Might want to check up on this story, Rob. It’s not at all what you make it out to be. No Republicans voted for the bill—there were two votes on it, one yes, one no. Guess which party the yes vote came from? The Democratic side. See the story below, and others through Google. The “man around the house” statement is both weird and wrong, I agree with you—but that sort of comment wasn’t the reason for the bill’s failure. Neither were the Democrats, NOW, or anyone else on the left the reason for its failure—seems like not many on either side was much in favor of it.
Pregnant women won’t get placards
‘DISABLED’ PARKING PROPOSAL FAILS
By Edwin Garcia
Mercury News Sacramento Bureau
Article Launched: 03/25/2008 01:38:51 AM PDT
Related Stories
* Mar 25:
* Editorial: Save the disabled parking for those who truly need it
SACRAMENTO - A proposal to allow some pregnant women to park in spaces reserved for the disabled failed Monday in a state Assembly committee.
AB 1940 would have classified all women in their third trimester - and up to two months after delivering their baby - as “temporarily disabled.” The law would have required the state Department of Motor Vehicles to issue disabled parking placards good for five months.
The measure was proposed by Assemblyman Chuck DeVore, R-Irvine, who called it a “common sense law” to help women get around easier. It died after receiving only one vote from the 14-member Assembly Transportation Committee.
DeVore’s fellow Republicans called the measure unnecessary because under current law doctors can sign a form requesting the DMV to issue temporary disabled placards to pregnant women who suffer from discomfort or other problems that affect their mobility.
After the hearing, DeVore said the male committee members “haven’t a clue what their spouses went through” during their final trimester of pregnancy - or while walking long distances through parking lots with a newborn.
The proposed law, similar to a measure that failed four years ago, drew criticism from some advocates for the disabled, who said blue-zone parking is in short supply, and from women’s rights groups, who disliked labeling pregnancy as a disability.
MDMDC - 02:03pm on 03/25/2008
I’m sorry but I think the pregnancy parking is going beyond the “handicapped” issue. One is not handicapped while pregnant.
Myself, who carried to term, 2 10lb girls and 1 11lb boy, I’ll happily step right up and agree it’s certainly cumbersome, laborious, and even occasionally embarassing, but never ever is it a handicap.
It is a blessing in disguise. (ok, I’m done laughing at that statement too, so anyway ..) A disguise of sometimes heinous masquerade and maybe even torturous deeds (ie: labor and delivery) But I’m thinking, if the “mommy to be” is expected to labor extensively for a gabillion hours and then deliver the hulkin’ mass of being from an exit 20 times smaller than the exitee then BY GOD… I think she can walk from a normal parking spot in the lot.
IMHO of course
Anna - 02:03pm on 03/25/2008
Oops, did I forget to mention, they have this so called parking at many stores in Washington state and the slang term for it here is “Illegal Immigrant” parking.
Laugh or get pissy all ya want, but I am serious as sh@$. LOL
PS y’all, if there is an actual medical reason behind a “mommy to be” to have handicapped privileges, the dr will make sure she gets her special parking permit tag.
Anna - 02:03pm on 03/25/2008
Anna. We have expectant mother’s parking in some of our grocery stores. The people here (down south) still respect women and especially pregnant ones. There is also another sign for something else, but I forget. This is not law, but common courtesy.
Chief RZ - 02:03pm on 03/25/2008
When I was pregnant, my doctor told me to walk for exercise. He even suggested that I park my car out in the south 40, rather than up close to the door, when going to the mall or shopping center.
If a pregnant woman is so debilitated, she can’t walk a few extra steps, then maybe she should be on bed rest rather than shopping. Plus at every grocery store in my area there are several handicapped spots and then next to them are two, sometimes three, spots that are marked for pregnant only. I live in So. Calif.
Pal2Pal - 02:03pm on 03/25/2008
I question the good faith here I call vote pandering on this the privilege is already available.
digital1nk - 02:03pm on 03/25/2008
But, on topic, it seems that left-wing women do not like people to have children based on the fact that most favor abortions. Their jobs are more important than human life. Baby killers. I guess they then become jealous of those who decide to have a family and let their child live. I learned about Billy Jean King about ten years ago.
Chief RZ - 02:03pm on 03/25/2008
But, on topic, it seems that left-wing women do not like people to have children based on the fact that most favor abortions.
Um, okay. That makes sense—left-wing women (like my wife, you mean?) don’t like people to have children (we have three, her sister has two, my sisters and brothers combined have eight). And we “favor” abortion—well, that’s just a baiting statement on your behalf, of course, so I won’t go on a long reply—let’s just say we don’t “favor” abortion, we understand the need for a woman’s choice. You can (and I’m sure will) argue with that all you want, but it certainly isn’t “on topic” here, as you’d like it to be.
“On topic” would be the the fact that this thread was started with a complete lie of a story—left wing women, NOW, Democrats, etc., had nothing to do with this bill not being passed. That’s the topic—given how often y’all complain about the MSM bias in news stories, I’d think you’d want to correct this one.
mddc - 02:03pm on 03/25/2008
If a woman knows her “choice” would be to terminate a pregnancy, should one occur, then she should take precautions not to get pregnant. The “choice” she didn’t make should not be rectified by killing.
Pal2Pal - 03:03pm on 03/25/2008
Common courtesy for past masters of deceit, RZ?
But, on topic, it seems that left-wing women do not like people to have children based on the fact that most favor abortions.
Might want to check up on this story, Rob. It’s not at all what you make it out to be. No Republicans voted for the bill—there were two votes on it, one yes, one no. Guess which party the yes vote came from? The Democratic side. See the story below, and others through Google. The “man around the house” statement is both weird and wrong, I agree with you—but that sort of comment wasn’t the reason for the bill’s failure. Neither were the Democrats, NOW, or anyone else on the left the reason for its failure—seems like not many on either side was much in favor of it.
Pregnant women won’t get placards
‘DISABLED’ PARKING PROPOSAL FAILS
By Edwin Garcia
Mercury News Sacramento Bureau
Article Launched: 03/25/2008 01:38:51 AM PDT
Related Stories
* Mar 25:
* Editorial: Save the disabled parking for those who truly need it
SACRAMENTO - A proposal to allow some pregnant women to park in spaces reserved for the disabled failed Monday in a state Assembly committee.
AB 1940 would have classified all women in their third trimester - and up to two months after delivering their baby - as “temporarily disabled.” The law would have required the state Department of Motor Vehicles to issue disabled parking placards good for five months.
The measure was proposed by Assemblyman Chuck DeVore, R-Irvine, who called it a “common sense law” to help women get around easier. It died after receiving only one vote from the 14-member Assembly Transportation Committee.
DeVore’s fellow Republicans called the measure unnecessary because under current law doctors can sign a form requesting the DMV to issue temporary disabled placards to pregnant women who suffer from discomfort or other problems that affect their mobility.
After the hearing, DeVore said the male committee members “haven’t a clue what their spouses went through” during their final trimester of pregnancy - or while walking long distances through parking lots with a newborn.
The proposed law, similar to a measure that failed four years ago, drew criticism from some advocates for the disabled, who said blue-zone parking is in short supply, and from women’s rights groups, who disliked labeling pregnancy as a disability.
I’m sorry but I think the pregnancy parking is going beyond the “handicapped” issue. One is not handicapped while pregnant.
Myself, who carried to term, 2 10lb girls and 1 11lb boy, I’ll happily step right up and agree it’s certainly cumbersome, laborious, and even occasionally embarassing, but never ever is it a handicap.
It is a blessing in disguise. (ok, I’m done laughing at that statement too, so anyway ..) A disguise of sometimes heinous masquerade and maybe even torturous deeds (ie: labor and delivery) But I’m thinking, if the “mommy to be” is expected to labor extensively for a gabillion hours and then deliver the hulkin’ mass of being from an exit 20 times smaller than the exitee then BY GOD… I think she can walk from a normal parking spot in the lot.
IMHO of course
Oops, did I forget to mention, they have this so called parking at many stores in Washington state and the slang term for it here is “Illegal Immigrant” parking.
Laugh or get pissy all ya want, but I am serious as sh@$. LOL
PS y’all, if there is an actual medical reason behind a “mommy to be” to have handicapped privileges, the dr will make sure she gets her special parking permit tag.
Anna. We have expectant mother’s parking in some of our grocery stores. The people here (down south) still respect women and especially pregnant ones. There is also another sign for something else, but I forget. This is not law, but common courtesy.
When I was pregnant, my doctor told me to walk for exercise. He even suggested that I park my car out in the south 40, rather than up close to the door, when going to the mall or shopping center.
If a pregnant woman is so debilitated, she can’t walk a few extra steps, then maybe she should be on bed rest rather than shopping. Plus at every grocery store in my area there are several handicapped spots and then next to them are two, sometimes three, spots that are marked for pregnant only. I live in So. Calif.
I question the good faith here I call vote pandering on this the privilege is already available.
But, on topic, it seems that left-wing women do not like people to have children based on the fact that most favor abortions. Their jobs are more important than human life. Baby killers. I guess they then become jealous of those who decide to have a family and let their child live. I learned about Billy Jean King about ten years ago.
Um, okay. That makes sense—left-wing women (like my wife, you mean?) don’t like people to have children (we have three, her sister has two, my sisters and brothers combined have eight). And we “favor” abortion—well, that’s just a baiting statement on your behalf, of course, so I won’t go on a long reply—let’s just say we don’t “favor” abortion, we understand the need for a woman’s choice. You can (and I’m sure will) argue with that all you want, but it certainly isn’t “on topic” here, as you’d like it to be.
“On topic” would be the the fact that this thread was started with a complete lie of a story—left wing women, NOW, Democrats, etc., had nothing to do with this bill not being passed. That’s the topic—given how often y’all complain about the MSM bias in news stories, I’d think you’d want to correct this one.
If a woman knows her “choice” would be to terminate a pregnancy, should one occur, then she should take precautions not to get pregnant. The “choice” she didn’t make should not be rectified by killing.
Common courtesy for past masters of deceit, RZ?
Oh RZ, you crack me up.