Connect with us

New Hampshire

NH Republicans introduce bill to mandate abortion video showing in health class

Published

on

NH Republicans introduce bill to mandate abortion video showing in health class


play

Advertisement
  • New Hampshire Republicans introduced a bill Wednesday to mandate the showing of abortion videos in public school health class.
  • They also introduced bills to require the showing of the “Meet Baby Olivia” video and to provide information about adoption in health class.
  • Bill sponsor says bill is for education purposes; Planned Parenthood said the materials are “anti-abortion propaganda.”

New Hampshire Republicans introduced a bill Wednesday to mandate the showing of abortion videos in public school health class.

HB 662 was one of three bills some state representatives have filed in an effort they say is to educate New Hampshire public school students on abortion.

While a bill to ban abortions after 15-weeks was withdrawn Thursday, these bills are a few of the ones keeping the abortion issue alive in Concord.

What would the abortion video bill do?

HB 662 would require public high schools to show at least two of three videos developed by Live Action, an anti-abortion activist group, as part of the school’s health and wellness education. The videos are described as showing the process of chemical or surgical abortion during the first or second trimester through “high quality, computer-generated rendering or animation.”

The legislation would also prohibit schools from offering any course materials from entities that provide abortions.

Advertisement

Why do legislators want to mandate abortion viewing in health class?

Prime sponsor Rep. John Sellers, R-Bristol, said that the videos are “nonpolitical and non-religious” and that the goal of the legislation is purely educational.

“I believe that this information is information our kids really need to know and understand what they’re getting into and how it may affect them,” he said Wednesday. “Banning these educational videos would be no different than banning books and not allowing the children to learn.”

“Meet Baby Olivia” bill and more

In addition to HB 662, Sellers sponsored two other bills related to education on abortion in schools.

Advertisement

HB 667 would require the showing of another video made by the anti-abortion group Live Action called “Meet Baby Olivia” which purports to depict the process of human development. It would make the viewing of this video a graduation requirement and would also mandate the New Hampshire public universities and colleges certify that students have seen the video. 

The language of this bill is like many others introduced around the country. North Dakota and Tennessee have already enacted laws requiring schools show “Meet Baby Olivia” or something like it, and lawmakers in several other states, including Iowa, Arkansas, and West Virginia, have introduced similar bills this year.

Sellers also sponsored HB 730, which would require school districts to discuss and provide materials related to adoption for at least one hour a year during health education and anytime sexually transmitted infections or contraception are discussed.

Planned Parenthood says bills push “anti-abortion propaganda”

Planned Parenthood of Northern New England and New Hampshire said that while they support a wide variety of sex education topics, these bills “seek to require anti-abortion propaganda to be shown and provided in New Hampshire public middle school, high school, and colleges.”

Advertisement

The organization said that the videos mentioned in the bills are biased and not based in medical practice or science. The “Baby Olivia” video, they said, has not been endorsed by “any unbiased media organization.” 

They also said that requiring the provision of adoption information “stigmatizes sexual and reproductive health care.”  

“All three of these bills seek to push an anti-abortion agenda on teenagers and young adults across the state. These bills all seek to shame teenagers,” read their testimony. “New Hampshire students deserve to have honest, medically-accurate, and complete information when it comes to making healthy lifelong decisions.”

All three bills saw hundreds more people in opposition than in support on the online testimony. They are all awaiting a recommendation from the Education Policy and Administration Committee before heading to the House floor for the first vote in the bill process.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

New Hampshire

State House Dome: Buckley gets key seat to defend NH primary

Published

on

State House Dome: Buckley gets key seat to defend NH primary


AFTER A TENSE, chaotic and demoralizing 2024 election cycle, New Hampshire Democratic leaders have landed key spots as they try to put the Granite State’s first-in-the-nation primary back in the national party’s good graces.






Advertisement

The Union Leader first confirmed that new Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin has returned New Hampshire party chairman Ray Buckley to the DNC’s Rules & Bylaws Committee.

Some in GOP still on U.S. Senate lookout

Ayotte picks new judicial panel members

Dropping in on the ‘other gov’

Signs SIG Sauer bill, fires off at trial lawyers

Let’s play ‘When is the election?’

Friend of Kelly headed to N.H.

First 2026 campaign reports to emerge

NH split on vehicle inspections



Source link

Continue Reading

New Hampshire

Concerns about transparency swirl around Nashua performing arts center – The Boston Globe

Published

on

Concerns about transparency swirl around Nashua performing arts center – The Boston Globe


Thursday’s decision arises from one of more than a dozen lawsuits resident Laurie A. Ortolano has filed against Nashua in the past five years under the RTK law. It clarifies that a 2008 change to the law didn’t narrow the scope of entities bound by it. Legislators added language specifying that government-owned nonprofit corporations are public bodies subject to the RTK law, but that doesn’t mean all for-profit corporations are exempt, the court ruled.

To determine whether an entity constitutes a public body under the RTK law, judges still must conduct a “government function” test, just as they were required to do before the 2008 change to the law. The lower court failed to do that in this case.

Advertisement

In response to Thursday’s decision, Ortolano said it seems fairly clear that NPAC Corp. is using public money to perform a government function, especially considering how involved city officials have been in the entity’s financing and administration.

Ortolano said officials had long reassured the public that the performing arts center would be operated transparently, but then they established the for-profit entity.

“All of the records went dark, and you could not really track accountability of the money any longer,” she said.

Ortolano’s lawsuit alleges the city owns a nonprofit entity that owns the for-profit corporation, but city attorney Steven A. Bolton disputed that. Nashua doesn’t own any of the entities in question, he said. (That said, the city’s Board of Alderman approves mayoral appointees to lead the nonprofits.)

Bolton said he was pleased that the Supreme Court agreed with the trial court’s decision to dismiss the city as a defendant in this case, and he expressed confidence that the money raised for this project was spent appropriately on construction, furnishings, and perhaps initial operating costs.

Advertisement

Attorneys for the remaining defendant, NPAC Corp., didn’t respond Thursday to requests for comment. The corporation maintains it is a private entity exempt from the RTK law, even though its members are listed on the city’s website alongside other municipal boards and committees.

Gregory V. Sullivan, an attorney who practices in New Hampshire and Massachusetts and who serves as president of the New England First Amendment Coalition, said he suspects the superior court will conclude that NPAC Corp. is subject to the RTK law. He commended Ortolano as “a right-to-know warrior” and criticized leaders who resist transparency.

“The city of Nashua has historically, in my opinion, not been cooperative with requests to disclose the public’s records as opposed to other cities and towns in New Hampshire,” he said. “We the people are the government, own the government, and they’re our records.”


This article first appeared in Globe NH | Morning Report, our free newsletter focused on the news you need to know about New Hampshire, including great coverage from the Boston Globe and links to interesting articles from other places. If you’d like to receive it via e-mail Monday through Friday, you can sign up here.


Advertisement

Steven Porter can be reached at steven.porter@globe.com. Follow him @reporterporter.





Source link

Continue Reading

New Hampshire

New Hampshire governor rejects hearing for Pamela Smart, sentenced to life for husband’s 1990 death

Published

on

New Hampshire governor rejects hearing for Pamela Smart, sentenced to life for husband’s 1990 death


New Hampshire Gov. Kelly Ayotte rejected on Thursday the latest request for a sentence reduction hearing from Pamela Smart, who is serving life in prison for orchestrating the murder of her husband by her teenage student in 1990.

Smart, 57, was a 22-year-old high school media coordinator when she began an affair with a 15-year-old boy who later fatally shot her husband, Gregory Smart, in Derry. The shooter was freed in 2015 after serving a 25-year sentence. Though Smart denied knowledge of the plot, she was convicted of being an accomplice to first-degree murder and other crimes and sentenced to life without parole.

It took until last year for Smart to take full responsibility for her husband’s death. In a video released in June, she said she spent years deflecting blame “almost as if it was a coping mechanism.”

On Wednesday, Smart wrote to Ayotte and the governor’s Executive Council asking for a hearing on commuting her sentence. But Ayotte, a Republican elected in November, said she has reviewed the case and decided it is not deserving of a hearing before the five-member panel.

“People who commit violent crimes must be held accountable to the law,” said Ayotte, a former state attorney general. “I take very seriously the action of granting a pardon hearing and believe this process should only be used in exceptional circumstances.”

Advertisement

In her letter, Smart said she has spent the last 35 years “becoming a person who can and will be a contributing member of society.” Calling herself “what rehabilitation looks like,” she noted that she has taken responsibility for her husband’s death.

“I have apologized to Gregg’s family and my own for the life taken and for my life denied to my parents and family for all these long years,” she wrote.

Smart’s trial was a media circus and one of America’s first high-profile cases about a sexual affair between a school staff member and a student. The student, William Flynn, testified that Smart told him she needed her husband killed because she feared she would lose everything if they divorced. Flynn and three other teens cooperated with prosecutors and all have since been released.

The case inspired Joyce Maynard’s 1992 book “To Die For” and the 1995 film of the same name, starring Nicole Kidman and Joaquin Phoenix.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending