American Imams
I'm simply stunned. Speechless. Sputtering. The New York Times reports today that the South Dakota State Senate approved a bill Wednesday to outlaw ALL abortion, the only exception being cases where "the mother's life is at risk". Not if she has become pregnant as a horrific result of incest. Not if that pregnancy is the unimaginably traumatic consequence of being forcibly raped. The Times notes:
Because make no mistake, kids. That's the real issue at stake in the abortion debate, and South Dakota's actions should send a chill down the spine of every person in America who values the right of personal choice in any venue. The implications of this action, and similar movements in a number of states, go beyond the un-Constitutionality of eliminating safe medical options for women not yet ready to raise a child, or the obvious arrogance and cruelty of adding to the trauma of a victim of sexual assault. With this bill, its backers have arbitrarily anointed themselves as holy interpreters of what constitutes the "right to life" of any woman who finds herself accidentally pregnant for whatever reason.
Abortion is quite possibly the most private, personal, gut-wrenching decision faced by an individual, even among genuine and committed pro-choice advocates. As such, it is simply nobody's goddamn business other than the individual directly involved. And it is certainly not the place of the State to make or forbid that decision for any free citizen. Period.
I'm sick to death of the characterization of pro-choice supporters as advocates of the "murder" of babies by alleged moralists who've granted themselves the delusional title, "Saviors of the Unborn". I've always maintained an intellectual respect for the right of pro-lifers to believe what they believe, even if I personally disagree with their position. That, after all, is what America is supposed to be about at its core. So, hey, if you don't support abortion, don't have one.
But by the same token, precisely because abortion is a matter of such personal choice, based oftentimes on wholly unforeseen circumstance, pro-choice advocates have an equal right to their beliefs in a truly free society, especially considering that they are in no way advocating the coercion of those who disagree to submit to the procedure. And because those who oppose the procedure do so on primarily religious grounds and not due to secular or scientific fact, their increasingly successful efforts to limit this choice are nothing less than the theocratic imposition of subjective dogma on the culture at large by a group of American Imams.
And that is simply un-American. At least, the last time I checked.
These same self-righteous individuals loudly decry the religious fundamentalist leaders of the Middle East for dictating codes of conduct in their nations that infringe upon the human and civil rights of their citizenry, especially as targeting Muslim women. Yet, this fatwah by our American fundamentalists to legislate specific "morality" on our society as a whole is no different, no less intrusive in areas where the State simply has no right to intrude.
Like I said earlier, if you don't support abortion, don't have one. But don't dare to criminalize the beliefs of those who don't agree. How can you even presume to make this decision for a young girl whose father is also her baby's father? Who the f#%k do you think you are to force a rape victim to bear her attacker's child? I hate to be crude, but if the daughter of one of South Dakota's anti-choice legislators were impregnated as a result of sexual assault, they'd both be on a plane headed to a New York Planned Parenthood clinic faster than you can say "Rapid City."
What's next from our American Imams - the obligatory stoning of those who've had sex out of wedlock? Legislation specifying "proper" public attire for women, with harsh criminal penalties for disobedience? Or how about laws mandating clitorectomies for all female children at birth, to "save" society from the blasphemous scourge of wanton vixens and unbridled promiscuity?
Think I'm exaggerating? Why - because the leaders of this nation, on both a State and Federal level, have so clearly demonstrated their ability to separate Church and State in other related matters?! Already, these same arbiters of private conduct have made significant inroads in impeding the availability of contraceptives, and in obstructing the mere public awareness of the Plan B pill, which, if widely and commonly distributed, would prevent up to 80 percent of unwanted pregnancies resulting from sexual assault.
We should be outraged as a forward-thinking populace over this South Dakota bill, and the broader implications it carries with it. One has to wonder if the fundamentalist Right has spent too much time obsessing over the Middle East - especially when its acolytes insist on moving us closer each day to a theocratic junta which forces its own brand of morality on us all.
After more than an hour of fierce and emotional debate, the senators rejected pleas to add exceptions for incest or rape or for the health of the pregnant woman and instead voted, 23 to 12, to outlaw all abortions, except those to save the woman's life.In addition, the bill's sponsors and supporters were obviously so confident that their judgment was "right" and omnipotent that "[t]hey also rejected an effort to allow South Dakotans to decide the question in a referendum." That's democracy for you - especially on a topic that would be of such trivial unimportance to citizens on an individual, private level. And I can't help but wonder just who the Hell these self-appointed arbiters of the most personal of personal decisions think they are.
Because make no mistake, kids. That's the real issue at stake in the abortion debate, and South Dakota's actions should send a chill down the spine of every person in America who values the right of personal choice in any venue. The implications of this action, and similar movements in a number of states, go beyond the un-Constitutionality of eliminating safe medical options for women not yet ready to raise a child, or the obvious arrogance and cruelty of adding to the trauma of a victim of sexual assault. With this bill, its backers have arbitrarily anointed themselves as holy interpreters of what constitutes the "right to life" of any woman who finds herself accidentally pregnant for whatever reason.
Abortion is quite possibly the most private, personal, gut-wrenching decision faced by an individual, even among genuine and committed pro-choice advocates. As such, it is simply nobody's goddamn business other than the individual directly involved. And it is certainly not the place of the State to make or forbid that decision for any free citizen. Period.
I'm sick to death of the characterization of pro-choice supporters as advocates of the "murder" of babies by alleged moralists who've granted themselves the delusional title, "Saviors of the Unborn". I've always maintained an intellectual respect for the right of pro-lifers to believe what they believe, even if I personally disagree with their position. That, after all, is what America is supposed to be about at its core. So, hey, if you don't support abortion, don't have one.
But by the same token, precisely because abortion is a matter of such personal choice, based oftentimes on wholly unforeseen circumstance, pro-choice advocates have an equal right to their beliefs in a truly free society, especially considering that they are in no way advocating the coercion of those who disagree to submit to the procedure. And because those who oppose the procedure do so on primarily religious grounds and not due to secular or scientific fact, their increasingly successful efforts to limit this choice are nothing less than the theocratic imposition of subjective dogma on the culture at large by a group of American Imams.
And that is simply un-American. At least, the last time I checked.
These same self-righteous individuals loudly decry the religious fundamentalist leaders of the Middle East for dictating codes of conduct in their nations that infringe upon the human and civil rights of their citizenry, especially as targeting Muslim women. Yet, this fatwah by our American fundamentalists to legislate specific "morality" on our society as a whole is no different, no less intrusive in areas where the State simply has no right to intrude.
Like I said earlier, if you don't support abortion, don't have one. But don't dare to criminalize the beliefs of those who don't agree. How can you even presume to make this decision for a young girl whose father is also her baby's father? Who the f#%k do you think you are to force a rape victim to bear her attacker's child? I hate to be crude, but if the daughter of one of South Dakota's anti-choice legislators were impregnated as a result of sexual assault, they'd both be on a plane headed to a New York Planned Parenthood clinic faster than you can say "Rapid City."
What's next from our American Imams - the obligatory stoning of those who've had sex out of wedlock? Legislation specifying "proper" public attire for women, with harsh criminal penalties for disobedience? Or how about laws mandating clitorectomies for all female children at birth, to "save" society from the blasphemous scourge of wanton vixens and unbridled promiscuity?
Think I'm exaggerating? Why - because the leaders of this nation, on both a State and Federal level, have so clearly demonstrated their ability to separate Church and State in other related matters?! Already, these same arbiters of private conduct have made significant inroads in impeding the availability of contraceptives, and in obstructing the mere public awareness of the Plan B pill, which, if widely and commonly distributed, would prevent up to 80 percent of unwanted pregnancies resulting from sexual assault.
We should be outraged as a forward-thinking populace over this South Dakota bill, and the broader implications it carries with it. One has to wonder if the fundamentalist Right has spent too much time obsessing over the Middle East - especially when its acolytes insist on moving us closer each day to a theocratic junta which forces its own brand of morality on us all.
posted by Bob P @ 3:00 PM
8 Comments:
Wow.
Excellent post and a sense of deep understanding of the issue, which does in fact go much further than abortion. It was almost a race to the bottom so see which backward state "won" the right to make more women die from botched illegal abortions.
I also appreciate your visits and comments, and I thank you for your support and encouragement. Same back to you, my friend.
James
The Psychotic Patriot blogs the incredibly stupid and heartlessly timed removal of a mother's memorial to her fallen son. Please pass this around, and if you blog, please post about this travesty.
This is a really good post, I am a pro-choice person myself and I agree with almost everything in this post. However, I wonder why you aren’t giving things their proper names instead of trying to negatively perpetuate all Muslims who are, at least not this time, not responsible for such fundamentalism. We all know that this ban is religiously motivated, however, the religion involved is Christianity, not Islam. Or is it just a catch phrase? I think you should be outraged by your own American Priests!
Unfortunately, this is just the beginning.
And if Bush gets to nominate one more supreme court justice, the America we grew up in could be transformed beyond recognition.
Aya,
I'm sorry if I was unclear to you. I AM outraged at American religious, political and social "leaders", as well as their blindly devoted citizen followers, who continue to take this prejudicial stand against women's rights, as well as, making a direct comparison to some of the terribly harsh laws that subjugate women in a number of Islamic nations - and the self-annointed "holy men" who dictate those laws.
And thanks to James and Anthony for your visit and your continued support.
The radical Right has its chess pieces in place now. I fear that we'll see the pace of these types of actions accelerate exponentially in the near future.
That's why it's increasingly important that people of reason keep shouting as loudly as possible. You two are some of the best voices out there, so keep fightin' the good fight.
Bob, as usual you represent the unspoken sanity of the American consciousness. I hope and pray that the women of this country will see what's going on and rise up in a tidal wave of electoral outrage. Can you imagine if 70 percent of women voted in the next election? It would be Democrats and Greens all across this country, with Bushparty forces down for the count. Let's hope NOW and Emily's List are able to keep these women on a sustained course for regime change, so we can put some sort of check on this insane new right-wing Court.
P.S. The American Peoples' Congress is becoming less of a loony idea every minute our leaders dither while thousands die. It's not communist, it's not even anarchist, it's just a new idea whose time has come. Please check us out at www.apctahoma.blogspot.com
Peace.
Enjoyed reading your post....I myself am Pro-choice because I like the idea that if I was to become pregnant my option of having the baby would be my choice not the Gov'ts. Not all of us who are Pro-choice are pro-abortion as the pro-lifers would have you think. They should of at least as you said let the people vote on the issue. But, why would they do that??? they know they would lose.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home