Senator Mary Lazich Asks For The Very Thing She Has Denied Wisconsin’s Women and Men!

Earlier Zach posted an article on the circus that existed within the Wisconsin State Senate yesterday morning during the short debate and rushed roll call vote on SB 206, the anti-abortion bill. His article included a ten minute video from the shortened debate and Senate President Mike Ellis losing control of the floor and losing control of Mike Ellis.

But here is the excerpt of the bill’s author, Senator Mary Lazich’s floor speech in support of the bill. Any number of times she decries the theatrics of her opponents just before she goes into full Hamlet mode:

President Ellis should have reminded her that there are not Tonys or Oscars for over acting in the capitol. Amazingly she demands that we provide women with quality health care at the same time she is promoting a law that closes the very thing she says she wants.

And she wants every woman to have full knowledge about what’s happening in their body. Maybe she should step back and enable age appropriate, medically accurate, comprehensive sex education in the first place. That would be a big step in the right direction.

I can’t imagine that one single woman who has ever considered an abortion didn’t know the consequences. Didn’t know what was going to happen and didn’t think long and hard before making the decision to have or not have an abortion. For Sen. Lazich to suggest that it’s a frivolous decision is absolutely absurd.

I find it incredible that she actually lived through the 1960′s and 1970′s and can still make the off the wall statements documented in this video. To say it was a right of passage to womanhood in the 1960′s to have an abortion? Really? OMG!

I don’t understand why nearly every woman in Wisconsin isn’t circling the Capitol right now and amid more sturm und drang than anything we saw in 2011!

BTW: As a number of people have posted on Facebook and a number of comments after online articles about the senator’s testimony, Roe vs. Wade wasn’t decided until 1973 and abortions were still illegal and dangerous prior to that.

Update: corrected typo of Rowe to Roe 6/14/13

12 comments to Senator Mary Lazich Asks For The Very Thing She Has Denied Wisconsin’s Women and Men!

  • Judith

    Perhaps Sen. Lazich’s passion and ranting reveals more about her personal life than she otherwise would openly share. I’m unable to find any biographical information about her current marital/parenting history. The language she uses is straight from pre-Roe v. Wade days and, I believe, demonstrates personal demons for having undergone a – what was then – illegal procedure. She is old enough to have lived those times and would know abortion was not a “right of passage” but an illegal procedure within U.S. borders. Does anyone have any insights about her history? As long as women believe the men who would, enmasse, essentially commit state-sanctioned violence against over half the species, the struggle for simple human dignity and self-determination must – and will – continue.

       9 likes

  • Tanya

    I’ve wondered that if such a woman frivolously making an abortion decision exists, would giving birth be in the best interest of anyone?

       4 likes

  • PJ

    Mary Lazich the Trauma Nanny is an immoral woman. I’d point out the propagandist method beneath her histrionics – one that Conservatives have relied upon with a number of issues, but particularly with the war on women – adopting the opponent’s frame and dishonestly applying it to one’s own agenda. Mary Lazich applies it, and shamefully so, to quality health care for women.

    Wowza – insisting that women in this state will no longer undergo abortion trauma if they’re subjected to an invasive ultrasound – because doing so will provide them with facts and all the information? Not a bastion of sound logic is she? The argument for preventing abortion trauma is what exactly? And the conclusive medical evidence that insists that invasive ultra-sounds (getting raped by the state) and forcing a woman to look at an ultrasound potentially against her will prevents abortion trauma? I don’t see Trauma Nanny Lazich supporting this Nanny-Stating inanity with medical expertise – you know, the kind which connects “state rape” and a decrease in “abortion trauma.” I should think if the medical community were to weigh in on it they might insist on the reverse. Being forcibly raped by the state, forcibly coerced by the state to undergo an unnecessary procedure might very well be the factors that induce psychological trauma.

    The FACTS, if Mary Lazich were concerned with them, are that no medical community anywhere in the advanced world identifies abortion as a trauma inducing procedure or negatively impacts a woman’s long term mental health. Neither the American Psychiatric Association nor the American Psychological Association recognize “abortion trauma” as described by Trauma Nanny Lazich. The facts are: the phenomena of “abortion trauma” was devised by Reagan advisors Gary Bauer and Dinesh D’Souza and “making it true” was assigned to evangelical Surgeon General C. Everett Koop. Even given his anti-choice views Koop was unable to “make it true.” Not that Koop’s opinion would have mattered to any thinking individual anyway; he was ill-qualified for the position he was appointed, having no experience in the field of public health. “Abortion trauma” is not medically recognized. “Abortion trauma” is a means to attract the evangelical vote. “Abortion trauma” is a political maneuver in every sense of the term. “Abortion trauma” is not a medical condition.

    That’s not to say that the medical community hasn’t identified correlating factors with respect to mental health and abortion. They have – with decades long longitudinal studies. What the medical community has determined is that there is no phenomena known as “abortion trauma” and no correlation whatsoever between a woman’s long term mental health and abortion. Where negative patterns arise between abortion and mental health, these patterns are contained to pre-existing factors within an individual’s circumstances such as previous mental illness, a woman’s support system (as in – lack thereof) and whether a woman holds conservative views. So, it would seem to me “abortion trauma” is induced more by exposure to Conservative ideology and Conservative policy than anything else. Let’s not forget the psychological distress caused to women who choose abortion due to the continual harassment by Conservative activists and Conservative culture warriors – the Anti-Choice Guilt Bullies. One can only speculate how much psychological trauma these unbalanced Nanny Staters have caused. What we needn’t speculate on is a scientifically proven causal relationship between abortion and psychological trauma – there isn’t one. “Abortion trauma” is a political tactic entirely disconnected from the realm of medical reality.

    The bottom line is: this is a mental health issue Trauma Nanny Lazich refers to, is it not? It would seem to me that the issues Trauma Nanny Lazich should get a handle on are women’s previous mental illness or psychological distress – long before the issue of whether or not that woman might choose to have an abortion. If Trauma Nanny Lazich is so very concerned about women’s mental health perhaps she’ll consider socializing the health care system so all women receive adequate mental health care all the time.

       8 likes

  • forgotmyscreenname

    Ed, you are wrong on this point:

    “BTW: As a number of people have posted on Facebook and a number of comments after online articles about the senator’s testimony, Roe vs. Wade wasn’t decided until 1973 and abortions were still illegal and dangerous prior to that.”

    About 20 states had liberalized or repealed their abortion laws making it legal in the years BEFORE Roe vs. Wade. By the way, it’s still dangerous but don’t rely on PP or the media to tell you that.

       0 likes

    • Ed Heinzelman

      Thanks for the clarification on the status of abortion.

      And yes every surgical procedure is dangerous…but a procedure in a clinic with trained medical personnel is safer than in a motel room with a quack.

         3 likes

      • forgotmyscreenname

        I agree, Ed. I am not talking just about the risk of the procedure itself, but many of the complications that can result years later. I don’t think women are informed about those emotional and physical consequences. Also, we’ve seen that in cases like Gosnell, the procedures do not always take place in a clinic (sometimes they are sent home for the drugs to kick in.) ‘Just hover over a toilet’ doesn’t sound safe or under trained supervision to me. If this were any other issue, the media would be calling for a nationwide review. Who knows how many other horror shows out there. Who are we kidding, ALL abortion clinics are horror shows.

           0 likes

  • PJ

    FMSN,
    If you are implying that abortion is medically dangerous, there’s no need to rely on the media to tell you that your assumption is incorrect. Rely on the medical establishment (of which Planned Parenthood is a part) – and the medical establishment ruling is no, abortion is not inordinately dangerous or more dangerous than any other comparable medical procedure. This was a point Koop couldn’t make at all which is why the effort to go with the erroneous and patently false idea that abortion causes “abortion trauma.”

    Rely on the medical establishment for evaluating “abortion trauma” as well – it is not recognized by the medical establishment. What is recognized is that women are more often stressed and anxious prior to the procedure and less stress and anxious after. Again, the phantom phenomena of “abortion trauma” appears to be an affliction confined to women with Conservative leanings – simply put, if a woman believes abortion is wrong she shouldn’t have one. If you’d like to go as far as saying abortion providers should be aware of their patients’ Conservative views, I’d say that is ludicrous. It would be appropriate to discuss those scientifically derived matters (and medical providers do), but state-rape to scare a woman into not having an abortion is cruel, immoral, and pathologically dictatorial.

    As to the statistical difference that suggests Conservative-leaning women might be more prone to depression or anxiety following an abortion procedure – kinda makes sense that a woman who had an abortion and is inundated with Anti-Choice vitriol might start feeling kind of bad – because that is what Anti-Abortion vitriol is intended to do – to shame and guilt a woman into not having an abortion, to shame and guilt a woman to question her own judgment (which only confuses rather than clarifies), and to cause a woman to feel guilt and shame after she’s chosen an abortion. Anyone who attempts to tell a woman abortion is wrong is immorally heinous – that decision should be a woman’s alone – not her family, her husband, her clergy, her legislators, the media or any Anti-Choice activist organizations. None of those views has any place within a medical facility. Only established medical data is appropriate to discuss within any medical facility.

    Whether or no some states relaxed their abortion laws prior to Roe is as immaterial as it is now. What is material is that every woman in the nation regardless of what state she resides shouldn’t have her health care and critical decisions about her own life dictated by the religious views of those who represent her in government.

    Though, you are correct that about 1/3 of the states had turned toward legalizing abortion – because it was necessary. Women were dying from back alley abortionists and also self-induced abortion. That liberalization was hodge-podge lacking in uniformity to the degree that it provided no guarantee to women. As for the history of abortion laws -the 19th Century saw the push to criminalize abortion, prior to that time it was a fairly common and uncontroversial procedure. Regardless – again, a haphazard set of laws is an untenable standard for safe medical care. A woman residing in a state with restrictive abortion laws is not living in a nation where equality is supposed to be the underlying principle of governance.

       5 likes

    • forgotmyscreenname

      “Whether or no some states relaxed their abortion laws prior to Roe is as immaterial as it is now.” — It’s not immaterial because it was a completely incorrect statement in the original post.

      I’m not dictating decisions based on religious views, I’m relying on the proven science of the day.

      As for the rest of your post, you can keep going on pretending that it’s a safe and honorable decision, instead of the ending of millions of innocent children. You blaming pro-life information for making people uncomfortable is like blaming photographers for showing you what the holocaust looks like. Sometimes the truth hurts.

         0 likes

  • PJ

    FMSN,

    You’re not relying on the science of the day – you are attempting to utilize science to manipulate and force a religious and extremist agenda onto women who have made their own decision about abortion. Forcing a woman to have an unnecessary ultrasound is state-rape, and it is designed to serve a religious agenda. There’s nothing scientific about the premise of the bill which is “abortion trauma” – “abortion trauma” isn’t accepted by the scientific community. Do your homework. It is a political maneuver that right-wing evangelicals have been traumatizing women with since Reagan’s administration. There is absolutely nothing analogical in any logical universe about “blaming pro-life information for making people feel uncomfortable is like blaming photographers for showing you what the holocaust looks like.” You’ve managed to rationalize but you haven’t employed rationalism. Rather than relying on convenient maxims, try studying the art of logic – that way you can actually think through complex ideas rather than absorbing that which is fed to you via propagandist methodology. By the way, a properly constructed analogy you might want to consider: using science to do as you, Trauma Nanny Lazich, State-Rape Walker, and the GOP suggest has a distinctly Mengele aspect to it. Your purpose for state-rape is guileful, punitive, predatory, and really it’s monstrous. Really, state-rape doesn’t differ much from what Gosnell did – preying on women at a time when they are most vulnerable. So, Join the club with Mengele and Gosnell, FMSN.

    I’m not pretending anything. In the first place, the medical establishment does not concur with you. Accept it. Forcing your beliefs on women who choose an abortion either directly or indirectly by subverting the purpose of government and perverting the object of the medical community is authoritarian and dictatorial. You can try pretending that it isn’t; but the fact remains: you insist that your belief that should override that of the medical establishment and that your belief should override every American woman’s right to exercise her own will by using her own mind. That position is dictatorial and it is reviled by anyone who truly values life, liberty, freedom, and equality.

    And Ed didn’t make an incorrect statement regarding Roe – he did spell it incorrectly and has since updated that orthographical error – but his statement was not incorrect. Prior to Roe there was no national law pertaining to abortion. That some states did alter their laws prior to Roe isn’t germane to Ed’s point, and more to the point – hodge-podge, patchwork legal codes with no uniformity does not make “something legal” any more that it makes something “illegal.” Your point is fallacious. Ed was on point – abortion wasn’t legally codified by the UNITED STATES.

       6 likes

  • Sandra

    How would Lazich know about the 1960’s? The Blue book says she was born on October 3, 1952 in Loyal, Wisconsin. Am I missing something? Was Loyal, Wisconsin a wild and crazy kind of place for a teenager?

    The 2005-2006 Wisconsin Blue book says Mary Lazich is married and has 3 children.

       2 likes

    • PJ

      Sandra,

      Good point. Trauma Nanny Lazich was 15 when the first state, Colorado, liberalized its abortion laws. That was in 1967. Another thing to keep in mind about Trauma Nanny Lazich’s irrational tirade is that she’s propagandistically attempting to establish a connection between morally loose women, the feminism movement, and abortion — it’s a dog whistle for the Right-Wing’s 1960s thesis – that the 60s and early 70s define the era that initiated a shift toward America’s immoral path as the nation culturally turned its back on “traditional values.” You’ll find this thesis perpetuated even by Conservative extremists born in the 60s and later, individuals who have no direct experience with the time. The 60s thesis marks one component of Conservative alternative anti-history, the historical revisionism that Right Wing Extremists continually advance. A point to keep in mind given that – It was in 1972 that the Supreme Court established the right of the unmarried to use contraceptives.

         2 likes

  • James Fenno

    Mary is the resurrection of the John Birch Society. They didn’t cease to exist in 1980′s. They, with exception of Grover F. Norquist, were down south recuiting and practicing their bigotry with the KKK.

    They are back with all their lying ways embodied by the Tea Party. Ask Mary if she takes money from the gun lobby. Women’s health issues are the purview of that worm assembly rep from DePere whose little wagon Mary has climbed on. Small Gov’t Mary told me she was proudest of her work on getting the voting bill thru the state senate. You know, the one cutting out students and people of color.

    MARY, WHY DO YOU SUPPOSE THE BIRCHERS ARE BACK? ANYTHING TO DO WITH WHO WAS ELECTED AND RE-ELECTED POTUS?

       1 likes

Leave a Reply

  

  

  

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Blogging Blue’s “14 in ’14″

Goal Thermometer