A political war on women? Sure seems so

We can debate whether or not there’s a “war on women” if you’d like, but if you think there isn’t, the weight of evidence would be against you.

There seem to be several fundamental issues at play here.

One is that some men just don’t seem to see women as equals, therefore feel compelled to continually attack women by demeaning their need for birth control, a national network of health care centers (like Planned Parenthood), or their right to have control over their bodies. Sometimes this takes a religious turn as “the faithful” rise up in anger swinging the Bible at anything abortion/fetus/pregnant/sex or outside their narrow moral focus. (I should note here that I don’t believe for a minute that being “religious” makes someone automatically a more “moral” person.)

This seems to create confusion in some people who believe religion should play a bigger part in government. No. First, when people talk about more religion in government, they are usually referring to conservative Christian beliefs . . . “their” religion, if you will, not Buddhists or Jews or Hindus or Muslims. Forget atheists all together. Government is secular and should remain that way. It is for all the people, not just believers of a certain faith.

Now that doesn’t mean people of faith don’t have rights, shouldn’t be respected or should be marginalized . . . It just means government should not be run or overly influenced by religion.

So what about this “war on women,” and why does it seem it has gotten worse over the last few years?

I think in part, some modern-day conservatives feel it’s important to revisit the abortion and other social issues regularly in hope of changing or preventing the more open social norms. Gay marriage, pro-choice, “religious freedom,” voting rights, and women’s health issues (often couched in anti-abortion rhetoric) are all a part of this agenda.

Old-line conservatives of a generation or two ago seem stunningly moderate by comparison.

This neo-conservative wave, spearheaded and emboldened in part by the rise of the Tea Party, sees nothing wrong with demanding the death of Planned Parenthood, want to put themselves between doctors and their patients, advocate closing women’s clinics and want to restrict access to birth control. The icing on top of the anti-abortion cake is that many don’t think there should be any exceptions to their anti-abortion legislation . . . not for rape or incest or even if the mother’s life is at risk. Forget the fact that no federal funds are used to fund abortions anywhere, including Planned Parenthood.

“GOP presidential candidate Mike Huckabee supports Paraguay's decision to deny an abortion to a 10-year-old rape victim, he revealed in an interview Sunday.

In an appearance on CNN's "State of the Union," the former Arkansas governor argued that the Paraguayan government's refusal to allow an abortion for the now-11-year-old, who gave birth last week after being raped by her stepfather, prevented a second tragedy.

‘Let nobody be misled, a 10-year-old girl being raped is horrible, but does it solve a problem by taking the life of an innocent child?’ he asked. He added later, ‘When I think about one horror, I also think about the possibilities that exist and I just don't want to think that somehow we discounted a human life ... Let’s not compound the tragedy by taking yet another life.’” (Huffington Post)

Apparently the 10-year-old rape victim doesn’t matter.

This conservative wave is carrying the Republican Party into the Presidential campaign, and could well carry it on to the rocks, smashing a party that has had few big-thought ideas or presented a clear path for creating more jobs, building American business, feeding food-insecure families or eliminating tax loop holes for big business over the past two decades. (Hint: “Trickle down” didn’t work.) We’ll talk more about that at another time . . .

The current fight over Planned Parenthood is this conservative social agenda battle all in one snapshot. Let’s assume the information that abortions comprise about 3 percent of Planned Parenthood’s business is correct. That would mean if it’s defunded and dies, 97 percent of its business disappears as well . . . birth control, breast, cancer, STD, HIV and other screenings, family counseling, pregnancy counseling, sex education, and on and on. With some 700 Planned Parenthood health centers across the country, women (as well as men) know there’s a general standard of care that may not be there with a patchwork of individual health clinics.

Somehow politicians don’t talk about that. Those that say they are all for good health care for women but want to kill Planned Parenthood are living in their own political dream world and trying to convince us we should join them.

I decline.

Any politician who wants to limit a woman’s right to decide what her health and reproductive choices should be has crossed a line. Nobody is “pro-abortion,” they would rather not have people who don’t want to get pregnant not get pregnant. They are pro-choice and believe a woman should have control over her body. Some men deride women who talk openly about sex and the need for birth control. Rush Limbaugh famously called women who enjoy sex “sluts.” I didn’t hear a peep about men who enjoy sex.

Let women be. I am tired of men standing up and declaring that women shouldn’t be able to decide for themselves. Politicians shouldn’t be in the doctor’s office or the bedroom. For a party that bemoans big government and regulations, Republicans seem all too eager to step in where they’re not wanted.