With the economy in free fall, moderate Republicans and disgruntled Obama supporters have been toying with the idea that Republican candidate Mitt Romney could be a viable alternative this November. Romney was actually starting to look like a "moderate Republican" on key social issues while having the business experience to revive a struggling economy. With his selection of Paul Ryan as his running mate, possible swing voters and supporters began to question once again, "Who is Mitt Romney and what does he stand for?"
Voters started to get some clear answers this week.
This has been a long week for the Romney/Ryan ticket. On Sunday, Missouri Republican Senate candidate Todd Akin made front page news when he remarked how women's bodies can somehow block an unwanted pregnancy in instances of legitimate rape or forced rape. Vice Presidential hopeful Ryan even called Akin and asked him to bow out of the race for "the good of the team. The fact is that Paul Ryan's record on abortion is largely indistinguishable from Todd Akin's and most of his Republican House colleagues, who have viewed restricting abortion rights as one of their top priorities.
Both Romney and Ryan's camp went into media spin overdrive vehemently trying to distance themselves from Akin. But here's where the adage "Watch what people do, not what they say" becomes relevant. By Tuesday, the Republican platform committee approved language calling for a Constitutional amendment outlawing abortion with no explicit exceptions except for rape or incest. The party also approved a plank supporting abstinence-only education, as it had in 2008. " We renew our call for replacing family planning programs for teens with increased funding for abstinence education, which teaches abstinence until marriage."
The right to have an abortion and the withdrawal of state funding for contraception emerged early as the key issue in the Republican presidential primary race in America. Candidates went to extremes to put where they stood on a woman's right to abortion at the top of their agenda -- ahead of the economy, education environment, health care, terrorism or taxes. Rick Santorum, who at one time was frontrunner in the Republican race, stated that he even opposed abortion in cases of rape and "women must make the best of a bad situation." Vice Presidential hopeful Paul Ryan co-authored this bill and voted with Santorum.
In 2008, Sarah Palin put anti choice and abstinence as a form of birth control at the top of her campaign agenda. It became clear just weeks after she was named John McCain's running mate she forgot to tell her own teenage daughter, Bristol, what happens when you don't abstain, drink too much, and don't have abortion as a choice. Palin became a liability and lost McCain the election.
So why is abortion once again taking a front seat in American politics?
Today, in the United States, more women graduate from university than their male counterparts (three women for every two men), women now earn 60 percent of all master's degrees, and half of all law and medical degrees. Women in their 20s in their largest cities already out-earn men of the same age. Could these gains by women possibly be one of the reasons why so many have become the chief defenders of the unborn?
It wasn't that long ago abortion was legalized: in 1967 it was made legal in England, Wales and Scotland, and on January 22 1973 abortion was legalized in every state in the United States. The legalization of abortion has allowed women the same rights as the man who impregnated her: the right to have sex without the burden and responsibility of having to live with the lifelong consequences of that decision.
Abolishing a woman's right to abortion is one way to keep women from competing for the jobs and boardroom seats that have historically been occupied by men. Re-instituting a pro life society is code for, "Get these women out of my way -- now and in the future."
Because post industrial society does not need physical strength as it did ,but rather values open communication and social intelligence in 21st century -- skills that have traditionally been considered female -- the modern male is not sure what their rightful place in society should be or is. As men lose economic and social traction, they are desperate to hold onto whatever power they have left.
The story of the decline of men has already taken traction. Even Newsweek, the most mainstream of the weekly news magazines, thought it newsworthy to have as their cover story recently, "Man Up! The Traditional Male is An Endangered Species." Can the traditional male successfully thrive in this post industrial world where for tens of thousands of years he has dominated on the basis that he is stronger and faster thereby making him smarter?
Men have had their cake and eaten it too for thousands of years. Western women have had just 60 years of the pendulum swinging in their direction of equal rights and the right to decide when and if they want to have children.
Perhaps when an amendment is passed that enforces every man is legally bound to both care for and pay 50 percent of the costs of raising and educating each and every ejaculated sperm that becomes a viable embryo, the Republican debate in the United States about legalizing abortion and withdrawing state funding for contraception will move to the backseat of the American political agenda.
Follow Jill Shaw Ruddock on Twitter: www.twitter.com/jillshawruddock
 |
 |
|
| Obama | Romney | |
|---|---|---|
| Electoral Votes (270 to win) |
332 | 206 |
| Obama | Romney | |
|---|---|---|
| Total | 65,899,660 | 60,932,152 |
| Percent | 51.1% | 47.2% |
| Democrats* | Republicans | |
|---|---|---|
| Current Senate | 53 | 47 |
| Seats gained or lost | +2 | -2 |
| New Total | 55 | 45 |
| Democrats | Republicans | |
|---|---|---|
| Seats won | 201 | 234 |
Pornstarse.com
1p15 s watkins rolb
1p31 shawn hess c
2p5 rndr mark payne le
2p9 c ratliff fb
Brenden martin 70/71 wr (4th p 17)
Aaryn depriest late 4th oline
ranell sharp 5p10 cb75
MLB TANNER BAILEY B4 3RDP15
Men have the right to carefree sex without burden of the consequences? What an utter FALSEHOOD.
There is no male abortion option. Two parties get the choice at the point of intercourse to partake - past that, once found to be pregnant the woman then gets the choice to have the child or to abort, even to have the child and give it up for adoption. The man HAS NONE OF THOSE OPTIONS past the point of conception. He cannot interfere and force a woman to carry a child, nor can he opt out of crushing lifelong financial and social burdens from forced parenthood.
When it comes to accepting or declining the burdens of parenthood, the woman makes the choice for BOTH parties and the man is faced with severe legal and financial ramifications for 26 years as a result of HER DECISION. No. Not equal rights, those a biased in favor of the woman at the expense of the males rights.
For a party that prides itself on being conservative and pro-family values... they sure are interested in women's vaginas.
However, I do believe there should be "rules" to govern abortion since I have know females and doctors that abuse the right. Late term abortions are disgusting. I had to sit in on one for a MD and quite literally threw up in the OR. Also women who keep having abortions like they are a form of birth control.
So although there should be "rules or guidelines" I certainly do not believe that the right to decide should be taken away entirely. If that happens you are going to have a lot of sterile and/or dead women in this country who go back into dark allies and have coat hanger abortions, as it was in the past.
On top they want to take away birth control so you don't get pregnant. Who is running for election the Pope? Contrary to popular belief....women don't want to barefoot and pregnant for their entire life. We are not making making machines, here for the pleasure of men.
I digress.
To me, the great irony in the abortion debate is twofold. Most people who believe life begins at conception and therefore abortion is killing a life, are the same people who support the death penalty as a form of punishment. These same people also believe that it is their Constitutional right to bear arms( written in 1791 and before semi automatics existed) which causes the deaths of thousands of innocent people each year. Perhaps the Pro-Life movement should regroup and rename themselves Pro- Foetus. Pro Life is a misnomer.
That being said, I would be willing to go along with more restrictions on abortion if ONE thing was done by the govt. Make it easier for women to get sterilized. I don't know about other states, but in my state of Texas, if you are a childbearing woman under the age of 35 and you have less than 3 kids, you MUST HAVE GOVT PERMISSION to be sterilized.
I never wanted kids of my own..and my ex and I used two forms of birth control because I couldn't get sterilized. Planned Parenthood wouldn't do it. My gynie wouldn't do it....and told me that both the state of Texas AND their malpractice lawyers prevented them from doing so.
What it boils down to is, just what your blog states....women are taking over control more and more, achieving more and more..and the men don't like it.
Over 1100 bills restricting a woman's right to choose were introduced in 2011. 940 more were introduced in the FIRST QUARTER of 2012. Liberals aren't the ones throwing the issue on the table. It is the religious right, hand in hand with the conservative oligarchy.
As for your last statement, you are entirely correct. It is personal. It has to do with MY BODY. And that means that NO ONE HAS THE RIGHT TO FORCE ME TO REMAIN PREGNANT.
i am *so* sick of their empty words, of their hypocritical whinging lies about caring for kids.
"Re-instituting a pro life society is code for, "Get these women out of my way -- now and in the future."
I am old enough to have ACTUALLY thought naively that the 60's and the 70's was the era that women had at last secured equal rights. The fact that the Equal Rights Amendment was defeated, I simply pushed aside thinking that eventually there would be one. Now we have a whole political party that espouses the disenfranchisement of women!!! It's even in the GOP platform albeit in the form of euphemistic "right to life" code words that appeals to those who practice the old time religion. Make no mistake. The Republican establishment does not care about embryos or fetuses. They simply want to have power over women. They don't even mind if we are raped. They really don't care if a mother of five dies giving birth. Just get women out of the way of the male population who think that women are on earth for their gratification. Folks, it's in their platform for all to see. What kind of women go along with this thinking? Republican wives? Shame on you!!!!.
On the other hand, it it can be quite a shock for a man to find out how big a slice of his paycheck goes to child support.
It is cheaper to keep it zipped until ready to make a long term commitment to your partner, then raise the child in the same home.
Once the GOP gets total control of the governing process, anyone not a WASP property owner will immediately become a second-class citizen, subject to the next project of the GOP: the restoration of slavery.
It's clear that their entire "message" is a load of hooie.