Birth control ban = violence against women

[Chichiri]

I'm very proud to say that I'm related to the author of this article.

Like other forms of violence against women, forced pregnancy has no rational, secular argument to support it. But, like other forms of violence against women, forced pregnancy is excused by secular arguments that favor nonintervention. Thompson laid out this argument nicely in his column last week; the argument hinges on religious sovereignty. Thompson, ironically, chooses the rather oxymoronic term "religious freedom," perhaps forgetting that the freedom in question is the freedom to restrict freedom—the freedom of healthcare organizations to restrict the freedom of women.

Sovereignty defines freedom at the institutional level. Liberals often fail to see how poorly this translates into freedom at the individual's level. Independence from outsiders is secured in order to engage in oppressive behavior within a state, institution or household. These concepts enable an institution or agent to use freedom as an argument in defense of its oppressive behavior. This argument enables pharmacists and insurance companies to construe their misogynistic dominance as an exercise in religious freedom.

And notice how effectively this rhetoric banishes the pregnant female from our consciousness; we're too preoccupied with autonomy and liberty to even think about pregnant women—or pregnant girls. Or people who didn't identify with their bodily sex in the first place and are now being punished for this nonconformity by enduring what society deems to be the proper function of that body—the production of new humans. I can't even imagine how traumatizing that would be; no lifelong biological male can. And many of them don't even try. Instead, they distance themselves psychologically from these issues by framing them in terms of liberty and other cheap, hokey, imageless words.

This rhetoric also has the impressive ability to turn the entire reality of oppression on its head. Thompson exemplifies this strategy beautifully: "Directing a religious institution to violate their beliefs is an assault on those rights." Did you see that? It's saying that opponents of violence against women are guilty of assault. Amazing.

Birth control ban case of violence against women

[DCKit]

1. I kind of have a dog in this fight.

My niece was raped at a party.... too many drinks. She was too embarrassed to tell her parents, so she blamed her current boyfriend for the pregnancy... the responsible guy who always wore a rubber.

Her parents got her into "save the baby counseling", and she seemed willing to give the kid up... then she wasn't. The parents had gone evangelical prior to the unintended pregnancy.

Cut to the chase, five years later, she wants to be involved far more than the adoptive parents are willing, and it's beyond creepy.... two mommies.

I detest abortion but, until the Republics are wiling to support single mothers and all of their kids, they need to STFU about both contraception and abortion.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

2. that is one DAMN fine essay