by JivinJ, host of the blog, JivinJehoshaphat

Younger women have a more complex view of abortion, and they don’t view the issue as passionately as their mothers. “If you ask them if they support abortion rights, they say they don’t know or they don’t want to answer that question,” says Jen Bluestein, Emily’s List communications director.

For an organization created around the core mission of promoting reproductive choice, that could be a problem, and that’s why its new president, 36-year old Stephanie Schriock (pictured left), a native of MT with a strong libertarian streak, is forging a new way forward….
It’s the definition of pro-choice that is evolving under Schriock’s leadership, and it apparently will be a lot more flexible… reflecting the changing times and the scientific advances that have clouded the issue. The Emily’s List candidate questionnaire is not a lengthy document that asks a candidate to pledge support to very precise and extreme positions. It’s about commitment to Roe v. Wade, and for most Democrats, men and women, that’s an easy threshold to meet.

In the past, to be endorsed by EMILY’s List, female candidates had to favor tax-funded abortions. I wonder if that’s still the case.

…[T]hey carry mutations for a wide variety of diseases, including cystic fibrosis, Huntington’s disease and muscular dystrophy. Scientists hope studying them will yield a wealth of information about those and other diseases, leading to new treatments.
The lines had been obtained from embryos donated by couples who were undergoing treatment for infertility and had decided not to use them because tests showed the embryos carried genetic defects.
But the advisory panel found that consent forms permitting use of the embryos contained unusually broad language and those who signed the forms gave up all rights to sue the clinic for any reason.

[Schriock photo via CampusProgress.org]