Anyone who is pro-lfe or anti-abortion, like Rick Santorum -- GOP's candidate vying for presidential ticket -- and other men leaders -- stand tall in a hypocritical posture. Mentioning or trampling birth control necessity for women is another political ploy to control women's bodies.
But they said the government shouldn't be involved with this and that. Why would they want to deny birth control or even discuss it, for that matter, if they're against abortion. Are they telling us that women must not have sex? One way or another, women need protection from unplanned pregnancy because if they have sex there's a good chance pregnancy (Oops) is likely to happen.
Where would these oversexed men get their ...? Let's see, married women ought not to use birth control or abortion to control their own bodies in case their libido runs wide. Single women ought to save it for marriage. Is that the message in the misguided political pill? Return to Good 'ol Boy Days? And guess what?
These women out there competing with men for political positions or high ceiling jobs would be "tied down" with babies. Men used to, and some still do, want to keep their women "barefoot and pregnant."
Is that what these bragadocio(s) are saying? Oh, maybe they haven't got that far in their "Bring back yesterday" rhetoric, but the protect women's body code is hidden in the sound bites.
Regardless, if we don't have birth control, there's a good chance pregnant women who want an abortion will opt for one -- more or less. Now opponents against women's rights, you cannot eat your doughnut and keep it unthawed in the fridge.
Besides, it's a woman's business about taking birth control, too, and she doesn't need politicians using the issue to plump up their political position by addressing that privacy. Aren't there enough political needs to discuss and fix?
Politicians -- state or federal -- should wrap their lips with duck tape on this personal matter?
No comments:
Post a Comment