As an outsider looking in, watching America lurch back into the 14th century, I find myself asking where will it all end? I know it’s an election year and politicians – being the craven curs that they as a species are – are pandering to whomever they think will vote for them… but when did the crazy people become the electoral base to woo? Sure, there always has been the religious right and the moral minority, but since Obama’s term of office, these groups seem to have lurched so far to the right, that Reagan would probably be seen as a filthy commie by most of them. The really sad thing is that for a country that prides itself of its so-called separation of church and state, it would appear as if more and more legislation is being proposed on religious grounds, than on sound (and sane!) legal grounds.
It’s almost as if the collective population took their eyes off the ball for a minute, and when they looked up, the crazy folk had somehow taken over the various state legislators. I mean, come on, the general American population can’t be that stupid as to elect these people, right? Right?
It’s thanks to these crazies that there are countless renewed attempts to have “intelligent design” and creationism forced into the school curriculum, despite it being a) not a science, even by the broadest definition of the word and b) being in direct contradiction of the whole “separation of church and state” thing. I’m not an expert on US law, but I wonder if a Romney or a – god forbid – Santorum gets into the White House, if we could see some sort of pressure being exerted to see a constitutional amendment, that would be the first step towards turning the US into a theocracy for rich, white men.
In the Beginning…
But that’s not the topic of today’s post. Instead, I’d like to know why the rabid right hate women so much. Maybe it it just plain old misogyny, but once again I have a feeling that there’s a religious element to it. After all, fundies claim that Eve (and thus womankind) are subservient to man, because Eve was created from Adam’s rib. However, this happily ignores the fact that this bit comes from the second creation timetable, set out from Gen 2:4. Now this is interesting, because in it God creates Adam BEFORE the plants and animals, and even more interestingly, only commands him “but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.” It’s only after this, that Eve is created… so one could argue that she never broke God’s instruction anyway. More importantly, in the creation story that we all know, when it comes to creating mankind, it says, “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.” (Gen 1:27)
Makes you think, doesn’t it? It’s probably the same thinking that lies behind them claiming that the adulteress’ tale is a later, liberal addition. In their minds, Jesus all about hellfire and that slut should be stoned to death.
Just asking for it
Maybe that is why we have Florida passing a “dress code” bill, after an 11-year-old girl was gang-raped by 17 men – the implication being that she was asking for it, by the way she was dressed. Remember, these aren’t drunk arseholes in a bar saying this. These are supposedly educated human beings, claiming that an 11-year-old child was asking to be raped. I think in the last sentence the “supposedly” applies more to the “human beings” bit than the educated.
Actually, no I think it does fit. As sub-human lawmaker Kathleen Passidomo put it:
There was an article about an 11 year old girl who was gang-raped in Texas by 18 young men because she was dressed up like a 21-year-old prostitute. And her parents let her attend school like that. And I think it’s incumbent upon us to create some areas where students can be safe in school and show up in proper attire so what happened in Texas doesn’t happen to our students.
Sure, because 11-year-old girls can easily be mistaken for 21-year-old hookers. And this from a woman? A part of me wants her daughter – assuming something this malignant can breed – to get raped, so we can ask her what her daughter was wearing and then nod sagely, knowing that clearly the slut was asking for it.
Then again, the right has funny ideas about rape. Maybe this goes back to Strom Thurmond raping the household help back in 1925. Oh sure, they’ll call it an “affair” but if you were a black 16-year-old, working in a rich white house in South Carolina in 1925, saying “No” was not an option. And that makes it rape.
Another example are the bizarre claims from Faux News correspondent Liz Trotta that women in the military should expect to get raped and should shut the hell up if they are. To quote this piece of scum:
And the sexual abuse report says that there has been, since 2006, a 64% increase in violent sexual assaults. Now, what did they expect? These people are in close contact, the whole airing of this issue has never been done by Congress, it’s strictly been a question of pressure from the feminist.
So, you have this whole bureaucracy upon bureaucracy being built up with all kinds of levels of people to support women in the military who are now being raped too much.
Wow… just… wow. So working in close proximity to women gives a man carte blanche to rape her? And she should just shut up if he does? Does this creature even have the faintest idea just how fucked up that sounds? Does this apply to any workplace, because there’s some honeys in my office and we’re in close contact. It is rank stupidity of a sickening degree, even more so because it’s coming from a woman. As with the case above, it’s not the fault of the men who do the raping, it’s the victim, who was clearly “looking for it.” Then again, she does work for Fox, so maybe she’s a bit “thpethial.”
Domestic violence? What domestic violence?
Some aspects of this war against women are, quite frankly, baffling. What possible benefits are there to repealing the domestic violence laws, as was done in Topeka, Kansas? Yup, domestic violence is no longer a crime there. Not only that, but even before it became law, the city’s District Attorney dropped all existing cases on the books , allowing the accused to go home to their wives to discuss this “little misunderstanding.” Then again, given that people like Roger Schlafly (yes, the son of the Wicked Witch of the Right) write off marital rape as a “communication problem,” it’s not hard to see the “logic” behind this. As the DA – yet another poor excuse for a human – described it:
the city does not have the staff or infrastructure to provide victims of domestic violence with the level of service that they have come to expect.
Yes, damn those poor victims, who’ve come to expect protection from their abusers and at last some form of justice. Then again, the less said about scum-bucket Bobby Franklin and his attempts to have Georgian law change “rape victim” to “accuser,” the better.
Recently, the attacks have become more brazen.
Komen for the Cure
We saw Komen for the Cure withdraw their breast cancer screening services from Planned Parenthood, because they didn’t want to be associated with abortions. Never mind the fact that abortions make up only 3% of PP’s total business – despite what lying sack of shit Sen Jon Kyl would have you believe. (Although he did later say that his claim that “97% of what planned parenthood does is abortions” was “not intended to be a factual statement.” Always nice to see a politician admitting to being a lying cunt.) Following a massive outcry at the fact that Komen were exposing millions of women to potential breast cancer, they reversed their position.
Or did they?
Their statement read in part:
We will continue to fund existing grants, including those of Planned Parenthood, and preserve their eligibility to apply for future grants, while maintaining the ability of our affiliates to make funding decisions that meet the needs of their communities. (my emphasis)
Hang on a second. What it sounds like to me (and other commentators) is that PP is welcome to apply for future grants… there’s just no guarantee that Komen will give them. And I’m fairly sure that some loophole will be found where they can legally deny funding. All of this and the fact that the now-fired Nancy Brinker is a big mate of George W is just a coincidence, I’m sure.
Contraception and “Personhood”
Over the past few weeks, we’ve seen the flurry of outrage over Obama’s insistence on the provision of free contraceptives through a member’s health insurance plan. Needless to say, the Catholic Church – that organisation full of old men who aren’t allowed to marry – was up in arms over this. I’m sure they aren’t in favour of contraceptives, because they’ve worked out over the centuries that if you’re just buggering little boys and girls, you don’t have to worry about them falling pregnant.
Needless to say, the religious right have now jumped on this bandwagon too, and it’s ended up in front of the circus formerly known as the House Oversight and Government Reform hearing, where they’re discussing religious liberty and the birth control rule. The ultimate irony is that no women are testifying… or for that matter, are even allowed to testify. I wonder what Issa is scared they’ll say. Yup, a bunch of men – including members of the Church of Child Rapists – are debating a woman’s right to not fall pregnant. Don’t believe me? Here’s a pic of the panel, taken by Planned Parenthood:
A sausage-fest all round. What’s really amazing are the 3 gentlemen on the left of the photo – two Catholic priests and a rabbi. These men – with no sense of irony – talk about “freedom of religion” whilst demanding that their religious beliefs be imposed on women all across the country. No wonder they don’t want women on the panel – there’d probably be blood if they had to sit there and listen to this crap. There’s only one right anybody who sees themselves as human should be concerned about – the right for women want to have access to basic health services family planning through their health insurance plan. And no male priest should be able to deny them that.
Finally – and probably most worryingly – we come to the so-called “Personhood laws.” In a nutshell, these laws defines the word person under state law to include unborn children from the moment of conception. In other words, a zygote has the same rights as you and I. This is all some fancy workaround to get past the provisions of Roe vs. Wade, but typically, the morons in Virginia, North Dakota and Oklahoma (amazingly Mississippi rejected it) haven’t thought it through… or maybe they have, which makes it even scarier.
Having a miscarriage could result in a charge of manslaughter being levied at the unfortunate woman… or even murder if she can’t prove the miscarriage was natural. Obviously abortion goes out of the window, as it’s now murder… although ironically Virginia’s legislation included an exemption for infertility treatments.
In other words, a fertilised egg that occurs due to infertility treatment does not have the same rights as a fertilised egg that results from sex (something which immediately sounds like a civil rights case waiting to happen). The reason for this is that only certain fertilised eggs are used, the rest are frozen or destroyed… but these are people in terms of the new legislation. However, as something like 1 in 8 women undergo this process and as the legislators want their votes, they’re happy to overlook this clause.
In the other states, however, doctors could refuse to perform fertility treatments, precisely because they could be charged under the new laws. Contraception – and certainly the “morning after” pill – could also be outlawed.
Worst of all, there’s no exclusion for rape or incest. So if Uncle Bobby takes you camping and gives you a practical demonstration of the birds and the bees – no doubt because you were asking for it – then you’re carrying that baby to term. Have fun now!
The biggest irony is that you’ll tend to find that the people most likely to have an unwanted pregnancy are those least able to afford to raise a child. Not just financially, but taking their age, emotional state and surroundings into account too. And yet, thanks to a bunch of old, rich, white men, they’ll be forced to bring another unwanted, unloved child into the world… whilst these same old, rich, white men do everything in their power to reduce your welfare benefits at the same time.
That’s why you have inhuman people like Sen Mitch McConnell, who are pushing for an amendment that would allow employers to deny coverage for ANY treatment against religious or moral beliefs. So if you work for a Jehovah’s Witness, forget getting that blood transfusion. And god help you if you work for a Christian Scientist…
Because if you’re a Republican, it’s only the unborn child that matters. After it’s born, they just couldn’t give a shit.