Friday, August 01, 2008

We Are Your Reproductive Overlords

The Bush Administration wants to classify certain contraception methods as abortion:

A draft regulation, still being revised and debated, treats most birth-control pills and intrauterine devices as abortion because they can work by preventing fertilized eggs from implanting in the uterus. The regulation considers that destroying "the life of a human being."

Many medical groups disagree. They hold that pregnancy isn't established until several days after conception, when the fertilized egg has grown to a cluster of several dozen cells and burrowed into the uterine wall. Anything that disrupts that process, in their view, is contraception.
As the article points out, the objective here is threefold. Once contraception is branded with the Scarlet A:

1. It potentially decreases the availability of contraception; insurance companies may refuse to cover it, making it less affordable for women to buy.

2. It bolsters the "right to conscientious objection" argument cited by medical providers who refuse to dispense contraception. This is a right the Bush Administration claims it has "an obligation to enforce", never mind that it tramples on patients' rights.

3. It advances the goal of anti-reproductive rights groups to define a single fertilized egg, a zygote no bigger than the period at the end of this sentence, as a legal person, or "as some activists put it, 'the tiniest boys and girls' ".

From there it's no longer a stretch to define the arrested development of a zygote as fetal homicide, which in turn would result in the outlawing of crucial advancements like stem cell research and the legal prosecution of women for murder. All for taking the pill or using an IUD.

Sounds crazy? It's not as farfetched as you might think: as the article further notes, South Dakota and Colorado now have legislation -- in force and potential, respectively -- that bestows full personhood on a fertilized egg, as well as on an embryo and a fetus.

This is how anti-reproductive rights zealots take away women's rights over their bodies: one small dot at a time.

Dozens of Democrats, including Barack Obama, have vehemently protested the proposal.

John McCain? Refused to comment.

The proposed legislation can be enacted by the Bush Administration at any point. Congressional approval is unnecessary.

The next president can easily reverse it. Question is, what are the chances of that happening if John McCain gets elected?

Technorati Tags: , ,

| +Save/Share | |


"It is the logic of our times
No subject for immortal verse
That we who lived by honest dreams
Defend the bad against the worse."

-- Cecil Day-Lewis from Where Are The War Poets?


  • What is the Blue Voice?
  • Bruce Miller
  • Fdtate
  • Marcia Ellen (on hiatus)
  • Marigolds2
  • Neil
  • Tankwoman
  • Wonky Muse


  • Dick Cheney's Itchy Trigger Finger
  • McCainboating Obama
  • Nader: Obama Supporters Are Political Slaves
  • President McCain's Women's Clinic
  • The Web They've Woven
  • Mission in Iraq not-so-accomplished today
  • More on the Tennessee terrorist
  • Tennessee terrorist attacks liberal Knoxville chur...
  • Mission accomplished in Iraq at last?
  • Warnings on the Afghanistan-Pakistan War



    [Tip: Point cursor to any comment to see title of post being discussed.]
    www TBV




    Environmental Links
    Gay/Lesbian Links
    News & Media Links
    Organization Links
    Political Links
    Religious Links
    Watchdog Links



    Atom/XML Feed
    Blogarama - Blog Directory
    Blogwise - blog directory



    hits since 06-13-2005

    site design: wonky muse