Overturning Roe v Wade, which keeps the decision on pregnancy with the person who is, like, pregnant, is no long enough for some Republicans. Dear, sweet, populist, fun-to-have-a-beer-with Mike Huckabee hath spoken: (via AP:
Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee rejects letting states decide whether to allow abortions, claiming the right to life is a moral issue not subject to multiple interpretations.“It’s the logic of the Civil War,” Huckabee said Sunday, comparing abortion rights to slavery. “If morality is the point here, and if it’s right or wrong, not just a political question, then you can’t have 50 different versions of what’s right and what’s wrong.”
“For those of us for whom this is a moral question, you can’t simply have 50 different versions of what’s right,” he said in an interview on “Fox News Sunday.”
You sure can’t accuse him of dog-whistling, I’ll give him that. No cutesy dodging around with “bad Supreme Court decisions like Dred Scott” like Bush used to use. Just comes right out and says it, Huckleberry does: The government owns your body, bitch. Get used to it.
Never mind that there are in fact not just 50 different “versions of what’s right” in deciding the outcome of any given pregnancy. There are as many “versions of what’s right” as there are pregnant people, see?
What the government can ban one day the government can make mandatory the next…if we accept that it is the government’s right to make such decisions. In fact governments can ban it and make it mandatory on the same day—maybe by race? Religion? Socioeconomic status?
China demands the right to make the decision of whether to continue a pregnancy for all its citizens too. Their decision is forced abortion after one child. National unity is always a good thing, isnt’ it?
Front page
Huckabee is absolutely right: Forced pregnancy is a moral issue
And it’s absolutely immoral for Christianists like Huckabee to try to force their tribal values on the rest of us — especially when as we all know, they don’t live up to their own values themselves.
Maybe if they let their kids have sex earlier, lots of the antisocial behavior they’re worried about would go away?
We. Are. Going. To. Die. We must restore hope in the world. We must bring forth a new way of living that can sustain the world. Or else it is not just us who will die but everyone. What have we got to lose? Go forth and Fight!—Xan
Unless there is rape involved...
…I don’t think the apt term is “forced pregnancy.” Not to put too fine a point on it, would “compulsory childbirth” be more correct? Compelling someone to continue a pregnancy against their will would qualify as “forced continuance of pregnancy” but not “forced pregnancy.” Or maybe I’m thinking of “forced impregnation?” Anyone?
I’m not picking nits here (I swear on my reproductive organs!). The language must precisely convey what is going on, so that legitimate news organizations (e.g. Pravda, Highlights) can be persuaded to ask candidates if they favor “compulsory childbirth” with the same casual ease they ask adults if we should co-opt women’s uteruses.
Coincidentally, Colorado may just get around to deciding that life begins during a hand job if things continue at the current pace.
++++
nitwits in your reproductive organs
is exactly what’s going on here. is there a medicinal soap for that?
i expect nothing less than this from huck. but i do hear a dog whistle- a racial one. controlling the brown women is a nice side effect, but in truth i think today’s strongest anti-choice voices are really all about the brown hoardes currently taking over. we’re in the middle of a ’civil war’ and the leadership of his side is white, and needs more white folks in its ranks, in his fevered imagination.
States rights on pregnancy
I don’t see what Huckabee is making a fuss about? Roe V. Wade made the change he sought in that it declared the there could no longer be 50 versions of what is morality on this issue. It declared that what takes place within an individual’s body is a private matter for that individual to determine, (within certain temporal limits). It also in effect, declared that some peoples’ religious dogma derived ideas about when life begins and what may be done in the privacy of their bedroom may not be forced on others. If Huckabee’s proposals were to be adopted what would be next? Banning of all forms of birth control? Banning of blood transfusions? Banning of surgery? After all these are matters of religious dogma also. So who’s religious dogma is to be used to determine what everyone is permitted to do with their own bodies?