The Battle for Reproductive Rights Continues…
by thefeargirls
By Patricia Arroyo
The 2012 election season is heating up as debates and issues crop up. Among the Republican candidates there is an acknowledged ‘war against women’ being waged this campaign season. The topics covered in the debates range from proposed personhood bills , health care reform, extension of government programs , and budget cuts to established aid centers like Planned Parenthood.
One of the main reasons that these issues are being brought to the attention of presidential candidates is to sway potential voters in the hopes of garnering more votes. Another function is to create discussion among commentators that closely align themselves with particular political parties. One of the most well-documented controversies so far has been American conservative commentator Rush Limbaugh’s disapproval of health care reform that would help cover women’s contraception.
In the video, Limbaugh manages to over-simplify and misconstrue a proposed health coverage amendment from the Obama administration that would aid millions of women in obtaining birth control. Instead of focusing on the benefits of this new health measure, Limbaugh chooses to make slanderous generalizations and completely fails to consider any positive attributes that this measure could have on the lives of millions of American women. Unfortunately, since Limbaugh has managed to cement himself as a prominent figurehead of the Republican party, his views are broad-casted to his large audience.
Women all across the board are outraged at the idea that government officials, especially men, are continuing to police the way women choose to handle their bodies, lives, and families. Even though women’s voices are largely underrepresented, we can still band together and make our voices heard. We can let figureheads like Limbaugh know that we are not okay with being grouped into negative generalizations without our medical needs being addressed. thinkprogress.org highlights the readily accessible ways that we have to reach out and attempt to have our voices heard. Social media has proven to be a valuable tool in expediting governmental change and social awareness, and during this time in which women’s rights are increasingly infringed upon, we have to continue to raise awareness in order to be able to maintain some control over the choices we make in our lives.
Patricia is a first generation Mexican-American, born in Houston Texas. Patricia went to school at The California College of the Arts as a Fashion Design major. Her senior year she put together her own capsule collection and was awarded a spread in Surface Magazine. She also was given an internship with Nicole Miller in New York, which she has just completed. Patricia has returned to Texas to care for her father while he begins treatment for colon cancer. Patricia likes scary movies, dancing, tattoos, cats, and knitting.
Her fear is rejection, and that her self-doubt and insecurities will hold her back in her future endeavors.
Another reason why these issues popped up is simply to distract the nation from dismal performance of the current administration. Rush should have avoided invective and simply explained why Sandra’s position was terribly flawed and distorted. Taxpayers shouldn’t be paying for your birth control. More government doesn’t mean more individual control of your life. What does raising awareness have to do with you making a choice–especially the right choice?
Don’t get fluked; Sandra isn’t looking out for women’s bests interests.
http://jadedswine.wordpress.com/2012/03/03/obama-joins-fray-over-limbaugh-slut-comment-chicago-sun-times/
I mean, you’re clearly coming from a very conservative mind set. And as a liberal, I’m sure we’ll do nothing but butt-heads on an issues like this but here’s my 2 cents none-the-less.
I really don’t think these issues popped up to distract from how the Obama administration is doing. I think these issues are popping up because right wing conservatives sway voters who a) rely heavily on religious vales and b) don’t feel like it is there obligation to pay for certain medications…if any.
It is certainly a difficult issue. And made all the more tricky because a lot of Republicans have pretty set ideas about the roles of women in this society. A perfect example is the one we’ve already talked about – Limbaugh calling this young woman a slut. That kind of language is really disgusting. And I think the other writers of this blog would agree with me when I say that people like Limbaugh don’t consider women equals, don’t really care about our rights and certainly don’t have our best interests in mind.
As for the more political side of it, I’ll disagree with you again. I think birth control needs to be covered by taxpayers. It’s a medication like any other. If companies cover Viagra on their medical plans, then come on! I don’t see it as the government trying to ‘control’ my life – as you put it. I see it as the government doing their job. There are too many people in this country struggling to afford food for their families let alone birth-control. It’s not just a matter of ‘have a condom on hand’ – the issue isn’t black and white – anyone with sexual experience would know that. Birth-control needs to be affordable and covered. I mean, that’s why centers like Planned Parenthood are so crucial. And the Republicans keep lobbying against them.
Finally, it’s important to raise awareness because these are our rights. And this issue isn’t simply ‘wear a condom’ or ‘don’t have sex’. I think that agument kind of goes out the window when the people suggesting it call a female college student voicing her opinion, a ‘slut who want to be payed to have sex’.
.
Thanks for the thoughtful response. The last liberal gal thumped me twice with an “f” and “s” bomb and never answered my inflammatory accusation. Golly, I have feelings you know. We can butt-heads in a nice way though.
Anyway, if the insurance company wishes to cover contraception, then that’s fine. Government shouldn’t be stepping in and telling private companies to cover Viagra or Yaz. Government shouldn’t be telling businesses with pools to install expensive handicapped access devices as well, but it does. How about ending discrimination with discrimination and lower standards?
Rush has a way of cutting to the heart of the matter in a way that makes liberals ill. Is Sandra Fluke really the spokeswoman for a woman’s reproductive rights? Is Rush really at war with women? Neither point is true. The central issue is government’s roll. Everything else is simply a distraction.
I don’t know anywhere in the Constitution where contraception is defined as a right. Nevertheless, woman are allowed to kill their babies by aborting them. That gives women some awesome power in taking away someone else’s life. Perhaps raising awareness about responsible behavior and the real-life consequences of poor choices would serve women better.
Bottom line, you want more government and I want less of it.
As you said below, “Bottom line, you want more government and I want less of it.”
Conservatives say that, but then have no problem with passing superfluous laws that trip up women trying to get abortions, which, whether you like it or not, is still a completely legal medical procedure.
Why should a woman be required by law to have a sonogram, listen to a doctor describe her fetus, then wait a full 24 hours before she can terminate her pregnancy? Why are Republican state legislators in Tennessee trying to pass a bill that would require doctors who provide abortions to disclose information about their patients?
Also, many facilities charge for performing ultrasounds, usually in the neighborhood of $200. So if you don’t want to have to pay for birth control, I’d appreciate it if you didn’t then try to force women to have unnecessary procedures that they’ll have to foot the bill for.
Who cares if, according to you, Sandra Fluke “isn’t looking out for women’s best interests”? She’s a private citizen. I’m much more worried about the hundreds of conservative politicians who aren’t looking out for women’s best interests and have the power to do something about it.
P.S., the article you linked to has nothing to do with what Fluke said, and you (either you’re the author, or more than one person writes under the name Right Thinking, in which case be prepared to stand by your colleague’s words) then go on to call her and all women who use birth control sluts and whores. So thanks for that. It’s interesting that someone offended by the words “fuck” and “shit” would have no problem with saying some pretty nasty things themselves.
I’m pretty sure you missed the point of the article, bro.
If you say so, comrade. A chicken in every pot! A condom in every wallet!
Good idea Right thinking, but you still missed the point. Why is no one speaking out about the duty of men to stand by the women they impregnate? Because they don’t have their lives turned upside down by pregnancy! Keep using those condoms honey, but let us deal with the real issues!
No point is missed. We just don’t agree and that’s okay. Regarding men, the responsible ones are not the issue. The ones running around procreating with impunity should be held responsible and that is where government has a legitimate purpose. Wage garnishment for child support is a wonderful thing and a required vasectomy to boot! Regarding women, they really shouldn’t be laying down with guys who aren’t willing to give them a ring and a wedding date.
I personally don’t see why Viagra is covered. I mean, what medical necessity does it cover? Isn’t it’s only purposes to facilitate sexual activity? The birth control pill has clear medical benefits, besides the obvious one of helping to slow the overpopulation of our world. Talk about a double standard. But of course… MEN use Viagra so of course that’s covered without question.
Colleen, Viagra should be covered because it’s medicine – it treats a medical condition, a doctor prescribed it, and so the insurance company ought to pay for it. There should be no value judgement attached to getting medication other than a doctor’s trained opinion as to whether a drug is useful.
It’s clearly a double standard, but the best response is not “DARNED MENS, TAKIN’ AWAY OUR RIGHTS!” We’re not all douchebags!
Hi Garrett. Actually birth control pills are often prescribed for medical conditions too: horrible acne due to hormonal imbalance and debilitatingly painful periods being just two of them. And I know it’s not all men (I happen to be married to one of the non-douchebag variety and have many wonderful male friends) but you can’t deny that all the people in congress making these decisions about women’s bodies and rights are men. Do women tell men what they can or cannot do with their bodies? Do you hear women rallying that viagra should not be paid for? I am 45 years old and I am shocked and saddened to see women’s rights going backwards instead of forward in this country.
Colleen – I’m agreeing with you. Both Viagra and the Pill should be covered on the grounds they’re both medicine, and they’re both prescribed by doctors. There should be no moral judgement.
Where I disagree is when you write “…you can’t deny that all the people in congress making these decisions about women’s bodies and rights are men.” The Virginia Ultrasound bill (http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?121+sum+HB462) that requires a transvaginal ultrasound was sponsored by a woman. The bill (http://www.statepress.com/2012/03/12/senate-judiciary-committee-endorses-controversial-contraceptive-bill/) that would allow employers to ask whether women are taking the pill for solely reproductive reasons was sponsored by a woman.
It’s not all men.
First, let me link the transcript of Ms. Fluke’s interview – http://abcnews.go.com/images/Politics/statement-Congress-letterhead-2nd%20hearing.pdf
What annoys me about the conservative rebuttal to her testimony is that it is generally fact-free. I would find Right Thinking’s post funny if it and opinions like it were not shaping the national debate. He writes that Ms. Fluke’s testimony was “terribly flawed and distorted” and then claims “Taxpayers shouldn’t be paying for your birth control” – except, of course, that that is not what Ms. Fluke is asking for – she is noting that birth control is not covered by her insurance.
Naturally, I understand where conservatives are coming from – it’s much easier to convince the American electorate that there’s a problem with women attempting to ‘steal’ hard earned taxpayer dollars to pay for their contraception than it is to convince them that insurance companies shouldn’t provide coverage for legal medicine prescribed by a doctor because of ‘moral or religious objections.’ While I respect that Georgetown is a Catholic University, I would encourage them to enter the 21st century alongside the rest of the civilized world.
Perhaps we could get Rush’s attention if we convinced the insurance companies to stop covering OxyContin for middle aged, hypocritical, junky blowhards? Insurance companies want to pay for as little of your medical care as they can possibly get away with, while still quietly charging you more for their “services” year after year. End of story. They could care less what we do with our bodies as long as we keep paying our deductibles. It is unfortunate that the beliefs of a few with power (and the good fortune to never have to face a difficult decision about an un-wanted pregnancy) are attempting to make decisions for those that have less political clout. I keep wondering what happened to the concept of “separation of church and state” that this country is founded upon?