If Women Wanted To Be Taken Seriously, They Should've Been Born Male

Republicans LOVE the unborn, but they despise children...and women

The one (and only) time I’ve agreed with Fraülein Gasraum…on ANYTHING.

If you run into an asshole in the morning, you ran into an asshole. If you run into assholes all day, you’re the asshole.

• Raylan Givens, “Justified”

Most of the polls I’ve seen (and the actual numbers depend on which poll you choose to believe) show that somewhere in the neighborhood of 60% of Americans support a woman’s right to an abortion. Or, to put it more accurately, 60% of Americans support the right of a woman to have agency over her body and reproductive functions.

That number holds up across the board, yet red-state Republicans consistently ignore that fact as they continue to push ever more draconian abortion bans, some of which are now pushing women up to the brink of death. These bans take women’s healthcare out of the hands of medical professionals and put it in the hands of those least qualified to make those decisions- White Conservative Christian heterosexual zealots.

If you view a uterus as property of the State, this probably seems as it should be. The problem is that this is about the health and well-being of child-bearing-age women, some of whom may be unfortunate enough to live in red states when they suffer life-threatening conditions connected to their pregnancy.

Doctors trained to know what needs to be done can’t follow their medical judgment because of the laws on the books in their state. In some cases, they’re forced to wait until a woman is almost literally at death’s door…and then hope they can bring her back. This sort of medical brinksmanship is unconscionable and dangerously unnecessary, but because of the legal climate in some red states, it’s what’s required of doctors.

Republicans are more concerned for their “culture of life” credo than anything, even when it becomes clear that their commitment to “life” doesn’t include the life of the woman carrying a fetus. In that case, a woman is reduced to the role of a vessel, a thing, a machine whose sole role and function is to deliver a baby into the world.

Once that takes place, Republicans want nothing to do with either the child OR the mother. As they see it, their concern ends once that child leaves the womb. At that point, it becomes the responsibility of the mother, and the State should play no role in the child’s upbringing.

Because that would be…SOCIALISM!!!!

But they can always interfere by interjecting themselves in FDA approval decisions taken two decades ago for a drug that has proven to be SAFER than giving birth. It’s also safer than Viagra, yet no one’s clamoring for boner pills to be pulled off shelves.

So…you’re saying it has nothing to do with safety, then? Because if that was the concern, then the same folks raising Hell over the safety of Mifepristone would also be endeavoring to kneecap sales of Viagra.

Oh, but you can’t take boner pills away from men, can you?? No, you most certainly can’t.

And remember, it was all about letting states make their own decisions on abortion…until it wasn’t.

As if that transparent smokescreen was ever believable.

The mifepristone decision (that was ultimately stayed by SCOTUS) revealed Republicans who had kept insisting that abortion was a "states' rights" issues were just trying to get a foothold to ban it federally.

One of those is Sen. Lindsey Graham from South Carolina, who had already proposed a 15-week federal ban so horrendous, his own party disavowed it. Graham, ever the Sideshow Bob, walked into more rakes on CNN's "State Of The Union.” First, Graham lied about mifepristone.

So, really, this is another case of Republicans hiding their intentions until they can marshal their resources and force their narrow minority agenda on Americans who in no way support it.

During his exchange with Dana Bash, Sen. Graham trotted out the anti-abortion zealots’ favorite strawman argument- that the Democrats favor abortion on demand up to the moment of birth:

The modern Democrat — yes, it's a human rights issue. Does it really matter where you're conceived? [...] to dismember a child at 15 weeks is a painful experience. It's barbaric. It's out of line with the rest of the civilized world. Only North Korea and China allow abortion on demand up to the moment of birth, except the Democratic Party. What the Democratic Party proposes on abortion is barbaric. Abortion up to the moment of birth, taxpayer-funded [...]I think is barbaric. I welcome this debate.

Of course, Sen. Graham is arguing is absurd. No Democrat has argued or advocated for abortion on demand up to the moment of birth. The senior Senator from South Carolina is pulling that one out of his ample backside.

When Bash jumped in to wrap things up and point out that Roe v. Wade allowed abortion until viability, NOT until the moment of birth, Sen. Graham lost his shit and went off on her:

No, that's no — no, no, quit covering for these guys. No, no, no, your — media, you keep covering for these guys. They introduced legislation that allowed abortion on demand with taxpayer- funded — you paying for it, the taxpayer, up to the moment of birth. That was their position in Washington. That's the law they want to pass. And nobody in your business will talk about it. It's barbaric.

That was never their position, Senator…and you know it.

Again, for the record, Democrats have never advocated for elective abortion up to the moment of birth. Sen. Graham’ inane histrionics notwithstanding, his dishonesty is typical of the anti-choice movement and their anti-women tactics. The short version is that he’s a liar.

There are “good Republicans” like Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) who argue that in order to win elections, the GOP must carve out some sort of “middle ground” on abortion. Unfortunately, this desire to find “middle ground” isn’t about the health and well-being of women as much as it is about concerns over GOP electability.

Until Republicans recognize that women’s lives and reproductive health are more important than the GOP’s ideological bulldozer, nothing will change for them. If Republicans can show legitimate concern and compassion for the health and well-being of women, the GOP might enjoy improved electoral prospects.

Of course, “Republican compassion” has always been an oxymoron, so I wouldn’t recommend holding your breath on that count.

Hillary Clinton was the one who put forward the idea that “it takes a village to raise a child”- and she was spot on. It does take a village- the people around a family- to raise a child, and that child learns lessons and absorbs values from people beyond their parents. That’s as it should be. Children should learn early on that community is a net positive and a place of safety and succor.

Republicans, however, would have us live in a world where families are walled off from one another, where we live in suspicion of those living next door over the fence. It’s why we have 400+ million guns, and why people get shot for knocking on the wrong door.

We’ve lost our ability to trust and assume the best of one another. So many fearful souls who get their news and information from the Right-wing Echo Chamber are trapped in a world where evil lurks around every corner. In their fear-addled state, neighbors aren’t allies, but rather potential enemies to defend against. They’re perpetually on guard against The Other, that unseen malevolent force that could catch them unawares at any moment their guard happens to be let down.

How do Republicans benefit from a polity steeped in fear? Because people who live in fear of where the next threat might emerge from are easily manipulated. They can be convinced to fear Liberals, Black, Muslims, Atheists, the LGBTQ community, abortion doctors, Jews, Packers fans, transgender people, rainbows on beer cans, or [insert group/person/thing/belief to be feared here]. The threat matrix never stops expanding. There’s always a demographic that can be presented as the next looming threat to the existential or physical safety of good, God-fearing White Conservative Christian heterosexual patriots.

And if we don’t stop [insert group/person/thing/belief to be feared here] now, who knows what the threat will metastasize into?

The thing with fear is that there’s never a path to security. There’s always something else out there, just over the horizon. Communist China? Mexicans? Hugo Chávez? The Green Bay Packers? Yeah, I know Chavez is dead, but if Right-wing America can believe he manipulated a Presidential election despite being dead for seven years, who knows what else the man may be capable of?

As long as America has a Right-wing Echo Chamber dedicated to spreading fear, disinformation, and propaganda, there will be a segment of the population willing to faithfully consume and internalize it. They’ll believe Joe Biden is dead and that an animatronic mock-up of him is controlled by Freemasons living in the White House and holding Jill Biden hostage as their sex slave.

They’ll believe that Vladimir Putin is a benevolent genius who’s gotten a bad rap and the American government just needs to give him a chance (and Hitler and Stalin were misunderstood Mama’s boys, eh?).

The sad truth is that we’re a profoundly broken society. It’s not just that we can no longer agree on a single set of facts. That’s been the reality for some time now, since before The Former Guy terrified ignorant, poorly-informed White Folks into voting for and beatifying him.

We can’t agree on the truth, we no longer recognize the validity of the other side, and supporters of The Former Guy would like nothing better than to destroy those who stand in the way of him ascending to the White House again. Only this time it would be as (not so) Benevolent Dictator for Life.

What sort of world will we be leaving for our children and grandchildren? I shudder to think what it might look like. I fear that it might look like something out of Idiocracy.