Just received word that the regional social work conference voted to support a resolution supporting women’s reproductive rights. Yay. It was a hands-raised vote, and one of four resolutions. All women voted in favor. Yay. All non-white males voted in favor. Yay. All white males voted against. WTF.
They all ought to be tossed out of the profession. The National Association of Social Workers Code of Ethics is pretty fscking specific about “Social Justice” and “Dignity and Worth of the Person.”
And, “Social workers respect and promote the right of clients to self-determination and assist clients in their efforts to identify and clarify their goals.”
It’s calvinball.
This should not come as a surprise to anyone here, but somehow, when a hyper-religious right winger has a pregnancy complication requiring a D&C, it’s not an abortion, it’s just medical care.
Clearly, women who have the bad taste to be poor, or not to attach themselves to connected, wealthy men, are morally decrepit, so deserve the misery of being denied reproductive care.
/s
Hey ladies! You can no longer get reproductive care, but HEY, you like to shop, right?!?
Not all straight couples though,. Only those who can conceive and give birth on their own. No IVF, no adoptions.
ETA: My bad, bad eyes.
And no blended families either, nor children born out of wedlock.
So much for pro-life, pro-adoption.
It does say “adopted child of both spouses adopted after the date of marriage.” A lot of emphasis on “after the date of marriage” in that hunk of manure.
Well - you wouldn’t want to support single people adopting.
Didn’t the soviets try something like that? Is the GOP just… actually three russias in a clown suit?
I think you’re thinking of Romania? They banned abortion and gave awards for women who had lots of kids (same with the nazis). Horrific results, of course…
I don’t think the Soviets did, as they were more concerned with getting women into the work force. I could be wrong, but I don’t think so?
