Anti-woman laws in America

Vaginal ultrasound laws in multiple. Laws making woman tell why they are using birth control, and so many other anti-woman laws are being put through state legislator's as of this moment, why do people support politicians that support these laws?

edited 15th Mar '12 6:51:01 PM by vanthebaron

I'm pretty sure the ultra sound is only required for abortions.

And the only thing it's forcing on them is thinking about a serious decision. If a sonogram would change their mind, then they didn't think about it enough.

You don't understand so I'll explain, they have to stick a 10 inch long metal utlrasound rod into the vagina for any kind of abortion, even it the fetus has gone toxic, or if it's already dead, or it the mother has one of the hundred illnesses that can make it life threatening for the female to carry a fetus.

To cite what Van is talking about: The forced-ultrasound bills which have been on the books in at least Texas for a while, another up in Pennsylvania (where the Governor said to "just close your eyes), while the Arizona state legislature has endorsed a "tell your boss why you're on the pull" bill. A georgia Republican advanced a bill which would ban abortion after 20 weeks even if the fetus is stillborn or not expected to live to term, and in doing so compared women to pigs and cows.

Furthermore, it has been noted that there has been a massive, drastic, record rise in how many anti-abortion bills have been advanced in the past two years since the Republican takeover of many state and local governments.

Lastly, the thing about the forced ultrasound bills is first that these procedures are medically unecessary, second that it is still the mother's right to abort, that this is as bad as a Crisis Pregnancy center, and lastly that many versions of these bills state that the woman must pay for this, not the state or the insurance company.

^ thank you for the link, can't post that many for phone without the post resetting.

They live in a culture in which female bodies are a legitimate area for public discourse and patriarchal domination.

That's not the business of the state or the public at large. Abortion is a private decision. It's disrespectful to begin with the assumption that a woman hasn't thought about her choice of abortion seriously. It's offensive and intrusive to attempt to make her agree with other people's (and more importantly, people with different bodies') opinions by sticking a big old thing in her vagina.

For the sake of argument, I should mention that even if a woman does consider abortion insignificant, or even enjoyable, that doesn't make her vagina eligible for intrusion.

Since when is it okay to stick things up people's genitals because they disagree with you about the value of human life? I think that the death penalty is horrible, but I don't think I should have the right to stick a pole up the genitals of someone who disagrees with me.

edited 15th Mar '12 9:46:25 PM by Grain

Or! Or! It is impossible for men to get pregnant, therefore these laws can only ever apply to women. So while I agree it's stupid, don't get ahead of yourselves here.

Or perhaps it's entirely possible for men to get the perspective of women without being one? And then to ignore that perspective in favor of religious rhetoric that has no constitutional basis?

Pretty stupid.

Not even ten posts and we're already insulting each other. Can we, uh, please be civil? I know it's kind of hypocritical on my part, but I don't want this thread to go the same way the abortion thread went.

I realize that. But you kind of shut down the conversation by failing to contribute anything beyond "these laws can only ever apply to women" and a rather condescending remark.

And my observation of stupidity was not directed at you, and I'm sorry it appeared that way. I was referring to the all male panel which was convened over the contraceptive coverage hearing.

And rather unfortunately, abortion is the main point of this, that all of these laws are tied to banning abortion or making it incredibly difficult to get one.

edited 15th Mar '12 10:16:33 PM by Enkufka

Of course it's not just men who support anti-abortion bills. There are quite a few women out there who are as staunchly Conservative about this as the men. And they COULD be subject to these laws. . .

This is true as well, but there is a growing gap in support from women for the two parties.

Also, men still hold the vast majority of the political power in the nation.

To be fair, a lot more men run for election than women. It's not that there are a ton of female candidates out there and voters are just being sexist.

That's true as well. I'm merely pointing out that men automatically dominate the decision making process, and the current decision making process is focused so much on the bodies of women.

This is something that can't really be separated from the rights of women, since what's happening is a part of their bodies.

But what this argument really hinges on how much you see as being a woman's right.

true, and that's where it breaks down. I can see, say, women needing more in the way of reproductive health care as "equality", because their bits are more complicated than ours (yay biology). Not everyone apparently agrees, which is why we have all the debates that are going on currently.

It's happening within her body. This is an inextricable fact of the proceedings, and for now, she still has the right to get an abortion should she choose to.

Should an involved debate break out, I'm going to avoid metaphors if at all possible, as they merely cloud the issue and act as intuition pumps. A fetus is not a child, but it can become one.

let's try to avoid the Big A Debate here, shall we?

@Kex: Okay, leaving gender out of it, currently in America everyone is allowed to purchase contraceptives. How much of an uproar would there be if a man could get fired for buying condoms?

@Enkufka

That's exactly the point I was trying to make. That's what you believe. It's not like you're going to say "Oh, yeah, I believe this but I also believe the thing that is directly opposed to it." You see it as a right, you see it as what a woman does with her body. Not everyone does. Neither viewpoint is objectively correct.

@Drunk Girlfriend

Well, like it or not, we live in a pretty sexist country. So there'd be a massive uproar. But contraceptives are also available to women, so I don't think that condoms act as the male equivalent to an abortion.

edited 15th Mar '12 10:58:36 PM by Kexruct

I'm much, much more willing to do that, Drunk, but the laws are also tied to the topic. :/

I will drop it, though.

I will pick it up for one moment: Where you stand on the debate depends upon when you believe life begins, but it is still in the woman's body.

edited 15th Mar '12 10:59:16 PM by Enkufka

But that doesn't mean it's entirely about the woman's body though.

Kex: She wasn't saying they were, she was talking about how there's a law being conceived in Arizona that would allow employers to fire female employees for purchasing birth control.

edited 15th Mar '12 11:01:39 PM by setnakhte

That. I'm avoiding the abortion debate, because that never goes anywhere.

That's stupid. Neither sex should be denied contraceptives based on religion. Separation of church and state and whatnot.