General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMarco Rubio, Pervert
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/11/florida-adoption-bill_n_7565046.htmlSen. Marco Rubio (R) was among the Florida state legislators who voted for the so-called "Scarlet Letter" law in 2001 that required single mothers to publish their sexual histories in the newspaper in order to place their babies up for adoption.
Five U.S. congressmen -- Reps. Mario Diaz-Balart (R), Lois Frankel (D), Jeff Miller (R), Gus Bilirakis (R) and Dennis Ross (R) -- were state legislators at the time and voted for the controversial bill. Reps. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D), Frederica Wilson (D), Daniel Webster (R) and Bill Posey (R), who were also state legislators back then, voted against it.
The law, which passed with overwhelming majorities in the House and Senate, required unwed moms who wished to put their babies up for adoptions to post details about their recent sexual encounters in the newspaper in an attempt to contact the father, even if the woman was a victim of rape or incest. The purpose of the bill was to inform estranged biological fathers that their children were being adopted and give them the chance to intervene.
The "Scarlet Letter" law gained media attention this week after The Huffington Post reported that former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R) had advocated for the public shaming of unwed parents in his 1995 book. Bush allowed the controversial law to go into effect in 2001, but signed a repeal of it two years later after it was successfully challenged in court.
The fact that Rubio, a 2016 presidential candidate, supported the bill could inoculate Bush from criticism that he allowed it to go into effect if Bush decides to throw his hat in the ring. The Gainesville Sun reported in 2002 that some lawmakers -- including Frankel, a longtime women's right activist -- did not realize the newspaper publication provision was in the bill when they voted for it. "I have to admit I'm horrified that I voted for this," Frankel told the Sun at the time.
Rubio and the other current members of Congress who supported the bill did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
I am speechless. War on women? Fuck YEAH!
TwilightGardener
(46,416 posts)but we all know it won't.
valerief
(53,235 posts)JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)peacebird
(14,195 posts)Instead of aborting it, right? Aren't the the uterus police? The ones who care so deeply about every zygote?
What's up with shaming and humiliating the women who chose to give a baby up for adoption?
(Disclaimer: I am totally prochoice. I support whichever choice a woman makes, and to me there is no one choice that is better than the other)
SunSeeker
(51,728 posts)Mind you, these are the same folks who don't want to provide health care for the baby once it is born, nor give the mom a living wage so she can feed the baby.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]
bluesbassman
(19,379 posts)Once you're out of the womb, you're on your own!
MadDAsHell
(2,067 posts)is politically catchy but it's very divisive to exclude trans men.
roguevalley
(40,656 posts)libodem
(19,288 posts)For abortion. Adoption needs to be as private as possible to especially protect underage girls. Are they trying to prevent any one from relinquishing their child?
Good lord that's a punitive breech of privacy. Why allow rapist/molesters access to their kids? That IS perverted.
olddots
(10,237 posts)they act like babys and I don't want them .
No Vested Interest
(5,167 posts)that the newspaper postings by the mom before adoption of the child was to get father's to pay child support.
If that was even part of the reasoning at the time, it was an extremely poor reason - to sacrifice the privacy of a mother in hopes of getting a few dollars of child support.
Likely many or most of those fathers were unable to pay any support money. Some may not have even been aware that they had fathered a child.