I used to be angry, now I am apoplectic. I also used to be fraulein and now I am a frau. I used to be a mademoiselle and now I am a madam, a senorita and now a senora. In other words, I am a mature woman, whose human rights are vanishing before her very eyes. For a long time, I have confused myself with a man and a human and become habituated to freedom. I don't like it when Congress treats me like a girl by hacking away at abortion rights and thinking about ELIMINATING funds for family planning.
From deep within my apoplexy, I ask: What in the name of God and goodness is Congress thinking? My reluctant and puzzled conclusion: Congress IS moralizing about sex and how some people are not supposed to have it while one member (and I do mean "member") after another is discovered in a bathroom with his pants pathetically down or on a screen showing off his biceps. Larry Craig, Eliot Spitzer, Mark Sanford, John Kennedy, Gary Hart -- all sides of the aisle -- remind me of nothing so much as my 16-year-old son, who forgot to remove a used condom from his jeans' pocket, for me to find when I laundered the pants. I don't remember moralizing. I do remember conversation. We decided, sex ed for him was "everybody agrees, no one gets hurt, no one gets pregnant." He posted these notes on his bedroom wall. Moralizing is not conversation. Congress wants to be punishmentalist and moralizing about female sexuality, as though it was theirs and not mine.
Certain members of Congress are living on a hypocritical erotic planet. People have sex. They love sex. Women love sex. I actually feel sorry for Larry Craig and what he sees as his potty room, the only place he is worthy of sex. Even if it becomes "illegal" in its reproductive consequences, people are going to have sex. Some will have it in bathrooms; others will have it on the Internet when their married lives start to bore them.
Republicans are also politically hypocritical. They say out of one side of their mouth, "less government," and out of the other, "more moral policing by big government." Did these electeds never take a class in logic? Do they really "think with their d---'s?" Forgive the slang but it fits way too well with my argument. Political logic would attach family planning to a decrease of the deficit and increase the funding for it. One d-word appears to be in the way of another. More unwanted children require more schooling, polices and services. DUH.
To even bring up the South Dakota possibility of encouraging people to murder doctors who do abortions is to move beyond apoplectic, where even rage doesn't protect our souls. I am going to ignore the South Dakota possibility on the grounds of my spiritual health, which is my only new subject in this tired and tiring conversation.
I am now praying for my mental health as a mature woman. I am praying to learn what Jesus could do, which is to love my enemy and be good to those who hurt me. As an adult, and a woman, I know my rage is hurting me as much as it is hurting my opponents. Can I try to understand what the sex police want? Do they want to justify their bathroom behavior? Do they want their mothers to find "something?" Are they really capable of an abstinence that they are forcing on women? As a pastor, the only explanation I can give for the immoral stupidity of the current proposal is here: Some people on the religious right really hate their own sexuality. That almost makes me sad enough to care about them. Just almost, as I still need the defense of anger. Anger is not the opposite of love. Indifference is.
My political opponents are no longer just opponents: they are enemies of my adulthood and the enemy of girls who will become adults, if I have my way, and won't if they have theirs. I wish I could bear all the sadness they have caused me and not cover it so with rage. I do love women, girls, sex, babies, sons as well as daughters. And I love choice. The choice to be a woman and not a girl. If men had to have abortions, they would be a sacrament. Since they don't, they aren't. I think choice is sacramental. And finally, I love sacraments. What we have done to sex and girls and women is anti-sacramental. Choice can be sacramental. That is why I am apoplectic about it.
Larry Craig, Republican Senator for Idaho, was arrested on July 11, 2007, by plainclothes police officer investigating complaints of lewd behavior in a Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport airport men's room. On Aug. 8 in Hennepin County Municipal Court in Bloomington, Minn., Craig entered a guilty plea and paid a $500 fine. On Sept. 1, Craig subsequently announced his retirement from the Senate. Five days later, Craig changed his mind, renounced his retirement and began a battle to have his guilty plea overturned. Craig supported the Federal Marriage Amendment, which barred extension of rights to same-sex couples; he voted for cloture on the amendment in both 2004 and 2006, and was a cosponsor in 2008. However, in late 2006 he appeared to endorse the right of individual states to create same-sex civil unions, but said he would vote "yes" on an Idaho constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriages when pressured to clarify his position by the anti-gay rights advocacy group Families for a Better Idaho. Craig voted against cloture in 2002, which would have extended the federal definition of hate crimes to cover sexual orientation.
Mark Sanford, governor of South Carolina, disappears during Father's Day weekend, 2009, returning to confess an extramarital affair in Argentina.
John Ensign, Senator from Nevada, refuses to resign after confessing to an extramarital affair with a married staffer, claiming she was trying to extort him.[ Later, it was learned he was attempting to pay her and her husband off through his parents and finding them jobs