Monday, May 23, 2005

Women and Their Rights.

Currently, Laura Bush is on an image repairing mission in the Middle East. While there, Mrs. Bush has been very outspoken about the status of women in the ME. While this is an issue that needs to be taken up, it does not need to be taken up by a woman whose husband is systemically setting women's rights back years with each new law he and his Republican buddies pass. The latest right under attack? The right to choose. For years Republicans have wanted Roe v. Wade overturned. While the case going before the Supreme Court is not Roe v. Wade, it is the beginning of the dismantling of the right to choose. htp://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4574091.stm
The above link is off of the BBC website. That story details the case that the Supreme Court is set to hear. This case is the latest in a long line of initiatives by the religious right to force its beliefs down everyone else's throat. Since GWB came into power family planning programs that advocate birth control have lost funding, two types of abortion have come under fire, aid agencies that provide birth control overseas to those who would otherwise not have access to it have lost funding because "abstinence is the best birth control", and schools are being coerced into teaching abstinence based sex-ed programs (which are proven to not work well).
If Laura Bush (a.k.a. the Republican Party Secret Weapon) wants to give women more rights, perhaps she should start by telling her husband.

3 Comments:

Blogger Jeff said...

Damn Skippy.

6:47 PM  
Blogger mulligan said...

Bingo! She would come across as being less of a hypocrit if she did.

5:57 PM  
Blogger Tom Carter said...

I'm pro-choice, in the same way the two Clintons are--abortion should be safe, legal, and rare.

The case the Supreme Court will hear centers on parental notification and consent when a minor gets an abortion. I wrote about parental notification in detail in a post at my site. To put it briefly, I don't understand how anyone can maintain that a child who can't get her tooth filled without parental consent can get an abortion without her parents knowing about it.

Roe v. Wade is very problematic, in legal terms, and very complicated. Discussion of it can't be reduced to a simple pro-life versus pro-choice argument. A lot more detail is at this post.

Sorry to include the references to myself. But the issues are complex, and I don't want to clog up your comments with an excess of verbiage.

5:53 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home