Friday, October 19, 2012

Personhood or Wackadoodleness?


Last February I wrote a blog entitle “Wackadoodles” which described some of the more ridiculous actions of some Republicans.  To wit: Congressman Daryl Issa of California holding a Congressional hearing on women’s health issues without having any women on the panel.  After a considerable uproar, on the second day he had two women, carefully screened ahead of time to make sure they were in line with men making these decisions for women.  In that hearing, Bishop Lori compared government involvement in the requirements for employers to provide birth control (which never really existed) to government requiring a Kosher deli to serve pork.  Needless to say, there was even more of an uproar since there is no woman who likes being compared to a piece of meat, regardless of whether it is pork, lamb or beef. 
At that time Rick Santorum was sounding off about birth control, and at the same time wanting to take away state and federal funding for education.  Also I wrote about the stupid comment Mitt Romney made about tying his dog’s kennel to the roof of the car, with dog in it, to take a 12 hour long trip.  He said there was no problem, the kennel was airtight.  Had the kennel been airtight, after 12 hours the poor dog would have been dead.  As it is, no one has particularly mentioned whatever happened to the dog after that trip.
I thought we had reached the end of our wackadoodleness until this personhood thing turned up wherein a fertilized egg would be proclaimed to have full human rights, perhaps even including property rights.  This would, of course, require a constitutional amendment, but don’t let a little thing like that get in your way.  So we have Todd Aikin, current Congressman and Senate candidate from Missouri pronouncing that rape cannot result in pregnancy because a woman’s body knows that little illegal sperm is up to no good, and shuts itself down!  And we have Congressman Joe Walsh, Illinois, saying that with modern science and technology there is no way a pregnancy can harm the mother; that claiming this is just the way to get an abortion! 
There have also been proposals, which fortunately have gone nowhere, to make miscarriages criminal, just as the fundamentalists want to make abortions, probably because the medical term for a miscarriage, the lay term, is spontaneous abortion.  After a Google search of the frequency of spontaneous abortions, it is estimated that about 1 in 3 women will have, and I return to the lay term since that is what I am, a miscarriage.  Some women experience this so early in the pregnancy they may not even know they are pregnant, unless they are using a pregnancy kit to determine if they are. 
This is a subject that most women don’t talk about.  If they didn’t know they were pregnant, the reason for not talking about it is obvious.  But later in the pregnancy, particularly if the baby was desperately wanted, the event was too personal and painful to discuss with anyone but their partner and/or doctor.  If the personhood amendment would actually be passed, and any cessation of a pregnancy would be criminalized as the murder of a real person, how devastated the woman would be by the fact that not only did she lose her baby, but now she is in jail, at best!  I assume that this would apply to married women as well as unmarried women.  To avoid the stigma of being criminalized, women will not report that they have had a miscarriage.  Generally speaking this is ok, but not always.  If the ‘spontaneous abortion’ is not complete, and some tissue remains, certainly a septic condition can occur.  The sepsis may damage her uterus, thus preventing future pregnancies, or at is worst, cause the death of the woman.  Is it reasonable to assume that if a personhood amendment passes, the same fundamentalists will have eliminated Obamacare in favor of high-priced medical Insurance, as we have now?
What is it with these wackadoodles anyway?  They talk about how they are so pro-life, about the miracle of life, but when it comes to women, they seem to be pro-who cares?

No comments: