It IS a War.

(This was written in response to a commenter on a friend's posting of a Planned Parenthood meme on their Facebook wall. During the back-and-forth, the commenter asserted that, "It's not anti-choice, it's pro-life. We believe women have plenty of choices but murdering their children should not be one of them. If you don't want kids, close your legs. That's the real choice." He then went on to state that, "If you know the consequences, such as getting pregnant means I have to carry a baby to term, you might think twice or at least take precautions. You would not be denied because of your act, you would be denied because the Right To Life of the child should be protected. It's not your body at that point." My friend then stated, "while we’re living on this planet, in this country, due to irreconcilable differences in morality, it is highly inconsiderate to restrict access to contraception and abortion based only on one group’s opinion with disregard to the dire circumstances many people find themselves in. If you begin restricting access, you risk people with serious need for emergency termination of pregnancy not being able to get it."

This was my response. I'm sharing it here because it covers many of the issues we're currently facing in what is undeniably an open war on an entire gender.)


D*****'s reference above to the restriction of access to contraception has prompted me to follow up on that - because far too often, I see claims that no one, anywhere EVER, is considering such actions. I present Exhibit 1... Colorado House Bill 14-1133, introduced yesterday: http://www.leg.state.co.us/.../EBF408A1297E838B87257C3000...

Let me hit the high points for you - the first line reads, "This bill prohibits abortion and makes a violation a Class 3 felony." It goes on to define pregnancy as, "THE HUMAN FEMALE REPRODUCTIVE CONDITION OF HAVING A LIVING UNBORN HUMAN BEING WITHIN HER BODY THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE EMBRYONIC AND FETAL AGES OF THE UNBORN CHILD FROM FERTILIZATION TO FULL GESTATION AND CHILDBIRTH." Fertilization is defined as, "THAT POINT IN TIME WHEN A MALE HUMAN SPERM PENETRATES THE ZONA PELLUCIDA OF A FEMALE HUMAN OVUM." The only exception to this prohibition is if "a licensed physician performs a a medical procedure designed or intended to prevent the death of a pregnant mother". No exceptions for rape. No exceptions for incest. No exceptions for fetal anomalies incompatible with life. No exceptions for health of the mother.

I need to point out here that this means that the mother's life must be in IMMEDIATE danger - you don't get to say, "If this woman's water breaks, her amniotic sac is so overfull due to the child's defect that it will certainly shred her uterus, cause massive internal bleeding and leave her at risk of death." You must wait until her water DOES break, shreds her uterus, and causes that massive internal bleeding before you may begin the procedure to save her.

To continue - this bill goes on to state the following: "NOTHING IN THIS SECTION SHALL BE CONSTRUED TO PROHIBIT THE SALE, USE, PRESCRIPTION, OR ADMINISTRATION OF A CONTRACEPTIVE MEASURE, DEVICE, DRUG, OR CHEMICAL IF IT IS ADMINISTERED PRIOR TO CONCEPTION AND IF THE CONTRACEPTIVE MEASURE , DEVICE, DRUG, OR CHEMICAL IS SOLD, USED, PRESCRIBED, OR ADMINISTERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH MANUFACTURER INSTRUCTIONS."

Sounds reasonable. right? No restrictions there, right? Except... wrong. By including the phrase, "if it is administered prior to conception", they have now outright banned all use of Plan B and its equivalents - as those are administered after a reasonable expectation of conception. They have also laid the groundwork for banning ALL hormonal birth control options and mechanical devices such as IUDs under the premise that, like Plan B, et al., they work in part by preventing the implantation of a fertilized egg.

Now, in all likelihood, this bill will never make it out of the Colorado House, much less the Senate, and even were it to jump THOSE hurdles, Governor Hickenlooper would never sign it. Even in the event he did, the first line makes it so unconstitutional as to be laughable - it would never stand up to a SCOTUS review. But these ARE the measures that so-called "pro-life" supporters want put in place. Similar bills have been presented in other states, as well as ballot measures proposed, voted on, and invariably defeated by wide margins, in multiple elections and states as well.

This isn't about "poor choices" or "morality" in any sense of the word, as victims of rape or incest MADE no poor choices and did nothing immoral. Nor did mothers gestating babies so damaged as to have no chance of survival. Nor did wives facing situations in which their health, or very life, is in grave danger - but not yet to the point where if nothing is done, they will certainly die.

And this is not about abortion. This is about whether a woman has the right to ANY option, other than total abstinence, to prevent pregnancy PERIOD. Combine these measures with proposals by certain legislators *coughRichardBlack(R, VA)cough* to legalize marital rape, and what you're looking at is a picture of a segment of society that wishes to relegate women to sub-human status whose entire worth is located in their reproductive organs - to give the entire gender no right to refuse the sexual use of those organs or the incubation of any product of that use.

And THAT, sir, is an open declaration of war. Full stop.