Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

I just want us all to remember...

This is how much the so-called "pro-life" people hate women.

We are nothing more than incubators.  We have no rights, not even the right to our own lives.

Just remember that, when someone tries to tell you that all women who want abortions are "lazy sluts who couldn't keep their legs closed".*

We do not require men to provide blood, tissue, nutrients, and space to a stranger for 9 months whether they want to or not; in fact, it's neither legal nor considered ethical (no, not even if it's Hitler being required to give blood to save Jesus).  Somehow, this thinking doesn't apply to women (because... babies?  That's a really fabulous lazy and bad argument).  Men are allowed bodily autonomy, but women are not?  Are our ladybrains so weak and unable to think that we can't weigh the ramifications of a choice in our heads?  And have these assholes ever heard about rape, the physical dangers of pregnancy (I guess it's an honour to die for the precious orphan that Republicans are trying very hard to ensure will starve on the streets), or even reproductive coercion

I have no personal stake in this battle; I made surgically sure I could never get pregnant years ago, and I have no daughters.  But I worry deeply about the future of all my world sisters.  Some of them may want children someday, and some of them may not.  Many of them die needlessly every day as long as there are people who fight against reproductive justice.  I want the mothers, the daughters, the sisters, the nieces, the women of the United States to always have that choice, and not be held to the unconstitutional** whim of religious woman-haters, many of whom think rape is no big deal (so refusing to have sex with them is probably not going to work).

Obama had better veto this one. 

*It goes without saying, of course, that "sluts" also deserve the absolute and unconditional right to make choices about the well-being of their own bodies.

**"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." (emphasis mine)

***Please note:  Anyone leaving a comment that says I'm a baby-killer, or slurs women, will be summarily deleted.  If your argument is that women are less important than a blastocyst, you're not an ally of women.  I'm just sayin'.


( 55 brains — Leave a chunk of brain! )
Page 1 of 2
<<[1] [2] >>
Oct. 16th, 2011 11:43 pm (UTC)
Heck, HR358 is downright moderate when compared to proposed Mississippi Amendment 26, which is expected to pass the state legislature on November 8. It effectively defines abortion and some forms of birth control as murder by stating:

"Be it Enacted by the People of the State of Mississippi: SECTION 1. Article III of the constitution of the state of Mississippi is hereby amended BY THE ADDITION OF A NEW SECTION TO READ: Section 33. Person defined. As used in this Article III of the state constitution, 'The term 'person' or 'persons' shall include every human being from the moment of fertilization, cloning or the functional equivalent thereof.' This initiative shall not require any additional revenue for implementation."

For more information, see http://www.wakeupmississippi.org/
Oct. 17th, 2011 12:33 am (UTC)
Argrhrgrghhhgrgrghjsgjfsg;ku pt oijah'pzjbo.


So. Much. Hate.
(no subject) - lylassandra - Oct. 17th, 2011 05:52 am (UTC) - Expand
Oct. 16th, 2011 11:56 pm (UTC)
Lo these many years ago (almost 23 if we're counting), I developed a searing pain in my abdomen. My husband ignored my wishes to take me to the emergency room at the local city hospital, but instead drove me about 10 miles further to a catholic hospital (in the town he grew up in).

They told me I had an ectopic pregnancy and admitted me. And that was it. For FOUR DAYS. I wasn't allowed any pain meds because "we need to know if the pain gets worse, because that will probably mean the tube has ruptured."

After 4 days, when I threatened to discharge myself against medical advice (my plan was to take a cab to the other hospital and have them treat me), they finally consented to do the necessary surgery.

As you can tell, I survived. However this sort of treatment could well become the norm if this sort of legislation goes into effect. Ectopic pregnancies are non-viable. There shouldn't be any argument about terminating them.
Oct. 17th, 2011 12:35 am (UTC)
Fuck. First Amendment, that's all I'm saying. It is unconstitutional to enforece their religious beliefs on people who do not hold them.

And, I'm glad you made it through. :)
(no subject) - helblonde - Oct. 17th, 2011 06:15 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - cathgrace - Oct. 17th, 2011 12:01 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - hugh_mannity - Oct. 17th, 2011 01:36 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - cathgrace - Oct. 17th, 2011 02:11 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - stringmonkey - Oct. 17th, 2011 05:46 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - cathgrace - Oct. 17th, 2011 06:39 pm (UTC) - Expand
Oct. 17th, 2011 12:42 am (UTC)
I'm honestly so disheartened and angry at all government right now, women hating seems to be the only politically agreed upon policy for all political parties.

I guess if you can't agree on debt reduction, jobs, and healthcare, it's time to fall back on what has worked historically, making oppressive laws that will never affect anyone making those laws.

Oct. 17th, 2011 04:37 am (UTC)
What I really hate is the Repub women voting for this crap, and then claiming they "support women".

I suppose supporting women's right to die for a baby that probably won't live anyway is support. Of a kind.
(no subject) - cathgrace - Oct. 17th, 2011 11:52 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - attack_laurel - Oct. 17th, 2011 04:34 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - attack_laurel - Oct. 17th, 2011 05:03 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - cathgrace - Oct. 17th, 2011 07:02 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - kass_rants - Oct. 17th, 2011 07:09 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - attack_laurel - Oct. 19th, 2011 01:36 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - kass_rants - Oct. 19th, 2011 02:35 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - stitchwhich - Oct. 22nd, 2011 06:18 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - kass_rants - Oct. 17th, 2011 03:32 pm (UTC) - Expand
Oct. 17th, 2011 12:45 am (UTC)
I'd only be willing to support such a thing if only the menfolk involved (at all levels) are willing to donate a kidney and a portion of their livers...even if it would affect their physical or mental health.



Yeah, didn't think so.
Oct. 17th, 2011 01:08 am (UTC)
Hey, in Topeka, Kansas it is now legal to beat your wife.


Every morning I wake up and wonder: where are we going, and *why am I in this handbasket*?
Oct. 17th, 2011 04:35 am (UTC)
Yeah, I've seen that one. I think all women should move out of Topeka Kansas; it's clearly hazardous to their health to remain there.

I'm really hoping I won't be saying that about the US in a few years, because this is my adopted country. I chose to live here, because once, it seemed like a place with a bright shiny future.

Now, I'm not so sure. I'm probably going to try to leave before it's officially re-named Gilead (edit), but I'm stubborn, and I generally like it here, so for the moment, I'm staying.

Edited at 2011-10-17 04:36 am (UTC)
(no subject) - hugh_mannity - Oct. 17th, 2011 01:42 pm (UTC) - Expand
Oct. 17th, 2011 03:37 am (UTC)
I went online to see how my congresscritter voted but his website doesn't seem to list that particular piece of filth... even though it lists all his other votes. I'm very interested in learning what he did when that came up.
Oct. 17th, 2011 12:36 pm (UTC)
look here

(hopefully this will not cause the LJ auto-screen of links)
Re: look here - stitchwhich - Oct. 22nd, 2011 06:11 pm (UTC) - Expand
Oct. 17th, 2011 08:22 am (UTC)
Amen. AMEN!
Oct. 17th, 2011 12:46 pm (UTC)
The great problem with the abortion debate is that it hinges on a really irreconcilable difference of opinion - that human life begins at conception or that it doesn't. Since there's no proving it one way or the other, the sides aren't going to meet on that. If you believe that a foetus is a human life, then there's an imperative to save it, and a concomitant view that the deliberate killing of it is murder; if you don't belief it's a human life, then there is no such imperative, and it's not murder.

In order to get anywhere on this issue, I think there needs to be an acknowledgement that many (by no means all) of the people on both sides of the abortion argument are motivated by compassion. I know people who are motivated by the deeply felt desire to save what they believe are human lives and I know other people who are motivated by the deeply held desire to give women rights not to experience sexual or reproductive oppression. I can sympathise with both of those viewpoints, and I think that many people are motivated by a desire to do something good. I don't think that all 'pro-life' activists are women haters, though some may be, and I don't believe that all 'pro-choice' activists are uncaring about the rights of the unborn child.

Personally, I think there can be a middle ground, though it's an uncomfortable one. I am both pro-life and pro-choice. I believe that human life starts at conception, and that abortion takes the life of a human being. However, I acknowledge that that's a decision that I have been free to make, and I don't believe that I have the right to make that decision for any other woman. I don't know her circumstances and I have not walked in her shoes. I also want the right to continue to be able to make my own decision if I were to be pregnant in difficult or unforseen circumstances without sufficient support to continue a pregnancy or raise a child. I would, for instance, choose to terminate an ectopic pregnancy if my life was in danger.

For that reason, I have accompanied friends to the abortion clinic, and I have campaigned to keep abortion legal in my country. I will continue to do so as the need arises, even while I mourn the fact that women feel that they have to make that choice. I have never seen a woman make it lightly. I also believe firmly that it is very important to provide real alternatives to abortion for women with unwanted or difficult pregnancies, alternatives that do not involve poverty, humiliation, or lack of choice. I know people who are passionately pro-life and have chosen to live their beliefs by financially supporting single mothers or adoption agencies, or adopting special needs children. In my ideal world, abortion would be safe, legal and affordable and no-one would feel they had to have one.
Oct. 17th, 2011 01:30 pm (UTC)
One of my friends recently expressed what I thought was a brilliant argument:

By outlawing abortion, one is putting the rights of the "child" over the rights of the women to have ownership over her own body. Her argument is thus: Where does it end? If one is going to arbitrarily argue that the "child" has the right to the mother's body from the moment of conception, when does that right end? Does a child living outside the mother's body demand that the mother give up an organ to them? Does the child get to make demands about how the mother cuts her hair? Why should childbirth be an arbitrary indicator of when the child's ownership of the mother's body end?

(no subject) - quatrefoil - Oct. 17th, 2011 08:01 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - hugh_mannity - Oct. 17th, 2011 01:52 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - kass_rants - Oct. 17th, 2011 02:47 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - quatrefoil - Oct. 17th, 2011 08:04 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - attack_laurel - Oct. 17th, 2011 04:52 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - attack_laurel - Oct. 17th, 2011 04:53 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - quatrefoil - Oct. 17th, 2011 07:45 pm (UTC) - Expand
Oct. 17th, 2011 02:45 pm (UTC)

I am not an incubator. I shouldn't have to have myself surgically altered to protect my choice.

And I have been arguing for decades that illegalizing abortion is a religious issue and violates the Constitution. I don't know why I haven't heard the argument elsewhere. Surely we're not the only two who see it that way.
Oct. 17th, 2011 04:56 pm (UTC)
I know Cerebus, whose blog I linked to recently, feels the same way. I wish it was a national arguing point, though. Surely it would get headway.

Even my surgical option wasn't "allowed" until I turned 35! I have never really wanted children (certainly not for the right reasons, and I maintain that the short period where I tried to get pregnant was the result of mental abuse), but my OB-GYN refused point blank to arrange for the surgery for years. Apparently, men are allowed autonomy in their birth control (Bob got tied in his mid-20's), but women "might change their mind". FFS.
(no subject) - kass_rants - Oct. 17th, 2011 07:12 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - cathgrace - Oct. 17th, 2011 07:19 pm (UTC) - Expand
Oct. 17th, 2011 04:34 pm (UTC)
RANT. RAVE. *foam at the mouth*

I really don't get it. Yes, abortion is sad. Who wants to think about the loss of a baby? BUT if they were really serious about preventing abortions, they would put their time and money and legislature behind more freely-available contraception and rape-prevention.

This punish-the-women schtick that always seems to be the go-to option shows that they are NOT serious about preventing abortions, just reproductive choice.
Oct. 17th, 2011 05:01 pm (UTC)
The raw hatred and fear of the power of women is at the root of this entire nonsense. They can dress it up in "save the bay-bees!" ranch sauce, but ultimately, it's about getting women back into the unquestioning obedience of their masters, men. Read any MRA site, and you'll see the exact same hate. Women got uppity, and must be put back in the kitchen, barefoot and pregnant, by physical force if neccessary, because the Bible says so.

The Bible does NOT say so, of course, but facts aren't their strong suit. Why is Christianity so misogynist? I blame Paul and St. Augustine. They both seriously hated women, and my theory is that Paul was super-jellus of Mary Magdalene, because she was getting it on with Jeebus, which was what Paul wanted to be doing.
Oct. 17th, 2011 06:51 pm (UTC)
It is things like this which make me reconsider my desire to have children (in particular, female children), and consider whether it might just be best to have my uterus removed now, so I can't be held hostage to it against my will.
Oct. 17th, 2011 07:14 pm (UTC)
I feel a similar sentiment, but it pisses me off that we are here talking about mutilating ourselves because we have female reproductive parts. It's insane!
Oct. 17th, 2011 08:24 pm (UTC)
What dissapointed me the most, was talking to a close friend, and hearing her say (paraphrased because OMG my brain shut down) "Well, if we make it easy for people to get abortions, they'll start treating it like birth control and start having unsafe sex and then aborting babies willy nilly."

It was so hard not to explain that that sort of statement says more about her than anyone else. =(
Oct. 17th, 2011 09:00 pm (UTC)
Because gynecological procedures are just so damn pleasant.
(no subject) - attack_laurel - Oct. 18th, 2011 05:50 pm (UTC) - Expand
Oct. 17th, 2011 08:44 pm (UTC)
It is unfortunately that the article you linked mis-reported the vote of two Pennsylvania Democrats and I wrote them scathing emails before I went to GovTrack.us and found out how they really voted. Ooops!
Oct. 17th, 2011 10:45 pm (UTC)
I love you. Right-fucking-on.
Oct. 18th, 2011 01:08 am (UTC)
I agree with you. I agree so doGdamn much that every time I read/watch the news now I feel like I'm being smacked with a 2x4.

Like you I'm surgically sterilized, but re: the ectopic pregnancy discussion upthread, I know there's a risk of this and have informed everyone I know to never, ever take me to a Catholic hospital, because they'd let me die.

And I take it as a repeated, REPEATED slap in the face every time one of these laws is presented, because they all come down to the same thing: a clump of cells trumps a living, sentient human being.
Oct. 22nd, 2011 06:30 pm (UTC)
I'm surgically sterile too... 13 pregnancies and only two children to show for it was horrible. I chose to continue, in order to 'get' that second child, but that was my choice - my husband left the decision to me. Nonetheless, it was heartbreaking to misscarry so often (once, it was twins, at 5 months) and I think I would have never had the strength to do so if some doctor or legislator informed me that I had no choice about it. In my case, the OB told me that I had very little chance of carrying another child to term so he delivered my youngest and tied my tubes all at the same time. I asked him to remove my appendix while he was in there but he declined, darn it.
Page 1 of 2
<<[1] [2] >>
( 55 brains — Leave a chunk of brain! )

Latest Month

April 2017


Powered by LiveJournal.com