Nebraska: OPPOSE LB 1077 Prohibit education about race and sex introduced by Senator B. Hansen

Committee: Government, Military and Veterans Affairs

OPPOSE LB 1077 Prohibit education about race and sex introduced by Senator B. Hansen

Greetings, Senator X, 

My name is X from X, District X.

I write in opposition to LB 1077, prohibiting teaching “certain concepts” about race and sex, introduced by Senator B. Hansen.

When looking at the summary of intent and then the bill itself, I’m just struck by how absurd, vague, needless, and reactionary this bill is, as well as how difficult it would be to enforce, especially because it censors free speech. 

Limiting our education system to avoid talking about “race and sex” is dooming our education system. Our nation is built upon injustices and if we cannot fully discuss history with the aim of addressing it and improving the present and future, we are doomed to repeat the bad parts of history. 

This bill is created by people who are unwilling to view history as it really is, and how it affects the world today. We will never advance as a nation if we are not willing to have difficult discussions, to LISTEN to the people who have been systematically disenfranchised in this country and around the world. This bill essentially tells people to “shut up” because it makes others “uncomfortable” to hear about what other people experience. That “discomfort” pales in comparison to the uncomfortable realities that are being silenced with a bill like LB 1077.

One thing that especially struck me was Section 4, 4a-b. A student couldn’t get extra credit for doing what I am doing right now… reaching out to legislators, being civic-minded and engaged in the democratic process, expecting my concerns to be of interest to elected officials who are supposed to represent me and uphold my best interests. Being engaged in the legislation of our nation SHOULD be encouraged. Trying to make the laws better SHOULD be encouraged. 

LB 1077 does NOT make sense, not as it is written, nor as a concept in general. It restricts education and free speech. It is counteractive to the growth and compassion and empathy that should be happening in classrooms and in places of discussion. 

Some of the most important conversations and discussions I’ve been privy to HAVE been uncomfortable truths about race and gender and I am GLAD. Learning about history in all its ugliness, listening to others who have backgrounds and experiences different from my own, being encouraged to change the world to be a better place, to be civic-minded and engaged in creating better places for EVERYONE, this has molded me to be a person who cares about others and who wants to improve life for others. 

This bill is horrendously antithetical to education and is a disservice to students, educators, and the general public. Places of learning should be for learning, discussion, and improvement, NOT censorship and ignorance. 

I am strongly opposed to LB 1077 and I urge the Committee and Senators to vote NO. 

Thank you for your time

X

Nebraska: Proponent of LB 1129 & LB 716 - free contraception, qualified abortion practitioners

Background: emailed my Senator and Health and Human Services Committee prior to the Committee Hearing.  

Greetings, Senator X,

My name is X in X, District X. 

I write as a proponent of LB 1129, free contraceptives, introduced by Senator Morfeld.

I write as a proponent of LB 716, allowing qualified practitioners to perform abortions, introduced by Senator Hunt. 

I am a film believer that women’s choice and reproductive freedoms should be protected, as it is a pinnacle part of our human rights. This includes access to contraception and abortions. 

In relation to LB 1129, contraception can be expensive for some people and it is an important element to women being able to exercise some control over their daily life. Some women are not ready for children, do not want children, or need to use their resources to care for children they already have. All of these are important to our freedoms, self-determination, and reproductive rights. 

Our health insurance system in our country fails to provide people the ability to meet their health care needs. There was a time in which health care covered contraception and that was a life saver to so many women, who oftentimes use contraception to address other issues outside of its common use of birth control. Unfortunately, there is a gap once again. 

When the cost of contraception can be covered, women are supported. It also will help down the line to prevent unwanted/unintended pregnancies and perhaps some children cycling through poverty, dangerous situations, or CPS. Anything that can be done to help women with their health and family planning is a benefit to the community at large.

In regards to LB 716, abortion access has been under attack and there have been detrimental efforts to make this important option less accessible to women. We need to understand that abortion IS health care. Therefore, allowing a higher number of qualified practitioners to perform abortions is a benefit to expanding this health care that protects our reproductive rights. Women need MORE options, not less.

I am a proponent of both LB1129 & LB 716 and hope you will do your part to get these bills passed. Please vote yes to support women.

Thank you for your time

X

Nebraska: OPPOSITION to LB 781, LB 933, & LB 1086 - Antiabortion bills

I emailed the Judicial Committee ahead of the hearing on three anti-abortion bills in the 2022 Unicameral Legislature.

OPPOSITION to LB 781, LB 933, LB 1086 Greetings, Senator X My name is X in X, District X. I write in opposition to LB 781, the “Heartbeat Act” introduced by Senator Slama. I write in opposition to LB 933 the “Human Life Protection Act” introduced by Senator Albrecht. I write in opposition to LB 1086, Chemical Abortion Safety Protocol Act, introduced by Senator Geist. Outlawing abortion endangers women and is an affront to civil rights, human rights, reproductive rights, bodily autonomy, self-determination, and our basic freedoms. It treats women as second class citizens forbidden from making decisions that affect their health, bodies, and lives. Outlawing abortion means that the state has decided that all women must be subjected to the risk of death should there be complications in the pregnancy. Therefore it does not protect women’s lives. Pregnancy and childbirth is an undertaking that has short-term and long-term risks. When women are not allowed to assess what is best for them and are forced into pregnancies, we are living in a dystopian society that views women as vessels and not autonomous human beings. In Nebraska, rapists have parental rights, so when you take away a woman’s right to an abortion, you are subjecting her to the trauma of possibly co-parenting with her rapist, or relinquishing her child to her rapist. This is cruel and avoidable by allowing women to make the decision they find to be in their best interest (and by preventing rapists to have parental rights). We do not live in a society conducive to pregnancy and child-rearing. We do not have a living wage. We do not have mandatory paid maternity leave. We do not have universal health care. We do not have universal child care. You cannot force women to undergo pregnancies in a society that does not protect them financially. Even if all of these social and governmental ills were addressed, (and they should be) it’s still unethical and wrong to force a woman into a pregnancy. Even if Person A is in need of an organ and Person B is a perfect match, Person B cannot be coerced into providing said organ. Similarly, if Person C has not opted into Organ & Tissue Donation before death, their organs may NOT be harvested once they die. In the same vein, you cannot force a woman to use her body in a way that is against her wishes, even if a embryo/fetus/child will be prevented from developing. The idea of a ‘heartbeat’ has often been misconstrued to promote an agenda. A fetus's heart is not formed until closer to 10 weeks, even if a palpitation is audible closer to 6 weeks when it is still considered an embryo. At any rate, it cannot survive outside the womb until several months have passed, so it is absurd to restrict women from a hugely important decision at such an early stage. Women may not know they are pregnant prior to detection of a ‘heartbeat.’ Scheduling any procedure can take time and appointments may not be available in a timely manner. It requires a woman to be able to change a work schedule (i.e. lose money), find transportation, and rearrange child care. The cruelty of this restriction is intentional and shows no compassion, empathy, or understanding for the real burdens women face. Women choose abortion for a plethora of options, none of which are up for debate. Abortion may even be the best option for protecting women who originally wanted to continue the pregnancy. It is inappropriate and dangerous for uninformed, uninvolved people to make generalized laws that prohibit doctors and health care providers from performing procedures that are in the best interest of their patient. Those who would tell women they cannot terminate a pregnancy are overreaching into realms that do not include them. There is no need to pry into women’s private lives and complicate things that have nothing to do with the unsolicited opinion of a stranger. Laws preventing women from terminating pregnancies are very often shame-based and meant to punish women for having sex. Men escape this scrutiny despite being at least 50% responsible. I am uninterested in the moral beliefs of these people and they are infringing upon my civil liberties with their belief systems. This needs to end. As far as LB 1086, this is yet another method meant to make it harder for women to access abortions. We should be expanding systems of complete sex education, and access to methods of contraception and abortion so that people can safely choose what is best for them. I trust women to make choices for themselves with their chosen medical provider. I know women who have had abortions, women who have given birth, women who have never given birth, women who have struggled with fertility, women who have fostered, or adopted. Some of these women have experienced a variety of those situations. My wish is for all women to have the resources and support they need to make the best choice for themselves without the moral judgments or unnecessary legal restrictions from uninvolved parties. Again, I am in opposition to LB 781, LB 933, and LB 1086. They are needless, cruel, and should be dismissed for their affront to human rights. Vote no to each. Thank you for your time,

X

Nebraska: Support LB 793 & LB 125 Ranked Choice Voting

I emailed my own senator, as well as those on the Government, Military and Veterans Affairs Committee. LB 793 will have a hearing in the next day or so and I wanted to lend my support 
Support LB 793 & LB 125 Ranked Choice Voting

Greetings, Senator X,

My name is X in X, District X and I write in support of LB 793 for Ranked Choice Voting for local elections and in support of LB 125 for Ranked Choice Voting for Presidential/Gubernatorial etc elections, both introduced by Senator X.

There are wide-reaching benefits to introducing a ballot that allows voters to rank their choices in candidates. 

It is more cost-efficient and it would allow us to eliminate costly primaries and run-offs. 

It would also allow for a more true democracy and more positive engagement, instead of a choice between two major parties only. Many people feel disenfranchised knowing their vote doesn’t truly count, but with Ranked Choice Voting it does.

Ranked Choice Voting is used in 26 states for local, municipal, primary, or special elections, and 21 states have introduced legislation recently.

I support the change in our voting system to better represent the will of the people and allow for the adoption of a more efficient system and hope you will vote in support to make LB 125 & 793 a reality for Nebraska. 

Thank you for your time. 

X