowing people to figure out pretty easily who the bearer of the modern day scarlet letter ( A is now for abortion instead of adultery) is.
Although the questionnaire does not ask for name, address, or "any information specifically identifying the patient," as Feminists for Choice points out, these eight questions could easily be used to identify a woman in a small community.
Oh and from the Department of They've Thought of Everything:
doctors failing to provide this information would face criminal sanctions and loss of their medical license.
Thankfully, the law is being challenged but as is, it's set to go into effect. Details of that lawsuit here
I'll leave you with this, yet another example of the irony deficiency of the extreme right or the blatant hypocrisy or both (from the Salon piece):
Maintenance of the planned Web site, by Oklahoma's own accounting, would cost over $200,000 a year, which is money we presume they'll have left over after feeding and clothing all existing children in need and making sure all underserved women who want to carry to term have access to prenatal care.
Or say, healthcare? Or school lunches? Or after school programs? Or here's a really radical idea: comprehensive sex ed?