Don't you get tired of misogynist fucktards?
Almost the entire debate over abortion in the health reform bill was a defense of the Hyde Amendment. Democrats used to talk about overturning it completely because it's an unfair, government-imposed burden on poor women. But the anti-choice forces have so controlled the rhetoric that we are left with this sad moment, where in order to even pass a meager insurance bill, another assault on poor (and at least some middle class but, really, all) women occurred by preventing any abortion coverage in any insurance plan in a federal government insurance exchange.
Tell you what: let's up the fuckin' ante here. What is the number one cause of an unwanted pregnancy? Balls and the jizz contained therein. So how about an amendment that says if a woman gets pregnant and is forced to carry the baby to term no matter what, the dude who knocked her up has to get his nuts cut off. There's your trade-off, and men and women both get to have "consequences" for their actions. The result is more babies in the short term, but a whole lot less in the long term. There's details to be worked out. But castration's in the Bible somewhere, isn't it? Like "And, lo, God did tell Zebechaiah to chop the junk off the fornicator Jake"? If not, it should be. Just say it's a new translation.
--the Rude Pundit
Of course, all those nutless bastards in the Senate have nothing to lose in this proposal. Can't cut their hearts out either, 'cause they lack those. Must be some reasonable penalty for their behavior.
No, I'm not oozing charity this evening.
--the BB
10 comments:
and I LOVE you for it!
I'm glad to see you back in top form!
Even though I cannot get pregnant at my age with the equipment I have left, I certainly would not want my Medicare cancelled if I had an abortion payed for with my own money. . .
Youre right!
I'll even volunteer for Cutting Duty...
Gee, Paul, tell us how you REALLY feel. I'm more squeamish than Doxy, but I agree with the sentiments. Eve was framed - time for Adam to take some responsibility for his own actions.
Most of us are more squeamish than our Doxy, Earthbound. Doxy with moxie, that's our gal. Fortunately, I have not gotten anyone pregnant so I can view this at a slight distance.
For all the visitors from SFIF, you should know that I have no problem with a moral position in opposition to abortion and can respect it. That particular controversy is not one of my major concerns and a topic that almost never comes up here.
I do have problems with legislating morality in civil law and am especially troubled these days by those who want to make an issue of it in the health care debate when the Hyde Amendment and subsequent laws make it clear that federal money must not go to fund abortions. Women, who are not of one mind on this issue, would, I believe, have a fairer debate on the topic. Men legislating about women's bodies seems but half a step from some of the extremes of sharia law.
My faith, in case anyone should venture to wonder, is placed in the Holy and Lifegiving Trinity and nothing less. I preach on the lessons appointed and keep my politics here, not in church.
Men legislating about women's bodies seems but half a step from some of the extremes of sharia law.
No "half step" from where I sit...
You've been having visitors?
Hundred of new guests, Susan. I hope they click "home" and join in the latest prayer requests. People need prayer.
Post a Comment