Wednesday, February 2, 2011

The House Has Done It Again.

Take a look at this proposed bill.  Just look at it, read it through carefully.  Focus especially on section 309.

It's something new the Republicans want to pass through.  Basically, they want to make it so that federal tax dollars no longer pay for abortions due to all cases of rape and incest.  They want to define and limit it to "forcible rape" and incest if only under 18.

There is no current definition of "forcible rape" in government documents.  That means that if you were to get drugged, raped, and pregnant, the government won't necessarily pay for your abortion.  Because there is no definition  currently, it would be up to the judicial system to decide if it was "forcible".  You would have to make a case and try to prove that you were attacked.

This is a sign of a poorly worded bill proposal.

I don't have a problem with the government not wanting to pay for abortions for everyone.  Heck, you get yourself knocked up with your boyfriend then you should either pay for your own or have the kid.  But the government should not be allowed to deny you because you were not "forcibly" raped.  It's like punishing you for something you didn't do by making you have the child.

No, I'm not opposed to adoption. But you get raped, do you really want to carry your attacker's child for nine whole months? I wouldn't. I would never have an abortion for any other reason, but I can guarentee that if I was raped, I'd be considering the option.

I'm going to take a moment to clear something up for you, dear readers. 

I am pro-choice. 

I am not pro-choice because I believe everyone should have an abortion.  I am not pro-choice because I am heartless and don't believe in having children.  It is not because I hate God, or because I'm a hippie out on the side of the road waving a flag.

  I am pro-choice because I believe in women's rights.  Women have come so far and we still have so far to go.  It is not the government's place to decide what is right or wrong for all women.  It is up to the woman to decide what is right or wrong for her own body and life.  I don't want to backtrack.  I don't want to give up the rights that I have.  I envision a world where one day all women have the same rights as men.

Back to the bill.

This could be devastating for women's rights.  By putting a definition on "forcible rape" compared to just "rape", Congress is saying that in some cases it's ok.  And it's not.  It is never ok. 

If this passes, we have gone a step back.  Before you know it, rape will be obsolete.  Women will be back to being barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen.  You can laugh - it does sound extreme - but it's true.  Think about it.

And no, the government isn't saying that you can't have one.  (At least, not yet; if this passes, that's going to be the next step, I'm sure of it.)  It's saying that it won't pay for you to have one.  What about women who can't afford an abortion?  So if you're poor and you get raped but not "forcibly", then you have to be punished by having the child?

Congress, this is so poorly worded and written out.  Why are you trying to pass this?  Think about the women here.  Think about the effect this is going to have ten years down the road.  Is that what you really want?

I, for one, do not want it.


No comments: