Forced Birth Improves The Economy? Armed “young, hot little girls on campus” Will Stop Rape?
There’s just so much of this nonsense. As a woman, who’s also raising a teen daughter, it’s overwhelming and frightening. It’s also disheartening when issues that directly impact over 50% of the country are dismissed as single-issue votes. Women do not view abortion or contraception as a “pet” issue. These issues directly affect our economy. Having a child is one of the biggest economic decisions for both men and women. If only we treated these issues with the same freak out we display when it came to a gas tax and tax cuts – and, make no mistake, abortion and contraception are a way bigger deal than things like the gas tax and tax cuts. Mainly because cutting/raising taxes won’t make a damn bit of difference to a woman’s (who’s forced to give birth) economy.
And yeah, I’m going to keep writing about women’s issues, mainly because it’s really all the GOP talks about. They link controlling women to every flippin’ bill they pen. It’s almost impossible to discuss anything the GOP puts forth without discussing women – and religion and gay people. All Republican roads lead to controlling sex.
I’m going to deal with Brownback’s comments about what improves the economy first.
“It’s working,” Brownback agreed. “What we want Kansas to be is the best place in America to do two things: raise a family, grow a small business.”
“And we are moving that way,” he continued. “I’ve signed 10 pro-life bills, there’s another one moving through the legislature on ending dismemberment abortions, where you actually dismember the child to abort it. It’s passed the state Senate, it’s going to pass the House, and I’m going to sign it.”
According to Perkins, Kansas was proving that a “pro-family agenda” was “entwined” with economic growth.
“They really support each other,” Brownback agreed. “Frankly, one of the big problems we have in the country is we’re not forming enough families. And that is hurting our economic work and hurting our economic projection because the best place for that child is within a strong family. And if you’re not forming a family unit, you are also slowing your economic performance.”
“So, these things really tie together. And I think we really do a disservice politically when we separate them,” he opined.
The idea that having unplanned/unwanted babies forms strong families is ludicrous. It’s actually one of the main reasons a couple falls apart. Is Brownback really claiming that making abortion illegal (or very difficult to obtain) would result in an improved economy because more women would have to give birth? It sure sounds like it. And I fully expect this idea to become Republican gospel. After all, it would result in women who aren’t mothers being blamed for a bad economy. It’s a natural fit. Sorta like Romney linking single parents for gun violence. And blaming women and minorities is the go-to for the GOP.
And speaking of guns…
As gun rights advocates push to legalize firearms on college campuses, an argument is taking shape: Arming female students will help reduce sexual assaults.
Support for so-called campus carry laws had been hard to muster despite efforts by proponents to argue that armed students and faculty members could prevent mass shootings like the one at Virginia Tech in 2007. The carrying of concealed firearms on college campuses is banned in 41 states by law or by university policy. Carrying guns openly is generally not permitted.
But this year, lawmakers in 10 states who are pushing bills that would permit the carrying of firearms on campus are hoping that the national spotlight on sexual assault will help them win passage of their measures.
“If you’ve got a person that’s raped because you wouldn’t let them carry a firearm to defend themselves, I think you’re responsible,” State Representative Dennis K. Baxley of Florida said during debate in a House subcommittee last month. The bill passed.
The sponsor of a bill in Nevada, Assemblywoman Michele Fiore, said in a telephone interview: “If these young, hot little girls on campus have a firearm, I wonder how many men will want to assault them. The sexual assaults that are occurring would go down once these sexual predators get a bullet in their head.”
Oh, sweet Jebus! Where to begin? “Young, hot little girls?” Really? First, rape isn’t about sex. It’s about power. And it has nothing to do with how “hot” a little girl (OMG! She actually used these words!) is. If you buy into that nonsense, then explain why a 74 year old nun was raped in West Bengal this week.
But this push by the NRA, and gun worshipers along with the GOP, to allow guns on college campuses has nothing to do with protecting women, and everything to do with Guns! Guns! Everywhere! It also ignores the fact that allowing guns on campus also allows the rapist to carry a gun. And since rapists tend to plan their rapes (long and short term) who do you think would be faster on the draw?
And how exactly would arming women against rape line up with Republicans definitions of “legitimate” and “forcible” rape? And given that the conservative view of rape is that “women lie about rape” can you imagine what would happen to a women who actually shot her attacker – and ruined a young man’s promising future?
This mindset also approaches rape as the mostly fictitious “man jumps out of the bushes” scenario. Can you imagine how this would go down if a women shot the frat guy at a party? She would be blamed for drinking and what she was wearing and if she smiled at the poor guy, called a liar and then we could blame everything on rap music. Because everything is women’s, the gays and rap music’s fault. Amirite!
Consider this: If you are tired reading posts about the War on Women, guns, race and bigots, imagine how tired of them I am. I would love to not write about these issues anymore, because that would mean the GOP would have stopped talking about, and legislating them. Instead, Republicans keep making everything about these issues. As a women, who’s also raising a teen daughter, I can’t afford the luxury of letting these things slide – or not prioritizing them. Reproductive rights and sexual assault aren’t side issues to women. They directly, and in many cases immediately, impact our daily lives.
Tags: Abortion, contraception, guns, Rape, Sexual Assault, Women Issues
Social Conservatives, their vital to the Republicans and without them they cannot win elections. But like all good two edged swords they tend to rile up, repel and nauseate other voters, even more rational conservatives. Same for guns as “safety” and a cure for crime, NRA approved or not. That and we’re still waiting for “the good man with a gun” to stop “the bad man with a gun”.
Obviously conservatives aren’t getting enough choreplay.
What these articles show is that when your thinking really is completely divorced from reality, you can say literally anything. Now that nobody expects conservatives to make sense or back up their arguments with evidence, they have free reign to just blurt out any old shit that they imagine to be true. Guns reduce rape. Yes. Sure. Why not? Abortions are holding the economy back. I thought it, so it must be true.
As a country we once pitied people like Brownback as they pushed their shopping carts full of dirty blankets from town to town. Now we elect them. And when they inevitably fail, we elect them again.
We really need to start reacting to Brownback’s comments the way we do when politicians start talking about cutting social security and medicare or raising/cutting taxes. It’s just as important given that:
• At least half of American women will experience an unintended pregnancy by age 45, and at 2008 abortion rates, one in 10 women will have an abortion by age 20, one in four by age 30 and three in 10 by age 45.
• More than 99% of women aged 15–44 who have ever had sexual intercourse have used at least one contraceptive method.[5]
That’s a lot of women. And while you may not know if one of your women friends, family or acquaintances had an abortion, you can lay money on the fact that some of them did. Combine these figures with all the laws passed, or moving through legislatures, or being proposed, and we see why women consider abortion and contraception under serious threat and part of their economy.
Treating the insertion of the Hyde Amendment into the sex trafficking bill as no big deal makes women feel as if their autonomy is simply a bargaining chip – something that can be tossed in to “sweeten” the pot, because it isn’t a big deal, or a serious concern. It is a big effing deal, and needs to be treated as such.
@Jason: I think you are using the word “thinking” a little loosely. I’m sure there are mental processes involved, but calling them “thinking” is to overly dignify them, I’m thinking.
The Hyde Amendment has been in every annual Labor-HHS appropriations bill since 1976.
Number of posts in DL discussing the Hyde Amendment since 2009.
2009 – 4
2010 – 4
2011 – 0
2012 – 0
2013 – 0
2014 – 0
2015 – 1
6 out of the 9 posts were by Unstable Isotope
What’s your point, Dave? That we’re doing it wrong? Why not search DL for the word abortion – there are pages and pages and pages. But I guess we’re making some progress – yesterday you didn’t know that anyone was concerned over the Hyde Amendment.
But, I get it. The Hyde Amendment isn’t a big deal because, in your opinion, we didn’t write enough posts about it. Perhaps you could tell me how many posts DL needed to write in order to prove our concern.
(Altho, if you read through all the abortion posts you will find the Hyde Amendment. Not by name, but by referencing how federal money/Medicaid won’t pay for abortions.)
Apparently Dave thinks that the only political activity that matters is behind the keyboards here at DL. And only by us. Somebody introduce him to FireDogLake please!
If you look at the bills/laws Republicans propose/pass you’d be correct in thinking that the only thing that concerns them is abortion. Stop listening to what they say about the economy, taxes, etc. and start looking at what they do. And what they do is propose and pass abortion laws.
In the last 4 years, states have enacted 231 abortion restrictions. As of February 16th, lawmakers have introduced more than 100 bills regulating abortion.
Here are bills from the US Congress – for just this year:
These bills/laws regulate such things as:
*provider/facility regulations (such as hospital admitting privileges and requiring clinics to meet hospital requirements)
*medical abortion restrictions designed to make this procedure unavailable
*unnecessary ultrasounds, requirements to watch “pro-life” videos
*parental and father notification and consent! (Of course, there’s no requirement for the father to stick around after he forces a birth.)
*longer waiting periods
*fetal pain
*late term abortions
*Insurance coverage restrictions
*banning abortion after 20 weeks (nationally)
Is it any wonder women are concerned? I wish this was a pet issue for me, but it’s not. It’s my, and every other woman’s, life.
They way they vote, govern and obsess on abortion and sexual issues make it obvious that the issue behind the curtain is of women’s reporductive rights
Agreed, mouse. And I really do think they see women’s reproductive rights tied to the economy, as in, “If only we could keep these women home and pregnant, the menfolk would have more jobs.”
It’s also amazing how Brownback sees pregnancy as a way to create strong families. In his world, before legalized abortion men never walked away from a pregnant women, and those who did marry her automatically formed strong, blissful marriages.
So I guess they’re for forced marriage, too. Only they’ll never legislate that because legislating men is never part of this plan.
“But, I get it. The Hyde Amendment isn’t a big deal because, in your opinion, we didn’t write enough posts about it. ”
No. It’s obvious you don’t get it and your information validates it. But I’ll be succinct and repeat my point one last time.
A post opined that the Hyde rider in S. 178: Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act of 2015 was a poison pill. I challenged that by stating that it’s been in appropriations bills for 30 years of both Democratic and Republican Congresses and Administrations, asserting that its ubiquitous use demonstrates that its inclusion in a bill hardly makes it a poison pill.
You have now segued that into all proposed anti-abortion legislation in order to make the case that the Hyde amendment is a big “effing deal.” I stand by my comment. It’s not big deal by itself or in comparison with other things which are really a big effing deal. I should not have to explain that it does not mean I approve of the amendment, approved of anti-abortion legislation in general, am an advocate of the war or women, or need to check my privilege. And with that I conclude participation in this thread by once again suggesting to you that when everything becomes outrageous, nothing is outrageous.
It’s not a big effing deal to you. Fine. But why are you so determined to set what should, and should not, be a big effing deal to me? By listing DL posts you basically said that this obviously wasn’t something I, and DL, really cared about, because if we really cared about it we would have written more posts.
And this isn’t the same poison pill (no matter how often you claim that), which I pointed out in another thread. This expanded the Hyde Amendment to include fines and fees.
Dave think he’s litigating. The first point in his first comment is fine. It’s been in every Labor-HHS appropriations bill since ’76. Hence it’s a stretch to call it a poison pill.
The bit about yearly posts mentioning it is typical attorney bullshit show-boat arguing that is meaningless. Pandora wants to talk about it now. I fail to see what the little counting exercise has to do with anything.