Home | About | Donate

Boycott Indiana—for Imprisoning a Woman Who Miscarried


#1

Boycott Indiana—for Imprisoning a Woman Who Miscarried

Sonali Kolhatkar

Indiana’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) has justifiably provoked outrage nationwide for its apparent intent to legalize anti-gay discrimination by private businesses.


#4

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#5

Sounds good to me.

mcp


#6

And who put those folks in those positions?

mcp


#7

Silence from the single issue silos


#8

Hearing about this, I would have thought it to be a southern state! The courts and laws are getting worse! What kind of jury did she have? I notice she is east Indian, by her name, so they figured, she is just a minority, and has no rights, less than other females. This most likely would NOT happen to a white, female, from a good family….Deciding if a baby breathes, or not, is questionable. The CO woman that cut the baby out of the mother, is not even charged with murder, due to some dumb law! What gives, that the rules, vary so much? Females, should NOT have to live in a certain state, to have civil rights, for themselves. This is supposed to be the united, NOT some states!


#10

So do you feel the same way about the RFRA law protest? The national outcry and boycott of Ind for that law, without which there would not be this "move to amend" it?

And there would have been no opportunity for this "misguided trial" if there weren't this "misguided" law in the first place, passed by the "misguided" leg and Gov, elected by the "misguided" people of Ind. ...


#11

I agree - we keep talking about the necessity for "solidarity" in our movements, but apparently some movements are considered to warrant more "solidarity" than others ....

The thought has occurred to me - wonder if the movement for gay rights would have gotten as far as it has if the the only gay folk were women ...


#12

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#13

Such a ridiculous post it hardly bears responding to... other than to point its idiocy out.


#14

It is about White Christian Fundamentalism and advocates of that strict Patriarchal "faith."

Meanwhile, the usual suspects are trying to discredit the writer, pretend that she's attacking all citizens of the state, or blame voters.

Voters that support these policies are fundamentalist Christians.

No one speaks honestly to the issue--the control of women's bodies or any deviation on the Biblical concept of marriage--which is driving these behaviors. The forum's regulars dance around it tossing ca-ca at everything but the self-evident target.


#15

I understand your point, but I disagree.
I myself don't like snow, or the desert...is my refusing to visit or live in states with snow or deserts "punishing" those, who thru no fault of their own have deserts or snow in their midst? I am not spending my money there or working in their communities...it could be described as a "boycott", if there were a way to negotiate with the climate. The point of a boycott is to use certain kinds of political and economic pressure to enact change.
It may well be that it is just as doomed to fail as boycotting on account of the climate,
but that is another issue.


#16

In 2008, Indiana voted for president Obama. We used to have the reputation of being one of the most moderate states in the country. Fast forward to slick talking tea party people like Mike Pence with Koch brother backing. See a pattern? Since I live in the South Bend area, I've lived with rich diversity in an overwhelmingly liberal leaning city. South Bend is struggling, we are in the rust belt in dire need of business and growth. Boycotting an entire state for the errors of a few is narrow minded. Wouldn't attempts to help bring the state forward be a better choice? I'm troubled that we have been tried without a jury and progressives also have a mob mentality. In fact, I will leave common dreams for my news until the contributors put away their ropes, pitchforks, and torches.