Tag(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (more...) ; ; ; ; ; ; , Add Tags  (less...)
Add to My Group(s)

View Ratings | Rate It

Promoted to Headline (H3) on 8/23/08:     Permalink
View Article Stats      (13 comments)

Eclipsed by the Conventions: Midnight Regulations Reduce Women To "A Uterus With Two Legs"

Add this Page to Facebook!
Submit to Twitter
Submit to Reddit
Submit to Stumble Upon

Tell A Friend

Become a Fan
Get Embed HTML Code
By (about the author)

Become a Fan Become a Fan  (7 fans)   -- Page 1 of 1 page(s)

opednews.com

Bush and the conservative religious right are at it again.  In the hushed corridors of the West Wing, K-Street, and Congress, they meet in secret, writing regulations for enactment in the twilight hours of the imperial Bush presidency that would roll back the progress women have made in the 20th century and beyond.  

The proposed change at the Department of Health would redefine some kinds of contraception as abortion, even contraception before implantation. Hospitals that offered such contraception would forfeit federal aid. They would also forfeit the aid if they refused to hire health professionals who opposed abortion or birth control. This regulatory change "could also undermine state laws that require hospitals to prove emergency contraception to rape victims," according to womensenews.

Frustrated by its failure to further infringe on the rights of women reproductive freedoms during the Bush administrations reign, the Religious Right has broadened its attack.  No longer only content to overturn Roe v. Wade, Republican political operatives and religious conservatives seek the negation of Griswold v. Connecticut – the case which serves as the basis for Roe v. Wade.  Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965), was a landmark case in which the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the Constitution protected a right to privacy. The case involved a Connecticut law that prohibited the use of contraceptives. By a vote of 7-2, the Supreme Court invalidated the law on the grounds that it violated the "right to marital privacy". Since Griswold, the Supreme Court has cited the right to privacy in several rulings, most notably in Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973). The Supreme Court ruled that a woman's choice to have an abortion was protected as a private decision between her and her doctor.  Overturning Griswold v. Connecticut would effectively render Roe v. Wade "toothless" and its legal validity would most certainly be challenged before the Robert's Supreme Court – a court certain go further to the "right" under a McCain presidency.

Women's "freedom" to choose methods of reproductive control and independent family planning are under assault.  Behind closed-door deals are underway to redefine and control women's access to contraception via insurance coverage restrictions.  Ironically, Viagra will still be covered by drug plans.  Horrifically, McCain's pro-life stance may mean the pill is murder

Women, we are being given our walking papers back to the Dark Ages.  If McCain plants one of these misogynistic "Neanderthals" on the Supreme Court, Roe v. Wade will most certainly perish.  Under such a ruling, it is conceivable that a woman could be legally designated as "potentially pregnant" throughout her reproductive years and subject to laws that control her behaviors with the intent of promoting fetal implantation.  A miscarriage or birth defect could lead to suspicion and/or prosecution of a mother for 'child endangerment, manslaughter, or murder.'  After all, pregnancy is the punishment a woman must pay for sex -- period.   Why else deny her access to birth control?  Why deny married women access to birth control?  A woman will be reduced legally to not much more than a uterus with legs -- a receptacle for an 'citizen embryo' that possesses more rights under the law than she does.   

Wake up.  They are sneaking these regulations under the radar and it is a serious attack on women's human rights and civil liberties – government sanctioned.  Before you know it, you will be reporting to the Office of Uterine Control for a chat.

They have launched a covert attack to take away a woman's ability to determine whether she will become a mother or not.  It is forced servitude.  Relegated to the status of a "birthing vessel" for all humanity, women will be left with few choices:  give birth, self-inflict a miscarriage, seek a back-alley abortion, self-inflict sterilization to include a surgical hysterectomy, criminal castration of husband, or suicide.

Is this the future we want for our daughters? Contact HHS and your members of Congress

 

PhD. Virginia Tech '93. Retired research ethnographer, she now resides in Georgia. US Army Veteran.

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

 

Share this page: (what's this?)                   Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend

Add this Page to Facebook!      Submit to Stumble Upon      Submit to Reddit      Add This Page to Mr Wong!           NEWSVINE      DEl.ICIO.US      Looksmart Furl      My Web      Blink List     (More...)

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
13 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)

WHY THIS IS STILL AN ISSUE by WML on Saturday, Aug 23, 2008 at 11:13:28 PM
Why are they attacking contraception? by Amanda Lang on Sunday, Aug 24, 2008 at 7:58:24 AM
MY PERSONAL POSITIONS by WML on Sunday, Aug 24, 2008 at 9:59:17 PM
They said by Sandy Sand on Sunday, Aug 24, 2008 at 10:23:10 AM
Burn by Linda Bailey on Sunday, Aug 24, 2008 at 10:51:56 AM
Another Solution by Linda Bailey on Sunday, Aug 24, 2008 at 10:57:33 AM
Or... by Amanda Lang on Sunday, Aug 24, 2008 at 11:03:28 AM
What about the baby's rights??? by Wretha Smith on Sunday, Aug 24, 2008 at 10:42:00 PM
That's a fact, Jack! by Jane LeMond-Alvarez on Monday, Aug 25, 2008 at 12:07:07 PM
Bull f*cking sh*t. by daveys on Monday, Aug 25, 2008 at 1:17:16 PM
Bull's Comments by Jane LeMond-Alvarez on Monday, Aug 25, 2008 at 8:39:29 PM
W.M.L. by daveys on Tuesday, Aug 26, 2008 at 11:48:31 AM
Womens rights, bullshit by Candace Frieze on Tuesday, Aug 26, 2008 at 11:18:57 PM