The number of times I’ve heard this lately is astounding, made perhaps only more so because of the sheer amount of truth to it ludicrosity put forth by the GOP during just this Congressional session, including, ladies and gentlemen, no less than 351 abortion bills, because of course JOB CREATION. You know, that thing they campaigned on? Apparently the GOP can totally create jobs by hating women, you guys.
What’s that? The GOP doesn’t hate women, as evidenced by Sarah Palin? Yeah, OK. Seems to me a fair assumption given in a party that would put forth changing the word “victim” to “accuser” in rape cases (the word victim can only be applied post-conviction, naturally), changing abortion restrictions to include only forcible rape (not even a legal term and silences many victims, including those drugged or sleeping), and essentially codifying into law a bill that would allow ‘pro-lifers’ to defend the rights of the unborn, questionably even at the expense of abortion doctors. And this is just within the few first months of 2011. True, much of this legislation has either been shelved at public uproar or has been vetoed, but the sheer volume is staggering.
What is truly disturbing, though, is the true lack of choice already existing or about to exist in many states: in nearly half, it could be a real possibility that it is impossible to buy regular insurance coverage for abortion even with your own money. In 87% of counties there is no abortion provider. There are numerous laws wending their way through state legislatures based on the disputed science of whether or not the fetus can feel pain (and by disputed I mean one doctor’s research versus the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology) and a few more bills based on restricting abortion at the time one can hear a fetus’ heartbeat, which can be even before a woman may know she’s pregnant, based on the regularity of her cycle– which, you know, is totally coincidental (generally a heartbeat can be heard around 10 weeks).
But how does abortion relate to hating women? Because many pro-life folks are all about “the exceptions” of rape, incest, and life of the mother. (To those that aren’t, thank you for at least some consistency.)
So let’s break it down.
Life of the mother is fairly straightforward: nowhere in the law can I think of that anyone is forced to die for another person. (Borrowing their body for nine months to incubate, however, will be codified into law if Roe is overturned.) The biggest contradiction is the rape/incest exception. (I have never, never understood why this has been broken into two separate exceptions.) While I’ve heard some lovely phrases about how a victim (sorry, accuser) should totally take life’s lemons and make lemonade, or “two wrongs (the rape and the abortion) don’t make a right”, it is generally accepted that a rape victim should not be forced to carry her rapist’s baby to term. I guess it’s only a piece of baby Jesus with a unique soul if the woman and man both enjoyed the dirty, sinful baby-making process, and a completely understandable murder of a child if the father is a criminal. This gets especially confusing when trying to prove whether the woman was in fact a victim or just a lying accuser, as a trial and conviction take way longer than nine months.
I have sat and tried to think about it, and came up with “well, I suppose this exception exists because these women didn’t choose to have sex and wouldn’t otherwise be pregnant”– and herein lies the problem. This puts a blatant lie to the fact that all life is sacred and states outright that women should be punished with a baby for choosing to have sex. These women did not choose to have sex and got pregnant; ergo, they should not have to keep the baby. Hence, the punishment.
Another point. This is a way that only women will be punished for sex. Only women bear children, and only women must show so publicly a sign that they have had sex. By eliminating the ability of women to be able to choose when and how to be pregnant, women are forced to be abstinent or risk wearing a scarlet letter on their chests for nine months. Now, we have moved from simply punishment to female-specific punishment for an act it takes two to create.
Does the GOP hate women? They say they don’t, but I have 351 reasons to say they do.
