Sunday, February 5, 2012

Personhood Amendment


Perhaps it is time that we introduce a new Personhood Amendment? Something to the effect that “Women are full human beings, with full rights over their bodies and complete freedom to make decisions respecting their bodies, health and futures.”

All of this new controversy over requiring that health insurance plans, regardless of where they are offered, cover birth control without copay, is absolutely absurd.

I have heard enough from Newt & Rick & Mitt & Ron Paul about ‘religious freedom’ and what an attack on the Catholic Church that this has been. Well, for thousands of years the Catholic Church, and other male dominated power structures, have been attacking women and our autonomy and it is about fucking time for a little push back.

This is not about abortion. This is not about birth control. This is not about the group of cells that may or may not be duplicating in someone’s uterus.

This is about Women.

This whole bullshit argument is about whether or not women can be trusted to think and decide for themselves what is best for themselves and their body and their future - or whether they need the state, or a man, telling them what they can or cannot do.

Women understand how our bodies work. We understand, and can comprehend, the multitude of issues that arise from our reproductive health and, thankfully, there are [still] organizations that can assist us in getting the care that we need.

Despite all of the arguments to the contrary, women are capable of making these decisions ourselves.

It is very simple: either I have control over my body or someone else does.

These arguments have always been about controlling women and limiting their abilities to control their own lives. Take away a woman’s choice about her own fertility and you limit every choice that that woman will ever be able to make for the rest of her life.

When, in this country, will we finally decide that women are full persons with all of the rights of a full person? Oh, that’s right, we have been trying to get a women’s ‘personhood amendment’ passed for 89 years and counting.


Anjha said...

Anjha said...

Tonight. Conference call. Fight for the ERA.

Judith said...

This has already been litigated during Roe v Wade. Viability is the criterion.

A person who is brain dead can have a heartbeat and be breathing. When a doctor pronounces proof of death, it's the lack of brain waves which confirm it. The fetus doesn't start emitting brain waves until into the third trimester. However while brainwaves definitely indicate death, they can also be present in a body which wouldn't otherwise survive without a machine which breathes, feeds, keeps it alive.

Now with all the medical advances even very premature babies can survive--for a short time or if for longer then there are usually many other problems. Until brainwaves are present the central nervous system isn't communicating with the organs. Until the CNS is developed many organs and systems (especially the respiratory system) cannot finish developing. Survival before the development of those systems and organs will be machine dependent--likely for the lifetime of the infant.

SCOTUS made the decision that viability is the criterion for life. Even viability is a fuzzy line. Now does viability mean ability to live on it's own, or life on a machine which is the criterion, and for how long?

While that may be the new issue, what isn't an issue is calling a zygote (undifferentiated cells) a person. The potential for personhood may be in the DNA, but it hasn't actualized and won't until it can survive outside the womb.

Judith said...

I saw this comment about the Oklahoma bill that requires listening to the heart beat of a fetus.

Judith said...

How are things in Seattle? Glad to see that you are still posting here. Sharon and I have become friends on FB. She remains politically active. I on the other hand, not so much. However, with the out and out attack on women, that is changing. If Republicans think they can win anything by attacking women, they have made the biggest miscalulation of their political lives.

Anjha said...

It is nice to hear from you. Let's play over here for a while? Want to?

I really do not like fb. It is just easy. Lazy blogging. No need to really formulate a real cohesive storyline - just a click of a like button.

Plus, I hate combining my life with my life.

As for viability - a fine debate to have for the person who it is affecting. My personal feelings about a fetus and a clump of cells and life and when it begins and all of the morality stuff is irrelevant. The only moral issue that I believe matters is whether or not I trust women. Period.

The moral issue is a big and important one. However, it is not mine. It belongs to the person who is experiencing an unintended pregnancy.

I believe that women are full human beings capable of making these decisions without having the state interfere. This was the point of my satire....though by the end I realized it was not much satire because it is fucking true.

We are not represented in the Constitution except for in the 19th Amendment. We are not protected by the Constitution except for in the 19th Amendment.

Judith said...

I just read your post. Yes, let's stay in touch. I will try to drop in more often. FB is not the place for politics, which I found out the hard way. Never knew I had so many right wing relatives and acquaintances. There is no educating those who refuse to base their belief system on facts.