Mainline churches should be silent while Religious Right political leaders get to speak their mind? Do you care? |
Yet another blog for spewing. This one may end up with a lot of religious and social content.
2006-03-30
"Liberal" Media? I Don't Think So!
Gee, the media is soooo "liberal" in it's bias. That's why shows like ABC’s This Week only have Religious Right talking heads like Jerry Falwell, James Dobson and Pat Robertson on the show, often several times, but have no leaders of mainstream denominations like American Baptist or the United Church of Christ. See Accessible Airwaves for news about this, including the fact that ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox and the WB refused a paid advertisement that pointed out UCOC's message of inclusion because it was "too controversial". Yet they'll take anti-abortion ads, give guest slots to bigots, religious exclusionists, and moralistic busybodies, and freeze out the voices of reason and inclusion because it doesn't pander to the supposed power of what is really a loud, obnoxious, hypocritical minority of religious right yammerheads. Hell, they might as well call Fox News the "Republican Religious Right channel".
2006-03-01
A Time Honored Tradition
Now, to piss off pro-lifers. You see, long before the rise of the AMA, or any male dominated medical profession at all, women have been providing pregnancy termination services to each other. Midwives, herb wives, and other things. Fertile as a turtle? Take these herbs to space your children. Can't feed another right now? Here, let me help you deal with it.
Now, with the triumphs of the religious fanatics in office at the state and federal levels, such services are on their way to being forbidden to the medical profession. The subsequent risk to pregnant women isn't even on these judgemental fanatics radar. After all, if a woman dies giving birth, it's "Gods Will", especially if her "sacred" child is saved. So what if the pregnancy itself could kill her, the sacred fetus might be a *boy*, and thus one of the chosen of Gawd. Girls are useful too, but only to breed more of the faithful for Gawd's armies and keep their houses.
So the knowledge from the 60s is again available. For one, see Molly Saves the Day: For the women of South Dakota: an abortion manual. Here's another link chock full of information: Can we safeguard abortion?
I would rather it didn't come to this, but between the triple whammy of useless "abstinence only" sex ed, pharmacists being able to exercise their consciences over your prescriptions, and the abortion ban folks being emboldened by Bush's lousy ideologue Supreme Court picks, it is time to return the control of women's bodies to women, not the medical profession or the "law" of old rich white men with a god complex.
Now, with the triumphs of the religious fanatics in office at the state and federal levels, such services are on their way to being forbidden to the medical profession. The subsequent risk to pregnant women isn't even on these judgemental fanatics radar. After all, if a woman dies giving birth, it's "Gods Will", especially if her "sacred" child is saved. So what if the pregnancy itself could kill her, the sacred fetus might be a *boy*, and thus one of the chosen of Gawd. Girls are useful too, but only to breed more of the faithful for Gawd's armies and keep their houses.
So the knowledge from the 60s is again available. For one, see Molly Saves the Day: For the women of South Dakota: an abortion manual. Here's another link chock full of information: Can we safeguard abortion?
I would rather it didn't come to this, but between the triple whammy of useless "abstinence only" sex ed, pharmacists being able to exercise their consciences over your prescriptions, and the abortion ban folks being emboldened by Bush's lousy ideologue Supreme Court picks, it is time to return the control of women's bodies to women, not the medical profession or the "law" of old rich white men with a god complex.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)