ROE vs WADE

Many women are outraged by the Republican Party’s move to reverse Roe vs Wade.    Ire at the Republican Party is misdirected – the Party is just the avatar for a base that Republican politicians are anxious to keep united.   Republican politicians could care less about women’s rights and the abortion issue; as always, their main concern is keeping their plush jobs; and in this case, it means placating the Religious Right.

Let’s put this squarely where it resides.   The roots of anti-abortion reside in the churches.   To fundamentalist Christian and the Catholics hierarchy, the outlawing of abortion in a major step toward their goal of legislating a version of Christian Sharia Law.

  

For years, Fundamentalist have declared the United States a Christian Nation and have declared God’s laws above man’s laws.   With each step of outrage against homosexuality, gay marriage, abortion…, the Religious Right is trying to consolidate a move toward a theocratic Christian government.

    

In the fourth century the Catholic Church drove Europe into a thousand years of Dark Ages, where science philosophy and enlightenment were crushed by religious superstition and zealotry.   Now a vocal minority wishes to turn the clock back by systematically integrate religion into government.

If you are outraged by the attack on Roe vs Wade you need to boycott religion.   Call out religion for the bigotry it is, and its danger to our democracy.

 

If you attend church on Sundays, and are outraged against the reversal of Roe vs Wade, then you need to reassess your values – for they are conflicted. 

the Ol’Buzzard 

LET’S PREVENT ABORTIONS

Republicans in Georgia and Alabama have just passed draconian anti-abortion laws forcing women to give birth against their will, and aimed at eventually overturning Roe vs Wade.

Alabama governor and legislature  

I have a suggestion that I would like to see go viral.   Everyone should call Republican Congressman and Senator and ask them to propose a law requiring all pubescent boys to undergo a (reversible) vasectomy.

     

The law should read that the vasectomy can only be reversed when a female, wishing to have a child by the man, is willing to sign a consent form for the reversal.  At any time after conception, the female can withdraw her consent, and the male is required to re-vasectomize.  

If a woman can be required to undergo a reproduction procedure (birth) without her consent in order to prevent abortion of a fetus, then there should be no double standard in the law.   The obvious solution is to prevent unwanted pregnancies, and this law would accomplish that; elevating the need for abortions.    Furthermore, many states, including Maine, have passed laws requiring children be vaccinated in order to attend school, regardless of parent’s objections.  So, the precedence is established - the government can require medical procedures for the good of the population.   If a woman’s reproduction can be regulated by the state, so should the man’s.

This law would also be environmentally sound, as it would aid in curtailing population growth, which is the root cause of climate change and global warming.

Many men would rave that the government has no right to legislate their bodies; but what’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

the Ol’Buzzard