Let’s rag on Alabama some more

These are all the Republicans who voted for the Handmaid’s Tale bill:

What do they all have in common? (Hint: there are only 4 women in the state senate, and they’re all Democrats.)

(Although, to be fair, a lot of white women voted for those asshats.)

Perhaps also relevant is that Alabama ranks #49 in the list of ‘best states in the US’. They beat Louisiana, which is nice, but Mississippi beat them, which ought to be a serious embarrassment. For comparison, Washington state is #1, Minnesota is #3.

Also, they ranked 50th in education.

Alabamians, I think you’ve been totally screwed over by your leadership. You can do better.

How stupid are these legislators?

When Senator Clyde Chambliss, a Republican, for example, was asked if the law would allow for incest victims to obtain abortions, he responded: “Yes, until she knows she’s pregnant.”

He did not elaborate on how someone would have an abortion before she knows she’s pregnant, outside of claiming, “It takes time for all the chromosomes to come together.”

Oh, yeah, 50th in education. It shows.


  1. davidnangle says

    I would almost want the refugees from Alabama to find walls when they try to steal all our jobs and benefits and rights.

    But no, I’m not a prick like their government leaders.

    Escape to civilization, my friends. Every woman and every liberal man welcome.

  2. DrewN says

    See! It’s not completely cruel & abhorrent, women can still get abortions if they’re only a little bit pregnant
    /gagging on my sarcastic rage

  3. weylguy says

    But… but … I thought they said that a woman’s body knows how to shut itself down during incest or rape. Ergo, a pregnancy can only occur if the woman really wants it.

  4. says

    These guys are a wall. A wall of smiling white dudes on this page, a wall between human progress for Alabama and murderous oppression. Anybody got a sledge hammer?

  5. weylguy says

    Castrate all these assholes. That would be a small step in the prevention of unwanted pregnancies.

  6. whheydt says

    So…Chambliss thinks the “morning after pill” is okay? What does the law he voted for actually say on the subject?

  7. consciousness razor says

    The Alabama House is also responsible. I think I counted correctly…. Women in the AL House are 11/28 Democrats and 4/76 Republicans (plus 1 vacancy which was held by a dude). Terri Collins sponsored HB314, which passed 74 to 3 with 27 absent. The three against were all Democrats of course, while the rest walked out. Two Republican dudes were also absent.

  8. ridana says

    They deliberately removed the rape/incest exception against the wishes of some (who still voted for it) to make the bill more certain to appear before the Supremes. Apparently “life of the mother” exclusions were too risky, since they’d have to defend that during reelection campaigns, and only the most Catholic of Catholics value the possibly viable, hopefully male fetus over the life of the pregnant person.

    Can the Supremes overturn only a portion of a law like this? Otherwise, this could backfire on them. Maybe it will anyway. I still want to see the violinist’s argument brought up in court. Afaik, it never has been. But with these full-personhood bills, the comparison seems inescapable. No person presently has the right to force someone else to save their life via the sacrifice of their own bodily integrity, even at no risk to their own life, not even if you are the parent of a child whose life is on the line. We can’t force people to donate blood, which is pretty benign and not very inconvenient, but saying an embryo has the right to usurp its bearer’s body under force of law seems like it would open the door to legislation requiring those with Type O neg to provide blood like milk cows, and make everyone get tested for bone marrow and kidney transplant registries.

  9. nomdeplume says

    Another thing they have in common – all smiling (I assume that’s as close as Williams can get to a smile).

  10. curbyrdogma says

    Some of the Ohio Repugnicans are fetishizing fertilized eggs to the point of trying to make it more difficult to obtain methods that could possibly “prevent implantation of a fertilized egg”, such as the Pill and IUDs.

    And they’re similarly as stupid as their Alabama brethren.

    They aren’t even allowing termination in the case of ectopic pregnancy. …And to show how utterly ignorant these bill-authors are on this subject, one of them believes that ectopic pregnancies can simply be “re-implanted” into the uterus.


    If “reimplantation” was even ever medically possible, I could think of a few ways it could be put to use.

  11. imback says

    Oh Alabama, the devil fools with the best laid plan. Swing low Alabama, you got the spare change, you got to feel strange, and now the moment is all that it meant.

  12. chigau (違う) says

    The browser on my tablet presented me this on the first line:

    …Hint: there are only 4 women in the state…

    OK. That makes sense.

  13. Crudely Wrott says

    Another “heart beat” bill, eh?
    The way I understand it is that heart cells are formed before they become organized into a beating heart.
    Yet, as long as they are in contact and ion channels are in place between cells, any randomly shaped group of heart cells will begin to beat in unison.
    I deduce that there need be no higher organization of the cells and that there need not be any blood or established vessels for blood to flow through in order for there to be heart cells contracting in unison.
    Therefore, there need not be a circulatory system nor any pumping action taking place when heart cells begin to form and become synchronized.
    Questions: is it possible to detect the synchronized contractions of heart cells, in utero, that are not part of a functioning heart? Could such detection be (credibly or not) interpreted as a beating heart? Or passed off as evidence of one?
    If so, someone, somewhere, must be serving up a steaming heap of BS. Not surprisingly, pasty white, male politicians in certain places are eagerly rushing the table and gustily tucking in. The table talk mostly concerns expected up-ticks in donations from the feeble and the faithful.
    Can anyone here shed some light on my questions?

  14. davidc1 says

    I wonder how many of them fine christian gentlemen have girl friends on the side ?
    And i wonder how many of those girl friends have became pregnant?
    And i wonder how many were forced to have abortions by said fine christian gentlemen ?

  15. jimmyfromdelaware says

    In all the reporting on this travesty I find it unbelievable when people bring up the men that voted for it; they never mention that a woman signed it into law.

    We need to elect leaders based on good policy, not on chromosome count.

  16. aziraphale says

    Another revealing quote from Chambliss.

    “Bill sponsor Sen. Clyde Chambliss, a Republican, specified that the law would not prohibit the destruction of fertilized eggs used for in-vitro fertilization, only those conceived within a woman’s body. “The egg in the lab doesn’t apply. It’s not in a woman. She’s not pregnant,” Chambliss said, in floor debate with Democratic Sen. Rodger Smitherman.”

    Translation: we don’t want to interfere with the profitable business of IVF clinics. Only with women.

  17. alixmo says

    Still, we should not forget: There are “pro life” women, too. Those women are mental hostages to their “culture” and “community”. They are anti-women-women, brainwashed from early on into believing that women are dumb, filthy, lying, third rate humans, not equal to men. Men, as seen in religion, are better than women. Men are made to please God, made in “His image”. Women are an afterthought, created later, for the sole purpose to please men and have “their” children.

    Religion = sacred misogyny.

    And that is why atheist-humanists have to continue fighting publicly for real secularism. That is why there is a need for outspoken, critical atheist-humanists. We cannot shut up because we fear to “hurt some feelings”.

    We may hurt feelings – religious lunatics hurt people (MOSTLY WOMEN!)

    Reminder: The so called “Islamic Republic” Iran has its 40 anniversary in 2019. This is a reason to mourn! (No, I do not want war against Iran, but the regime is a horrible, inhumane, misogynistic etc. nightmare – that HAS to be said out loud, often!)

    Therefore: We have to speak out against religion (ALL religions, world-wide). We have to fight religious indoctrination in early age (kindergardens, schools). NO to faith schools, NO to homeschooling! NO to religious indoctrination in “normal” state schools!

    NO to the pro-religion bias in media and politics!

    (These are my general demands, not only for the US.)

  18. curbyrdogma says

    @ alixmo #22: Right you are. It’s been an uncomfortable realization that the Xian cult and its central focus around guilt appeals to certain sadomasochistic tendencies that are probably established in childhood, using reward/punishment incentives. Submit and accept your punishment to be an accepted member of your group. Personal sacrifice is one of Xianity’s core moral tenets, and this is why Xianity is so popular with women, because it preaches virtue and reward through sacrifice (validating the social role of sacrificing oneself for husband/children)

    Eve (representing all women) was the first “sinner” who disobeyed doG. Therefore, all women carry the burden of Eve’s guilt — as sinners who tempt men and are more likely to disobey doG — and must accept their lot in life if they wish to be granted eternal life.

    …And one of the other central tenets – “faith” – serves to lock it all down and avoid questioning it.

  19. Mobius says

    Oh, Jeez. I know it must be bad when Oklahoma (my home state) ranks higher. I pity Alabamans.

  20. silvergrrl says

    Quoting the God parody account on Twitter: (@TheTweetOfGod) “Life begins the moment you leave Alabama.”

  21. anbheal says

    You name your kids Clay and Clyde, you know you’re in for some serious stoopid.