Tag Archives: birth control

When Real Monsters Attack

Satellite image of Melissa over Jamaica

“When I look at the cloud pattern, I will tell you as a meteorologist and professional – and a person – it is beautiful, but it is terrifying.  I know what is underneath those clouds.”

Sean Sublette, a meteorologist based in Virginia

Who needs ghosts and witches for Halloween when we have massive storm systems like Hurricane Melissa?  This past Tuesday, the 28th, Melissa plowed into Jamaica with 185-mph (298 kmh) winds.  It’s the first known Category 5 hurricane to hit Jamaica and most powerful since Gilbert in September 1988.  Gilbert held the record as the most powerful tropical storm system in recorded history, until Hurricane Patricia in the northwestern Pacific in October 2015.  Patricia produced 215-mph (346-kmh) winds and a surface pressure of 872 millibars (mb).  That pressure is the second lowest on record with Typhoon Tip producing 870 mb in October 1979.  (Tip boasted 190-mph winds.)

These storm systems – already the most powerful tempests on Earth – are getting worse.  In September 1995 Tropical Storm Opal developed in the Bay of Campeche and slammed into Florida’s west coast as a Category 4 hurricane.  It was the first time since U.S. meteorologists began naming these storms in 1953 that the Atlantic-Caribbean group reached the letter ‘O’.

That year, 1995, produced a total of 21 named systems; the greatest number since the 20 total systems (albeit unnamed) in the region in 1933.  All those records, however, shattered in 2005 when the Atlantic-Caribbean produced an unprecedented 28 tropical storm systems.  For the first time since 1953, meteorologists had to resort to the Greek alphabet for storm names.

The 2005 Atlantic-Caribbean hurricane system was most likely foretold in March 2004, when a squall nicknamed “Catarina” developed in the southwestern Atlantic and hit Brazil as what would be considered a Category 1 hurricane.  This was truly anomalous as full-fledged hurricanes rarely form in the Southern Atlantic because of cooler sea surface temperatures and strong vertical wind shear.

Tropical storm systems of any magnitude anywhere in the world are measured using the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Wind Scale, which went into effect in 1973.  The U.S. National Hurricane Center (NHC) modified the system in 2009, but it’s still the standard-bearer for measuring the most powerful weather systems on Earth.

The development of Doppler weather radar in the 1970s proved to be a great leap forward for meteorology.  In September 1961 Hurricane Esther was the first tropical storm to be tracked by satellite.  Previously storms were generally followed by military reconnaissance aircraft.  But with Doppler scientists were able to trail various weather systems in real time and garner detailed information about a storm’s formation and movement.  By the 1980s, meteorologists began theorizing that tropical storm systems – especially hurricanes – follow certain pathways in the atmosphere; depending on the time of year and location of formation.  Late season hurricanes (after October 1) in the Atlantic-Caribbean, for example, tend to move eastward.

Eight years ago Hurricane Maria became one of the worst storms to rake across the Caribbean.  Puerto Rico suffered the worst of the chaos, as the storm killed over 3,000 people and costing roughly USD 90-95 billion.  It was the strongest storm to strike the island since the 1928 Lake Okeechobee Hurricane, which was also a Category 5 storm sporting a maximum wind speed of  160 mph (412 kmh) and a death toll in excess of 2,500 throughout the Caribbean and Florida.

Melissa’s strength is disturbing in that it is late in the Atlantic-Caribbean hurricane season.  In October 1998, meteorologists were stunned when Hurricane Mitch became the first Category 5 storm to develop in the region in the month of October.  Before the development of weather technology, it’s understandable that these storms would exact massive death tolls in the areas of impact.  The Great Hurricane of 1780 killed an estimated 22,000 to 30,000 people throughout the Caribbean.  Historians believe it may have achieved a maximum wind speed of 200 mph (322 kph).

To date, the deadliest hurricane to hit the United States (and the deadliest natural disaster) is still the 1900 Galveston Hurricane, which killed over 12,000 – at least 8,000 on Galveston alone.  No one knows where specifically it formed, but scientists believe it was a Category 4 storm.  They also believe it was the same storm that marched up into the central U.S., across the Arctic region and down in Siberia.  If that’s accurate, the storm wasn’t just deadly – it was truly anomalous.  The calamity was exacerbated by the lack of a cohesive warning system and geography.  Galveston is essentially a barrier island, which are narrow strips of sand that protect the mainland from the impact of powerful storms and ocean waves.  By nature they’re not designed to be developed for human habitation.  In 1900, the bulk of Galveston’s land mass rose barely above 15 feet (457 cm), and many of its streets ended at the shoreline.  In the ensuing decades Galveston officials have taken greater measures to develop a solid warning system and evacuation plans; a sea wall that extends across much of the island has helped, along with the planting of seagrass and palm trees.  The entire island has been literally lifted up by hauling in more sand and dirt.  Despite all those efforts, Galveston remains vulnerable, as evidenced by Hurricane Ike in 2008.

Technology and even the most comprehensive evacuation plans won’t save people from themselves.  Development along the coastlines of the U.S. has grown exponentially within the past 50 years.  In September 1999 Hurricane Floyd approached the Florida-Georgia border as a Category 4 and triggered the largest evacuation at the time – nearly 3 million people were ordered to move inland.  However, Floyd bypassed the area and migrated northward in the Carolinas.  Many people were upset at having to leave for a storm that missed them.  I recall one man on the national news complain that all the technology should have provided a more accurate prediction.  I looked at the TV screen and said, ‘Really?’  I personally believe that no one should ever be forced to flee their homes for a natural disaster.  If they feel they’re brave and strong enough to withstand nature’s wrath, just leave them alone!  But they also shouldn’t expect first responders to come racing to their aid.  After X hour, they’re on their own.

In June 1992, the United Nations staged the “Conference on Environment and Development” in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.  Also known as the ‘Earth Summit’, political leaders, diplomats, scientists and many others convened to discuss humanity’s impact on the environment.  One subject that was part of the original agenda was birth control.  The premise was simple: unchecked population growth can have adverse effects on natural resources, such as clean water and air.  But just as the conference was set to begin, the Roman Catholic Church in Brazil intervened and demanded that any discussion on birth control either be limited or excluded altogether.  Despite some initial resistance, the conference organizers eventually conceded, and the Church got their wish.  Conversations on any kind of population control were all but eradicated.  Afterwards, though, the conference was declared a success.

In 1992 the global population was a little over 5.4 billion.  In 2024 it stood at approximately 8.1 billion.  In 1982 China reached an incredible milestone when it became the first country on Earth to attain a population of 1 billion.  (Various demographic studies declared that it actually had reached that number in 1980.)  Before then, China’s various efforts to control its population had catastrophic results.  In 1958 the “Great Leap Forward” was an attempt to streamline food production and distribution, but it led to the starvation deaths of up to 55 million people.  In 1979 the “One Child Per Family” policy was a more concerted effort to limit population growth, but it had an incredibly low acceptance rate, especially in rural areas where more children meant more hands to harvest crops and other food stuffs.  Its most negative impact, however, was on gender disparities.  As with many developing nations, China valued its male citizens more than females.  The “One Child Per Family” stunt culminated in the deaths of thousands of infant girls and has now made China the only country with a greater population of males than females.

In May 2000 India crossed the 1 billion citizenry mark.  By 2023 it had surpassed China in overall population.  Lack of education and comprehensive health care always has deleterious effects on a nation’s overall welfare.  Unmitigated population increases push more people into regions where they’ve never or at least rarely lived.  We’re seeing that here in the U.S., as city populations grow and begin overtaking forests and even farmland.

What does this have to do with Melissa and other tropical storm systems?  In terms of population and human interaction with nature, it means everything.  Coastal areas continue to be popular destinations for tourists and even residents.  Severe storms and rising seas are already wreaking havoc on U.S. coastlines.  Since the start of 2025, a large number of beachfront homes across the country have collapsed into encroaching oceans, mostly on the Eastern seaboard.

Remember Melissa is the strongest hurricane to develop this late in the season.  The first two decades of this century have seen the greatest number of Category 5 hurricanes in the Atlantic-Caribbean basin – nearly 40.  Hurricane Camille remains the most powerful storm to strike anywhere in the United States.  It basically set the standard and was considered a true meteorological anomaly.  But that standard is changing rapidly, and Category 5 storms are becoming more common.

Once again, who needs ghosts and witches when we have real monsters coming out of the sea?

Also see: Great Bhola Cyclone

Leave a comment

Filed under Essays

No Tax Latex

It’s been nearly two years since the U.S. Supreme Court outlawed abortion and left it up to individual states to decide whether or not women should be able to decide what to do with their bodies.  The Dobbs decision sent proverbial shock waves throughout the American conscience.  For the first time in modern judicial history, a fundamental right was snatched away by a band of elitists who – like most extremists – feel they know what’s best for everyone else.

Now another abortion-related issue has come before the Court: whether mifepristone is legal or not.  Basically this medication induces abortion without an individual having to visit a clinic.  Recently the U.S. Food and Drug Administration expanded approval of the drug.  That incited the ire of Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, a conservative anti-abortion group that forced the matter onto the plate of the High Court.  If the Dobbs decision is any precedent, things don’t look good for mifepristone.

I might have one solution to the overall problem of unwanted pregnancies: tax-free condoms.  Even before I entered my teens, my father put the fear of the Almighty into my brain – never trust a girl when she says she’s on birth control.  Of course, women should never trust a man when he says she can quit her job because he’ll make her his queen, but that’s a different dilemma.

To many men wearing condoms is comparative to showering while wearing a raincoat.  (Points to anyone who has actually heard that firsthand.)  But, as we saw with the AIDS epidemic, condoms are a safeguard.  Personally I’m tired of hearing men say that birth control is a woman’s responsibility.  A real man takes charge of his own birth control. 

Unexpected pregnancies present more than a few challenges to an individual female.  Children who come into the world unplanned and unwanted often end up being unloved; thus, they often become society’s problem.  Two decades ago economists Steve Levitt and John Donohue hypothesized that a reduction in crime in the 1990s was one effect of the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion nationwide.  A strong economy and a greater presence of law enforcement, especially in major metropolitan areas, were also counted as dominating factors.  But it was the abortion connection that prompted the most controversy – and greatest outrage.  Liberals opined that abortion provided women with greater autonomy over their own health care, while conservatives pointed to a reversal of liberal social policies beginning in the 1980s as the primary reason for a reduction in criminal behavior.  Either of these theories bears some truth.

Another interesting result of the Dobbs decision is the sudden rise in vasectomies here in the U.S.  Perhaps some men are finally getting the hint that they also have reproductive choices.  Institutes from the Cleveland Clinic to Planned Parenthood are noting an increase in vasectomies.  It’s both logical and practical.

But I still think eliminating taxes on condoms will provoke younger and/or single men to buy and use them.  As of now, I don’t know of any state that maintains this practice, but I still feel it would be worth the trouble.  States will garner tax revenue on a slew of other products anyway.  I’m fully aware condoms are not a panacea to solve unwanted pregnancies; no form of birth control outside of abstinence is.  But, just as with the foolishness of “Just Say No”, abstinence only blanket ideology isn’t reasonable either.  Children cost money – as any parent can tell us.  They should be a blessing, not a burden.

5 Comments

Filed under Essays

Best Quotes of the Week – July 23, 2022

“There’s nothing more dangerous than professed Christians who have no real interest in Jesus. They’re rather easy to spot if you’re paying attention.  They’re usually the ones most loudly claiming things like religious liberty while methodically swallowing up the personal freedoms and elemental rights of other people.  They incessantly broadcast their devotion of God on their bumpers and bellies, while living antithetically to the compassionate heart of Jesus actually found in the Scriptures.”

John Pavlovitz, “Actual Followers of Jesus Don’t Want Conservatives’ Compulsory Christianity”

“It is clear that their attempts to roll back the clock on contraception is again another plank on their extreme agenda for American women.”

Rep. Nancy Pelosi, after the House of Representatives passed the Right to Contraception Act

The bill codifies the right to birth control amid concerns the U.S. Supreme Court may repeal the right to contraception following the Dobbs decision that reversed the right to abortion.

It’s worth noting 195 Republican members of the House voted against the act.

Leave a comment

Filed under News

Best Quotes of the Week – June 25, 2022

“With sorrow – for this Court, but more, for the many millions of American women who have today lost a fundamental constitutional protection – we dissent.”

U.S. Supreme Court Justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan in their dissent of the decision to overturn Roe vs. Wade

The trio warned that abortion opponents now could pursue a nationwide ban “from the moment of conception and without exceptions for rape or incest.”

“Thirty years, murder after murder, suicide after suicide, mass shooting after mass shooting, Congress did nothing.  This week we have a chance to break this 30-year period of silence with a bill that changes our laws in a way that will save thousands of lives.”

Sen. Chris Murphy, after passage of a bill to address gun violence in the U.S.

Leave a comment

Filed under News

Roe Back

“Fight for the things you care about, but do it in a way that will lead others to join you.”

Ruth Bader Ginsburg

Abortion-rights and anti-abortion demonstrators gather outside of the Supreme Court in Washington, Friday, June 24, 2022. The Supreme Court has ended constitutional protections for abortion that had been in place nearly 50 years, a decision by its conservative majority to overturn the court’s landmark abortion cases. (AP Photo/Gemunu Amarasinghe)

It has been one dream of conservatives for decades: overturning Roe vs. Wade.  The landmark 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision guaranteed women the right to abortion, in accordance with the 9th and 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.  Now that goal has been achieved: earlier today, June 24, the Court has overturned Roe; thus gutting nearly a half century of reproductive freedom for women in the U.S.

It’s a stunning move and it’s left abortion supporters shell-shocked.  It doesn’t seem to matter that the majority of Americans support abortion to some extent.  Six justices on the Supreme Court have decided they don’t like the concept of abortion, so no woman should have access to it and no one should help a woman burdened with a crisis pregnancy.  It is the first time in U.S. history that a constitutional right has been granted and then rescinded.

Social and religious conservatives are ecstatic about this decision.  Although the Roe decision startled many people in 1973, the ruling didn’t really become an issue until the 1980s; when the evangelical Christian movement started to make its intrusive presence known.  They saw the election of Ronald Reagan as assurance that abortion would be outlawed in the U.S.

At least 26 states were ready to outlaw abortion under most circumstances, should Roe be overturned.  Now that it has, they are moving towards the annihilation.  Last year the legislature in my home state of Texas passed the so-called “Heartbeat Act”, which bans abortion after 6 weeks (before many women know they’re pregnant) and only allows it in cases where the mother’s life is endangered.  That means rape and incest victims will be forced to carry their pregnancies to term.  Any woman (or girl) who obtains an abortion and/or anyone who assists in that procedure could face up to $10,000 in statutory damages and face prison time.  Noticeably it doesn’t say anything about prosecuting men who rape women or girls.

The overturning of Roe perhaps will be one of Donald Trump’s greatest legacies, aside from his dismal handling of the COVID-19 pandemic and the violent insurrection at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.  But it won’t so much be his legacy as it will be that of right-wing extremists – the people who loudly proclaim to cherish personal liberty and freedom, but in practice, mean it only for themselves.  Everyone else’s personal liberty – that is, people who aren’t exactly like them – is somehow subjective.

Abortion opponents are now presenting – as they always have – what they consider viable solutions to the dilemma of unplanned and unwanted pregnancies; quick fixes that are ridiculously quaint and utopian.  They recommend creating a society where every child comes into the world loved and respected; that women always have a safe and effective way to carry out their undesired pregnancies.  It’s tantamount to beauty pageant contestants expressing their wish for the blind to see and the lame to walk.  It’s wonderfully idealistic, yet extraordinarily delusional.  Such answers to some of life’s most complex issues are typical of the conservative mindset: simple and unencumbered.  That’s why I always say my brain is too big to be conservative.

In the 49 years since Roe was passed, it’s estimated that some 60 million abortions have taken place in the United States.  Abortion adversaries groan that it means some 60 million children never got a chance to grow up and have fulfilling lives.  But millions of children have come into the world under the best of circumstances and have never lived fulfilling lives.  The future is always uncertain, and occasionally things go awry in families.

It’s also possible that those estimated 60 million children could have been subjected to abuse and neglect.  Children who come into the world unwanted often end up being unloved.  I have to wonder if abortion opponents are going to dish out any additional cash to help support all those children.  It’s easy for them to lounge in their ivory towers – the way religious leaders often do – and bestow well wishes upon troubled souls.  Good intentions don’t pay diaper and formula bills; they don’t provide housing and education; they don’t deal with the daily angst of raising children.  They’re glossy words that lack substance, unless solid and concrete action is taken to make those lives better.

Liberals and moderates are already concerned that other Supreme Court decisions are at risk, such as Griswold and Lawrence.  Even Brown and Loving may come under similar attack.  As part of his decision to overturn Roe, Associate Justice Clarence Thomas wrote, “In future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell,” referring to decisions on contraception, sodomy and same-sex marriage respectively.

Remember, the original Roe decision developed under the auspices of the right to privacy and equal protection under the law.  Those are essential and undeniable features of a truly democratic society.  Stripping any particular group of basic human rights isn’t a sign of a moral culture, as many social conservatives would have us believe.  It’s more emblematic of a totalitarian world; a universe where a handful of people have blessed themselves with the power to decide what is and what is not appropriate for everyone else.

If abortion opponents think this Dobbs decision will end abortion in the United States once and forever, they are mistaken.  After the initial shock has worn off (which is already happening), people will begin to fight back and find ways around it.  Whether right-wing extremists like it or not, abortion will happen.  There will always be women who find themselves in very difficult situations and feel they must end a pregnancy.  It’s been happening for centuries and it will continue happening, even though a band of self-righteous elitists demand otherwise.

Just wait for it.  They’ve awoken a giant.

Leave a comment

Filed under Essays

Right to Control

Many of the cases that arrive before the U.S. Supreme Court begin with individuals either trying right a wrong or make their own lives better.  They rarely expect to launch a national movement.  That was pretty much the case when Norma McCorvey found herself pregnant with her third child in 1969.  An unemployed carnival worker living outside Dallas at the time, McCorvey apparently had led a rough life and had given up her first two children for adoption.  She didn’t need – and couldn’t afford – to bring another child into the world.  However, the state of Texas didn’t allow for abortions except to save the life of the mother.  Even rape and incest victims couldn’t end their unwanted pregnancies.  Like so many women in her situation, McCorvey was too poor to travel to another state where abortions were safe and legal.  She even tried to obtain an illegal abortion, but again the cost was prohibitive.  She sought legal help and ended up under the guidance of attorneys Linda Coffee and Sarah Weddington.

In 1970, after McCorvey had given birth and given up the baby, Coffee and Weddington filed paper work challenging the Texas law and bestowed the name “Jane Roe” upon their client.  They targeted then-Dallas County District Attorney Henry Wade.  Wade had entered the national spotlight nearly a decade earlier when he prosecuted Jack Ruby for killing Lee Harvey Oswald who had been accused of assassinating President John F. Kennedy.  (Wade would later come to light as a ruthless prosecutor who engaged in unscrupulous legal maneuvers to ensure criminal prosecutions, no matter the cost and despite evidence to the contrary.)

After McCorvey’s suit was filed, a Texas district court ruled the state’s abortion ban violated the constitutional right to privacy under the 14th Amendment.  Wade persisted, however, and vowed to prosecute any doctor who performed what he deemed unnecessary abortions in the state.  The case eventually reached the U.S. Supreme Court and, in a 7-2 ruling on January 22, 1973, abortion was fully legalized in the United States.

That was pretty much the end of the issue until the 1980s, when right-wing religious leaders began stoking the fires of anti-abortion rhetoric.  It accompanied the presidency of Ronald Reagan who openly stated he wished for a return to an America before the 1960s.  That should say enough about his bigoted state of mind, but it aligned with a growing hostility towards progressive ideology and civil rights legislation.

Earlier this week the unexpected news arrived that the Supreme Court may overturn Roe vs. Wade by the end of its current term in June.  We wouldn’t know anything about this if it wasn’t for the leak of a draft opinion by Associate Justice Samuel Alito who declares the Roe decision “egregiously wrong” in terms of constitutional practicality.  Chief Justice John Roberts has confirmed the veracity of the statement, but has joined many others in condemning the leak.

For many of us the leak isn’t the main concern.  It’s what it says.  There is now a very real possibility that nearly a half century of protection for that part of women’s overall health care could end because a handful of conservative extremists on the High Court want to inject their personal views into it.

For their like-minded ilk in the American public, the overturning of Roe marks the end of a long-fought battle in their alleged “pro-life” agenda; a perverted early Mother’s Day gift.  It doesn’t matter that a majority of Americans don’t want to see a complete ban on abortion.  They’ve been working for this moment over the past four decades.

For liberals, though, this is a much more dire situation.  While the current case that brought Roe back into the forefront is limited to just abortion, progressives see other seminal SCOTUS decisions in the judicial crosshairs.  It really isn’t extraordinary to see such cases as Obergefell vs. Hodges, which legalized same-sex marriage, reversed.  Along with abortion, queer rights have been a target of far-right conservatives.  But, if the Court sees fit to outlaw abortion at the national level (and leave it up to individual states), it could also reasonably overturn Griswold vs. Connecticut, which ruled that states could not deny birth control to married couples.  Before that decision, married residents of Connecticut (and a few other states) couldn’t legally purchase birth control.

To some conservatives, abortion has become another form of birth control, which is not what contemporary feminists who jump-started the modern women’s movement desired.  The latter group had always declared that abortion should be a woman’s last choice.  But, with the overall concept of birth control in mind, is it possible a woman who has a tubal ligation could be criminally prosecuted?  For that matter, could men who have vasectomies be subject to criminal jurisprudence?  How about condoms or IUDs?  Could those be outlawed?

Why stop with Roe?  Aside from Obergefell and Griswold, could the Court target Loving vs. Virginia, the case that struck laws against interracial marriage?  How about Brown vs. Topeka Board of Education, which outlaws racial desegregation in schools?

Remember that, when Antonin Scalia died in 2016, Republicans in the Senate displayed their usual contempt and disdain for President Obama by refusing to hold hearings on his nominee to the Court, until after Donald Trump got into office.  They stated that, since Scalia’s death occurred during an election year, the incoming president should select his replacement.  Yet, upon the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg in 2020, they rammed through the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett – a character straight out of “The Handmaid’s Tale”.

That social and religious conservatives want to dictate what women can and cannot do with their own bodies conflicts with the long-held American vision of individual freedom.  Many of these people screamed at the thought mandatory mask-wearing or forced vaccinations at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic; crying they should have autonomy over their own bodies.  Really?  What an original concept.

Conservatives herald the beauty of life, but a life costs hard dollars in the very real world of child-rearing.  Since 2019, for example, the state of Texas has experienced a 1,100% rise in children placed into foster care.  Love and compassion alone won’t pay those bills, no matter how much prayer one puts forth.  Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie once emphasized that pro-life means the entire life cycle – not just up to the moment the fetus is born.

The reasons why an individual woman wants to end a pregnancy are myriad, but it is no one else’s business.  As painful a decision as it may be, I’d rather see a woman end a pregnancy she doesn’t want than give birth to a child she doesn’t want.  Children who come into the world unwanted are often unloved.  That’s an awful fate for someone.

Regardless, pregnancy and birth are individual choices.  No one – not the Supreme Court and not a politician – has the right to interfere with that.

Leave a comment

Filed under News

Worst Quote of the Week – October 11, 2019

“Contraception is seen as harming the gifts God gave us.  You can’t put in physical barriers like condoms or chemical substances that are going to obstruct the natural design of the ovaries.”

– Theresa Notare, assistant director of the Natural Family Planning Program at the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, after the Christian-themed Obria Medical Clinics received $1.7 million in federal funding to promote its abstinence-only family planning policy.

With a global population fast approaching 8 billion, I actually see the idea of contraception as humanity’s gift to itself.  And the fewer devoutly religious people we have in our midst, the better!

Leave a comment

Filed under News

His and Her Birth Control

Source.

Leave a comment

Filed under News

Quote of the Day

“For the first time we can remember, a bureau of the federal government seems to be radically intruding on what the term of a church is.”

Roman Catholic Cardinal Timothy Dolan of New York, explaining lawsuits by Catholic bishops and universities against new federal rules requiring them to furnish birth control coverage.

Is he kidding?  This is the same Roman Catholic Church that feels it has the right to tell grown people what to do in their own bedrooms.  And, this bastard is pissed off that the U.S. government is now telling them how to treat people?!

Leave a comment

Filed under News

Quote of the Day

“Trampling the rights of women in an effort to grandstand against the federal government is simply wrong and I cannot be a part of it.” 

– Allison Catalano, in her resignation letter to state Rep. Myra Crownover, R-Denton.

Catalano, 26, started working as an unpaid intern for Crownover in August 2011, shortly after graduating from the University of North Texas; she then became a paid staffer.  Her letter has caused a stir in Texas politics, but Crownover (pictured below) describes Catalano as a “fine employee.”

 

1 Comment

Filed under News