Latest news with #reproductivefreedom
Yahoo
05-07-2025
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
'80s Pop Icon Makes Bold Political Statement: 'Stay Loud'
'80s Pop Icon Makes Bold Political Statement: 'Stay Loud' originally appeared on Parade. Cyndi Lauper isn't staying quiet amid a tense political climate where human rights are on the line. The '80s pop icon has been an advocate for decades, never shying away from speaking her mind about the need for all humans to have the same rights. Taking to Instagram, Lauper once again spoke out for women's rights as she marked the third anniversary of the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade. Lauper was somber as she talked about the 'basic' and 'human' right for women to have control over their own True Colors singer shared that she's 'all in' on the fight before she ended her video. Lauper had even more to say in the caption of the social media share, including that it's been three years since she recorded an updated version of her hit single Sally's Pigeons. 'In my childhood, women didn't have reproductive freedom and 50+ years later we find ourselves in a time warp where one's freedom to control their own body has been stripped away,' she began her caption. Lauper explained how the song Sally's Pigeons came to light in the '90s and its impact today. 'When I wrote this song with Mary Chapin Carpenter in 1991, we wrote about two little girls who dreamt of stretching their wings like the pigeons they watched that flew above them. They dreamt of being free. But freedom for women then, and unfortunately now, comes at a big price. If we don't have control over our own bodies then we have no real freedom. Stay loud and stay mobilized. Keep fighting. ✊✊✊,' Lauper ended her caption. The singer's post was met with several emojis supporting her message. Many commenters also called her 'amazing." One even declared, 'You go girl!! You tell them!' '80s Pop Icon Makes Bold Political Statement: 'Stay Loud' first appeared on Parade on Jun 25, 2025 This story was originally reported by Parade on Jun 25, 2025, where it first appeared.
Reuters
28-05-2025
- General
- Reuters
Missouri Supreme Court allows abortion ban to continue
May 27 (Reuters) - The Missouri Supreme Court on Tuesday overturned a pair of lower court rulings that had blocked the state's strict abortion ban, once again putting the ban in place at least for now. The state's high court ordered a circuit court judge to vacate her injunctions against the abortion ban, saying the judge had applied the wrong standards. The Supreme Court said one of its prior rulings had established "a more rigorous standard" when blocking a state law. But the Supreme Court also ordered Circuit Court Judge Jerri Zhang to re-evaluate her rulings "in light of this standard," raising the possibility that Zhang could reissue the injunctions on a different legal basis. The underlying lawsuit challenging the law has yet to go to trial. For now Missouri's abortion ban, which kicked in when the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022, will once again take effect. Missouri voters in November passed a ballot measure to ensure abortion rights by amending the state constitution that guarantees a "right to reproductive freedom" up until fetal viability, generally considered to be around 24 weeks of pregnancy. That prompted the state's Planned Parenthood organizations to file a lawsuit seeking strike down the state abortion ban, which led to Zhang's rulings. In December Zhang ruled the abortion ban violated the constitution but left in place some licensing requirements that prevented many abortions from resuming. Then in February she ruled the licensing requirements were discriminatory, enabling Planned Parenthood to resume abortions. The state attorney general challenged those rulings, leading to Tuesday's Supreme Court decision. Republican lawmakers have also approved a new ballot measure, either in November 2026 or possibly sooner if a special election is held, that would seek to repeal the amendment guaranteeing abortion rights, which voters approved by 3 percentage points last November.
Yahoo
11-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Motherhood should be a choice. The Trump Administration doesn't think so
Motherhood can be wonderful and joyous when it is freely chosen and fully supported. As we celebrate mothers, we should acknowledge that motherhood occurs in various ways in the modern world. We should also consider whether we want the government meddling with sex, reproduction and the family. Such meddling is an old problem: Plato imagined the state controlling procreation — his goal was to produce better offspring through eugenic breeding of human beings. His student, Aristotle, suggested that deformed children should not be allowed to live and that abortion could be required in the interest of population control. Opinion If those ancient proposals sound appalling to modern ears, that's because we typically embrace sexual and reproductive freedom. We want to be able to choose who we have sex with, as well as whether and when we reproduce. Freedom of choice for mothers is a relatively new development: For most of human history, motherhood was under patriarchal control. The innovations of the modern world have changed all of that. During the past 200 years, the human population has boomed from 1 billion to 8 billion people. At the same time, sexual and reproductive freedom were unleashed. Better birth control technology allows for sex without reproduction. Liberal divorce laws, the demise of the stigma against unwed mothering and LGBTQ rights have changed the cultural paradigm. We are still sorting out the implications of these changes. And the culture war about motherhood is not yet over. The rapid increase in population has led some to worry about the carrying capacity of the earth. Those concerns are exacerbated by climate change, immigration crises and ongoing social and political turmoil. A growing population may make these things worse. But some folks are now worrying about declining populations in developed countries such as the U.S. global population will likely continue to grow to above 10 billion people in the next 50 years. But in those parts of the world where sexual and procreative freedom are firmly established, birth rates are falling below replacement levels. These declining birth rates have prompted the Trump administration to advance a pro-natal agenda. At the annual March for Life in January of this year, Vice President J.D. Vance said, 'I want more babies in the United States of America.' At the same time, Vance criticized 'a culture of radical individualism.' Vance invokes a broad critique of those modern developments that include women's liberation, the sexual revolution and abortion rights. He is concerned that people are enjoying their freedom while ignoring what he called 'the joys of family life.' The pro-natal agenda has led the Trump administration to consider policies to promote childbirth, including a $5,000 incentive for making babies. In support of the idea, one conservative commentator, Michael Knowles, has encouraged Americans to get busy making babies. In a YouTube video, Knowles said, 'Close your eyes and think of America. Do your patriotic duty. Make America great again. You gotta have babies. OK? It's your marital duty. It's your patriotic duty…. Close your eyes and think of America, and maybe you get five thousand bucks.' Critics have pointed out that $5,000 is hardly enough to support motherhood in an economy that includes high costs for health care, childcare and housing. Libertarians and feminists alike may also wonder whether it is a good idea to view procreation as a patriotic and marital duty. We should be nervous when government officials start meddling with sex and the family. The government can offer incentives and support for families and children without becoming coercive, but the slippery slope of governmental coercion is an ancient problem we ought to avoid. And to suggest we close our eyes and make babies as a patriotic duty is truly bizarre. If motherhood is an important good, it should be chosen with eyes wide open, for its own sake and not because of some political program. Vance is right about the joys of family life: Loving families are wonderful. But reproduction is not the only joy that matters. In a world with more than 8 billion people, it might be appropriate to have fewer kids. More importantly, in a free country, we must be allowed to pursue familial joy on our own terms. Andrew Fiala is the interim department chair of Fresno State University's Department of Philosophy.
