As per usual, the menfolk want to think they know best about our reproductive rights. In Arizona, a bill that actually made it out of committee addresses the completely nonexistent problem of abortion based on the race or sex of the fetus.
The Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act initally reads as exactly what it pretends to be, protecting a potential baby from discrimination. But then it moves on to a section that says the father can take civil action against the woman if he believes she is pursuing an abortion based on race or sex.
I’m sorry, what?
First of all, the majority of abortions in the US are done during the first trimester, at which point it is too early to even determine sex. So, let’s rule that out. Secondly, who in the hell is going to a sonogram like, if this is a girl, she’s getting the boot.
And that’s half of this bill shut down.
Now let’s talk about race. Let’s say I’m racist against Hispanics, so I’m going to abort this Hispanic fetus. Wait a minute. If I hate Hispanics, why did I sleep with one? Is this a new belief that I suddenly took on?
You can say rape may be an issue, but let’s say a whitey-hating black woman gets attacked while she’s ovulating, and the hospital-administered emergency contraception doesn’t work (or worse, she doesn’t even report it). A few weeks she realizes she’s pregnant and calls and makes the appointment. Is she doing it only because she hates whitey? Oh you think so? So she’s not at all doing it because she was already violated in the worst imaginable way and now she’s having to deal with having her body hijacked again?
The craziest part about this whole scenario is that if a man brings a case against a woman, it could go on and on and on, until a point where she wouldn’t even be able to have an abortion. How the hell do you prove a woman is seeking an abortion based on race or sex? How? Tell me. Like Tom Price said, “show me one woman.”
What’s next? A man starts a relationship with a woman, not knowing that she’s on the Pill, and a year later sues her because she hasn’t let him knock her up?
If we disect the religious side of things, we’re left in a circle of contradictive dogma (shocking, I know). The thing that makes me laugh about most religion-based arguments against birth control is this: Because birth control prevents a ‘life’ from being created, it is immoral.
Okay, that’s all well and good, but, having a natural menstrual cycle and not having sex – living by the ‘correct’ standards – do the same thing.
In the perfect Catholic world (I use Catholic because I myself am a recovering Catholic and it’s what I know most about, not to mention, in this great BC debate, Catholic leaders seem to be the loudest), no one would ever use birth control and no unmarried ladies are having sexy time. Well, every month her body is evicting an egg – a potential life – and laughing in the face of these standards.
In Genesis 38, Onan was instructed by God to impregnate his dead brother’s wife, and every time they lay together, he let his semen spill to the ground. He was punished, yes, but for his act of rebellion against God, not for his contraceptive act.
Listen up men. Do you even know how birth control works? It prevents ovulation from even happening, thus, not wasting an egg, or our seed, but this is bad.
Really, the very act of choosing a celibate lifestyle prevents you from ever reproducing, so, by that belief, aren’t religious leaders like nuns and priests just going against everything right from the get-go?
Here’s what it is: Uterus envy. All these men are tired of centuries of not having the same reproductive organs as we possess, and they’ve just watched us blatantly ignore their functions. What they’re thinking is, “Why do these bitches get to have all this stuff, those ovaries, that uterus that they don’t even use?” And instead of simply evolving and growing one of their own, they want to punish us by forcing us to use ours to their fullest extent.