In yesterday’s newspaper (Monroe Evening News), a rather interesting bit appeared about the latest issues voted on by the Michigan legislature.
Now, I DO NOT like the idea of anyone being forced to have an abortion, as I believe that should be a choice made freely by the woman.
So, in that vein, it was made illegal to coerce a woman to have an abortion, and abortion clinics would have to ask if anyone coerced the woman to have the abortion. Coercing a woman to do so can net you 15 years in prison. Really rather harsh, but ok, I can live. This was passed by about 67-38.
Along with that, I do NOT like the idea of anyone being forced not to have an abortion.
The law that would make it illegal to coerce a woman NOT to have an abortion was struck down, 38-67.
Right now, I’m trying to find a link, but I suddenly get the thought that it would be SO easy to move to Ohio, as it’s a little over 20 miles south…
You can always move to the East Coast Supposedly, the people here are rude, but its a heck of a lot better than having your civil liberties restricted.
Anyway, they could never seriously force a woman not to have an abortion. That bill being struck down is just part of the blowback of a dying culture of Bible-thumber/rednecks etc. They realize their way of life is dying, so they’re getting desperate. It’ll fade away in time.
If you ask me, the real damage they can do is in education. They can’t pass any bills to illegalize what they want to illegalize, but unfortunately, as we saw in the South immediately following Bush’s reelection, they can have a great deal of influence over what kinds of things are taught in school. What you saw in the South is a bunch of changes to textbooks such as ‘Chastity is the best way to deal with STDs’ or in some cases not even talking about STDs. This is not to mention what they teach their children.
Well, abstinence is the best way to deal with STDs, from a sheer percent success standpoint. However, they also present all hte problems but none of the benefits of other birth control methods (namely the ability to have sex is never listed as a perk, for one), and the statistics used are a litte fucked up. For example, the statistic on condom’s pregnancy prevention rate is given including improper usage. The figure with proper usage, or even that the figure with proper usage is a much better rate, isn’t given. It isn’t even mentioned in the text, at all.
I guess the theorizin’ behind this law was that if they talk you into it, it’s kinda irrevocable, but if they talk you out of it, you can go back and fix it later. That, or crazed right-wing nonsense, but I’m trying to keep optimistic. While not the best logic, I suppose I can see it coming into somebodies head. Although, the idea of making a law against coercion is a problem, since it cannot be proven, and there’s no real defintion of how far ‘coercion’ goes. Is it coercion to say the options are to keep a child, send it into Foster Care, or get an abortion. I mean, if they can’t afford to keep it, that coerces them into Foster care of Abortion, and given the negative views towards orphanages and such facilities in modern culture, the coercion goes more to aboriton? I could see a good lawyer arguing it. It seems like it could be a way for any conservative with a smoothe tongue to make abortion illegal case-by-case. That’s my pessimistic side of it.
I always find this sort of thing pretty funny… Christian “law” is supposedly based on the Jewish Old Testament, but according to Jewish law, contraception and abortions aren’t nearly as bad as Christians seem to think they are. Then again, according to Jewish law sex is a right given to wives, and it’s generally agreed that lifelong abstaining from sex is one of the worst things a man can do. Much healthier all round.
Yeah, I had always heard that Judaism is much more of an earthier religion than Christianity, especially if you go back and translate the original Hebrew of the OT the right way instead of the King James version.
Oh tell me about it. This summer I’ve had to sit through four books about all the crazy things sex deprived nuns and monks did to each other and had visions about. Stuff like one female saint claiming that after a vision of marrying Jesus she had in her youth, she always wore an invisible ring made of Christ’s foreskin. Now I’m looking forwards to reading the book about Jewish mothers in the middle ages.
Anyway… the passing and failing of those laws are still steps in the right direction in your state, Star. At least they aren’t making abortions illigal again, like they did in some other state a while back.
It’s surprising how Christianity has changed over time. Even Catholic law okayed abortions up until the mid-nineteenth century, since it was believed that the soul didn’t enter the body until shortly before birth.
I don’t think it’s that surprising. The people who believe in them and interpret them change and they themselves change. If only they were more in touch with their faithful they could adopt a few meaningful changes like accepting contraceptives, doing some charity, promoting social revolution (j/k or perhaps not? Nowadays they’d brand Jesus a terrorist and hang him).
I’m afraid you are wrong here. Abortion was made a crime in the Roman Empire at around 200 AD, and since Christianity was the official religion, they surely couldn’t perform it.
Anyway, StarStorm, as long as you are not a woman who wants to abort, I don’t get your fuss. Of course, it sucks to live in a reactionist country like the USA where religion is a force in politics, but that law wouldn’t really affect you personally, would it?
That’s like saying I shouldn’t be upset of the law that gives black people the right to vote isn’t passed when it comes up to ballot again, just because I’m not black. There are some things that are wrong, regardless of if they affect you or not.
First they came for the Communists, and I didn’t speak up,
because I wasn’t a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t speak up,
because I wasn’t a Jew.
Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn’t speak up,
because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me, and by that time there was no one left
to speak up for anyone.
I quite agree, though I can understand why women have abortions, 99% of them are confused, frightened, don’t have the money to support the baby, there’s no daddy (by the way that brings up to mind what I read in a story once, “Abortion is for the damned convinence of men”) etc.
We Christians are not a dying breed, how many times have we heard this over the hundreds and thousands of years, and all the time, we’ve lived out those who have said these very words!
Weiila, I’m interested, where did you read that thing about the Nun and what she said about her “ring”? That seems like she’s more more phycotic that she was religious, but I’m interested in it."
Also, whoever said that the Catholic Church gave thumbs up to abortions up to the nineteenth century, where did you get that bit of info? Again just curious.
One final time, Christianity is dying out? I don’t think so, in fact statistics show that it is a massive growing force in both Africa and Asia. It’s also funny I think that many people say through the centuries that the church is finally dying or dead usually in one part of the world, only to forget to look around other parts of the world, where it expanded, to create missionaries and send them to the newly non christian areas of the world. Ireland was converted twice, in fact, the Roman Empire itself had to be reconverted after it left Roman Catholicism to Palgeism for a good deal of time in the four hundreds.
MMmm, rant ahead, I won’t claim that it’s anything BUT my opinion. But here we go.
First of all, as Arac and Curtis had put it more eloquently than I, just because it doesn’t affect to me doesn’t mean it’s not right.
In fact, I see this as rather very hypocritical. As far as I’m concerned, criminalizing forcing a choice an a person while saying that forcing them into the other choice is perfectly legal is in fact, exceptionally hypocritical. At least it’s refreshingly obvious.
I can deal with this if it was a common sense issue, such as seat belts or murder, but abortion isn’t a common sense issue. There’s too many grey areas as far as I’m concerned.
That said, to me, this isn’t about the unborn child or even religion.
Going on, I’m not fond of abortion. I never have been. In my ideal world, abortions would be used in only the most extreme circumstances. But in that ideal world, this would also require comprehensive sexual education as well as easy access to birth control. This is what they are against as well.
I get the feeling that these are the same people who, if they were pharmacists, would refuse to give a rape victim the morning after pill.
Basically, my thoughts are: this isn’t about unborn life. If it was, I’d also be hearing about the new child-protection measures that would make sure that children were sheltered, clothed, well-fed, and educated. But oddly enough, I don’t. In fact, I’m starting to come under the impression that states that don’t try to “restrict” abortion usually have better concerns for living children.
So, in the end, it’s not about abortion, it’s about… well, the best way I could put it is “socially criminalizing” sex. The people in support of this would love nothing more to bad abortion, ban birth control, and give children shoddy sex ed so people end up fearing it so much that they’ll only have sex “the way God wants it”. That, oddly enough, sounds like the way levitican conservatives want people to have it.
So, let’s say they do manage to ban abortion and stop the sale of feminine birth control. What’s there to stop them from banning male birth control? I know I’m not ready for children, but I would still like to enjoy sex, and that is basically the only means I have of doing both.
But then, I’m not a woman, so why should I speak up? They SURELY wouldn’t do that, right?
The conservatives have basically been itching for a way to nullify Roe v. Wade for a very long time. This is just another step in that direction.
In a book for my summer course about women in the middle ages. The book in question is “Holy Feast and Holy Fast” by Caroline Walker Bynum. The nun in question was named (St.) Catherine of Siena. I tried finding an online source about the ring thing, but it seems that most sites shy away from mentioning it. Can’t imagine why.
I do remember that the guy who wrote her vita claimed that the ring was made of gold or silver, but she herself in her letters said that you could not marry Jesus with a gold or silver ring, but only one made of his foreskin.
Lady, please take a step back and stop molesting Christ.
Also Vanguard, if you’re interested in more psycho than religious people, that book is a gold mine.
On abortion, I don’t like the idea of it, but I fully support it. It should absolutely not be made illegal. Why? Because women will still be desperate enough to do it - with illegal doctors who operate them without sedatives/pain killers/disinfectants, or on their own using knitting needles or coat hangers. That’s what they did before abortion was finally made legal. Desperate people can get frighteningly resourceful.