This is how fast the kids are changing, and by “kids,” I mean “new voters replacing old bigots at the polls”:
First-year college students are more socially liberal than their predecessors on issues such as same- sex marriage and public education for undocumented students, according to an annual survey released today.
More than 71 percent of respondents who were freshmen in 2011 indicated same-sex couples should be able to marry, up from 64.9 percent two years earlier, according to the survey by the Higher Education Research Institute at the University of California, Los Angeles.
The survey, which began measuring student opinions and concerns in 1966, also found more students supporting abortion rights, with almost 61 percent saying abortion should be legal. Forty-three percent opposed denying undocumented students access to public higher education, down from 47.2 percent two years earlier.
Yesterday, people were appalled when it was reported that Rick Santorum, a man who holds such grotesque opinions on a host of topics that he repels all but the worst wingnuts, had seemingly outdone himself by telling Piers Morgan that women who become pregnant by rape should accept it as “a gift in a very broken way.” Here’s the quote:
Last Friday, CNN’s Piers Morgan asked Santorum to clarify his reasoning behind such a callous position. Insisting that “it’s not a matter of religious values,” Santorum explained that sexual assault victims should “accept this horribly created” pregnancy because it is “nevertheless a gift in a very broken way” and that, when it comes down to it, a victim just has “to make the best out of a bad situation“:
SANTORUM: Well, you can make the argument that if she doesn’t have this baby, if she kills her child, that that, too, could ruin her life. And this is not an easy choice. I understand that. As horrible as the way that that son or daughter and son was created, it still is her child. And whether she has that child or doesn’t, it will always be her child. And she will always know that. And so to embrace her and to love her and to support her and get her through this very difficult time, I’ve always, you know, I believe and I think the right approach is to accept this horribly created — in the sense of rape — but nevertheless a gift in a very broken way, the gift of human life, and accept what God has given to you. As you know, we have to, in lots of different aspects of our life. We have horrible things happen. I can’t think of anything more horrible. But, nevertheless, we have to make the best out of a bad situation.
The Lord works in mysterious ways, you silly ladies, and sometimes it comes in the form of a brutal rape! So saith Frothy. Or as Tbogg put it, Santorum is saying that “when life gives you rape, you should make rapeanade.”
Here’s video [viaWonkette] of that, and then some more thoughts:
My god. I must pause for a moment, quickly, to point out that just after 1:35, he says, “this is not an easy choice.” That is the point, wingnut! It’s a choice that only a woman can make! C-H-O-I-C-E!
But that gets to the larger point here. This is not about abortion. This is not about morals. This is not about religious belief. This is about men, like Rick Santorum, believing in a worldview that says that they, as white, straight men are superior, and the rest of us — women, people of color, LGBT people — are all subject to their control. I want to quote a lot of what Tbogg said on the subject, because though people know him as a “funny writer,” he’s remarkably on point on the greater implications of this worldview:
Twisted version of a living thinking human being Rick Santorum is not a “the uterus is half empty”-kind of guy. To him the uterus should always be popping out babies like a Pez dispenser because, what are women after all, besides elaborately constructed EZ Bake Ovens for man batter. And if you happened to be raped (which Rick, always angling for the lady vote, thinks is “horrible”) well you should look at the bright side of things: you might just get to be a mama!
[...]
God gave you a gift albeit through a horrible violent soul-crushing emotionally scarring way that you will carry with you every minute of your life until you die. And, if you choose to not accept God’s very mortal man-like awkward attempt at gift giving and you say “no thanks” and give it back to Him, well, you’re an ungrateful bitch. And probably a whore for leading your rapist and God on so you don’t deserve the baby, just the rape.
Exactly exactly exactly. And lest you think he’s being hyperbolic, think of many of the “typical” things people say on the subject of women avoiding rape. They’re all focused on the victim and suggest that, well, as long as the lady doesn’t wear a certain thing and as long as the lady doesn’t walk alone and so on and so forth, as if violating one of these rules means somehow that the lady had it coming. Perhaps what’s most striking about Santorum’s quote isn’t the general worldview behind it — we’ve lived around that for a long, long time in the United States, but rather that he is able to move from “brutal rape” to “gift from the Lord!” in a whiplash-inducing two minutes.
Amanda Marcotte suggests in a piece yesterday that modern fundamentalist Christians [whether Catholic or Evangelical -- they've really blurred together over the past few years over common hatred of others] don’t really believe in Jesus anymore, but rather in Sperm Magic. If the term doesn’t make sense to you now, it will in a minute. In writing about the anniversary of Roe v. Wade and where the pro-choice movement stands today [on shaky ground], she discusses the larger worldview of the cultural fight that is often reduced to being simply about abortion, using this image of the Duggars as a springboard:
Amanda:
…[I]t’s important to realize that this battle is not and has never been just about abortion. It’s about women’s rights and women’s roles, and whether we should be full citizens or be managed and controlled by fathers, husbands, ministers, etc.
[...]
In a single image, we get what anti-choicers believe men have lost, and what they believe stripping reproductive rights will return to them: Woman as pet dog.
We don’t even get the dignity that cats get, in their worldview. No wonder they don’t care if Gingrich told his second wife she should just put up with the third one. Your dog doesn’t get a vote when you get a new dog.
[...]
What Oppenheimer [the writer of the piece Amanda was criticizing] doesn’t talk about. but that picture illustrates so well, is what anti-feminists really feel is lost with what they call “contraceptive culture”: men’s god-given right to have a woman—perhaps several (though in a row, mostly)—who follow them around, worshipping their every move, submitting completely and joyfully. I suspect this fantasy never was a reality, but I suspect a lot of Christian fundamentalists have convinced themselves that giving women the power to say “no” to men is what made us so maddeningly unwilling to play the supplicant. No to sexual overtures, no to marriage, no to demands that we wait on you, and most importantly, no to letting your magical seed plant itself in our bodies whenever it wants. That’s why I believe that modern conservative Christians don’t worship Jesus so much as Sperm Magic.
So taking this belief — that women are, as Tbogg said above, little more than Pez dispensers for the products of what Amanda calls Sperm Magic — to its conclusion, it’s not at all surprising that Rick Santorum is more concerned that “God’s will” be done by forcing a woman who has been raped to carry that rapist’s child to term. Though he knows he has to appeal to at least a few female voters and remembers to say rape is bad, it’s obvious that once the idea of conception is on the table, Santorum is no longer thinking about a brutal crime, but about the great will of God to keep women in their place by relegating them to the status of babymakers and nothing more.
Indeed, they believe that this is the natural “gift” of women, that a woman’s highest calling is to churn out babies for God’s little army. Have you heard of the Quiverfull movement, of which the Duggars are members? The Santorums may be involved in creepy Catholic versions of these fundamentalist Christian movements [Opus Dei comes to mind], but it’s the same general idea. Women are the property of men, women are worth less than men, and if The Supreme God of All That Is deigns to use a man’s Sperm Magic to multiply the human race, then that harlot had better comply, regardless of how God decided to deliver that sperm magic, even if it was through violent rape or incest.
When you believe women are inferior, it’s not a big leap to punishing women for being raped. Look at much of the Islamic world, and continue to tell me how different their fundamentalists are from our fundamentalists. Sure, stoning women for being raped wouldn’t fly in the Western world, but I highly doubt it’s because our Fundamentalists wouldn’t find their way there if they didn’t have several centuries of the Enlightenment and the United States Constitution holding them back from exercising their true beliefs.
Wayne posted below on how much Rick Santorum, AKA Ol’ Frothy Mix, loves earmarks. Also, the following things happened today involving the world’s most pathetic presidential candidate:
1. Maybe the reason Rick Santorum wants so badly to ban contraception and abortion and women being able to breathe without first asking permission has less to do with his morals and more to do with the fact that his wife’s super-sexy ex-boyfriend is an abortion provider. HUH. I don’t know, but it’s interesting news nonetheless.
2. Speaking of Mrs. Santorum, she would like all of you gays to please be nicer to her husband. You see, the fact that he doesn’t believe in your fundamental dignity as human beings enough to set aside his moral bigotry in order to support your equal rights — no, no, that would be too American of him — doesn’t mean he hates you. He just thinks you’re lesser than he is. That’s all. Here’s Karen Santorum, replying to the mother of a gay son:
“I think it’s very sad what the gay activists have done out there. They’ve vilified him and it’s so wrong. Rick does not hate anyone. He loves them. What he has simply said is marriage shouldn’t happen. But as far as hating, it’s very unfortunate that that has happened. And a lot of it is backyard bullying.”
Said Rick: “This is a public policy difference. And the problem is that some see that as a personal assault.”
He went on to reply that children deserve a mother and father and unless that is promoted there will be less of it,” adding: .. There’s all sorts of other relationships that people have, and they are valuable relationships — whether they are amorous relationships or friendship relationships or familial relationships — they’re all important, they all have value they all should be affirmed. But that does not mean that we should change the laws to order — to create an atmosphere where children and families are not being promoted.”
Of course, studies show that Rick Santorum, and his wife, are simply spouting off make-believe crap when they assert that children do best with tradishnully married couples. Indeed, some studies show the kids of gay and lesbian parents doing better than the kids of straight people, simply because our kids are much more likely to be planned.
“Please, come join us,” insisted an attractive college student flashing her bright Aquafresh smile.
Before I was able to decline her friendly invitation I was gently pulled into a large prayer circle of thirty or so Charismatic Christians. “I’m sorry my hand is sweaty,” the girl said with a sheepish grin.
Those were the last words she spoke that I understood. We quickly surrounded a handful of young preachers who whooped and hollered before surrendering English for the unintelligible language of tongues. The manic participants sounded like a cross between a prayer service and a Native American tribe preparing for battle.
Eventually, they raised their hands toward the sky pointing to God, which allowed me to escape and enter the seating area at Ford Field, where Lou Engle, founder of The Call, had gathered 27,000 fundamentalist Christians from across the nation on 11.11.11, a date that came to him in what he believes to be a divinely inspired vision. The majority of the crowd was Caucasian, however a significant number were African American. There was a large youth component, but the age of participants reached across the spectrum.
While I can’t speak for the entire conference, which was a 24-hour call to fast and prayer, I did spend 14 hours at Ford Field watching sermons, surveying sideshows, videotaping the gathering, and interacting with the hyped-up crowd. So, my observations, while not complete, do offer a significant snapshot of the 11.11.11 Detroit rally.
In a press release prior to the event I wrote that I expected 11.11.11 Detroit to be a “gay bashing” and “Muslim trashing” extravaganza.After all, The Call had chosen Detroit as its rally site in an effort to convert the region’s estimated 150,000 to 200,000 Muslims.
The Associated Press reported that Apostle Ellis Smith, Engle’s local “point person” for The Call, referred to Islam in a sermon leading up to the revival as a “false,” “lame” and “perverse” religion.
Engle had previously held an infamous event in Uganda that whipped up anti-gay hysteria. In 2008, the electrifying preacher organized a rally at San Diego’s Qualcomm Stadium in support of Proposition 8, a successful measure to prohibit marriage equality in California.
To my surprise, the festivities, which were aired on God TV, were appreciably toned down. Sure, there was red meat on the menu, but it was not the all-you-can-eat buffet that I had come to expect from Engle and other leaders of the 7 Mountains Movement (aka The New Apostolic Reformation) that he is a key part of.
Indeed, most of the aspersions on Friday evening and Saturday were deliberately cast though euphemism. Homosexuality was never explicitly mentioned, but was instead lumped together with other “sins” under the umbrella of “sexual immorality.” Other times, speakers camouflaged their anti-gay agenda by simply saying they supported “traditional marriage.” During the entire time I observed the event there was not one reference to healing homosexuality and no “ex-gays” were trotted up on the stage to tell tales of how they “prayed away the gay.”
However, the Detroit Free Press reported that Apostle Smith claimed that at the event, “a lesbian came from the homosexual community and said she has never experienced such love. And she is now working to change her lifestyle.”
(I’m sure this alleged lesbian was very stable and well adjusted because it is common for healthy and secure LGBT people to spend weekends attending revivals that consider them demonic.)
The conversion of Muslims was also downplayed and “Dearborn,” referring to the Detroit suburb with perhaps the nation’s largest Muslim population, euphemistically replaced the word “Islam.”
It took several hours to figure out what was really going on – but I gasped when the disturbing pattern finally revealed itself. This elaborate show had all the trappings of a modern religious revival – from the thumping music to the two gargantuan video screens suspended above the enraptured audience. But this ostensibly religious event was little more than a political front.
Its real aim was to peel African American support away from the Democratic Party in a swing state during a critical election year. Not only is President Barack Obama’s reelection at stake, Democratic Sen. Debbie Stabenow is locked in a tight race that includes social conservative and former GOP Rep. Peter Hoekstra. This cynical revival was not about “values” — it was about votes. It was not about worship, but winning office for Republicans by promoting what writer Ed Kilgore called in The New Republic, a “big-God, small-government creed.”
The amazing part was that the audience seemed totally unaware of the underlying motives and machinations. After all, the words “Democrat” and “Republican” were never spoken and there was only one local politician identified on-stage. It seemed that even some of the minor speakers might not have been privy to the overarching strategy. Nonetheless, a brilliant display of political subterfuge was unfolding as the oblivious crowd bopped to Christian rock with their hands swaying above their heads.
This is not the first attempt of white fundamentalists to lure black voters away from the Democratic Party. Immediately following the 2004 presidential election, social conservatives made a strong push to lure African-Americans. Rev. Lou Sheldon, founder of the Southern Poverty Law Center hate group, The Traditional Values Coalition, hosted a right wing meeting of 70 black religious leaders in Los Angeles.
“In 2004, the religious right was concerned about re-electing George W. Bush,” said Al Sharpton at First Iconium Baptist Church. “They couldn’t come to black churches to talk about the war, about health care, about poverty. So they did what they always do and reached for the bigotry against gay and lesbian people.”
Unbelievably, at the Los Angeles meeting Sheldon played an anti-gay video featuring disgraced Sen. Trent Lott, R-Miss. Remember, Lott had to step down as Senate Majority Leader after he publicly pined over Strom Thurmond not winning the presidency as a Dixiecrat. African-American columnist Leonard Pitts put Sheldon’s power grab in perspective:
“Whether the issue was slavery, segregation, lynching, voting rights or housing discrimination, social conservatives have always taken a position that history later judged to be ignorant and flat-out wrong….which leaves me at a loss to understand why any African American possessed of a functioning brain would give this atavistic bunch the time of day.”
Still, the attempt was gaining some momentum until Hurricane Katrina ravaged New Orleans, which badly frayed the burgeoning unholy alliance. The effort was further hampered by the emergence of Barack Obama as the Democratic standard bearer.
In this renewed effort in Detroit, Lou Engle and his minions were smart. They wisely figured out that direct attacks on the Democratic Party would not fly, nor would all-out verbal barrages against President Barack Obama, who still has strong African American support. They also understood that the baggage surrounding white Evangelical racism would have to be addressed and surmounted before real progress was made.
To overcome these obstacles and recruit African Americans to vote for the GOP they devised what seems like a five-part strategy.
1) Pick a key swing state with a beleaguered city that had an economically disadvantaged African American population
2) Create an emotional spectacle where tearful white people pleaded for forgiveness and repented onstage for past racism
3) Sharply define new wedge issue(s) and create a racially-based conspiracy theory that could ultimately be used against the Democratic Party
4) Exploit these emerging wedge issue(s) to the point they become more important than fixing the economy
5) Redefine voting criteria so candidates are primarily judged by where they stand on these wedge issue(s) – with the ultimate goal of leading many African Americans to conclude that they are best represented by the conservative GOP.
Lou Engle understands that much of Michigan is conservative. If he were able to peel off fifteen or twenty percent of Detroit’s black Democratic vote, he might be able to turn the state solidly red. The main wedge issue he selected to accomplish his plan is abortion. For good measure, he helped weave a conspiracy theory: Sinister white bigots who run programs like Planned Parenthood were using abortion to reduce African American birthrates.
“What Birmingham is to the civil rights movement, Detroit is to abortion,” bellowed Engle at the event. “Detroit has a calling…blacks and Latinos could lead the parade of history.”
Engle’s message was aided by a parade of socially conservative African American ministers. One preached that black people must choose “BC (Biblical Correctness) over PC (Political Correctness).” The subtext was that the pro-life GOP is on the side of the Bible and thus should be the party of African Americans. Another pastor was even more explicit when he declared that African Americans had a choice: “God’s way or a political party’s way.” (Read More)
Wayne wrote this morning about last night’s victories for openly gay candidates around the country, which is fantastic. It was even more than that, though. Last night there were several crucial victories, messages sent to the whackjobs who have taken over the Republican party that “we are sorry, but the American people aren’t like you and won’t let you ruin our country.” Mississippi voted its infamous “personhood amendment” down, and in Ohio, voters told Republican governor John Kasich exactly where he could put his union-busting SB5 law. In this clip, Lawrence O’Donnell and Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz [D-FL] discuss the results.
In the clip, O’Donnell mentions that Ohio voters also rejected the individual mandate in the healthcare law passed under this administration, but Schultz also points out that a very conservative Republican judge upheld the HCR law as constitutional yesterday, which is another smackdown to extremists.
The vote is today. If you haven’t been following the progress of Mississippi’s proposed personhood amendment, which would grant fertilized eggs as well as embryos and fetuses the legal status of human beings, you should brush up. Though a similar measure has already failed at the polls twice in Colorado, this one has been heavily pushed by religious groups, and it’s expected to pass. If it does, said the New York Times, all forms of abortion and some forms of birth control would effectively become murder in the state. Yes, that includes abortion for rape. Some people worry that women who experience miscarriages could be subject to criminal investigation under this law; it will also make in vitro fertilization a very different process if doctors are prohibited from discarding some of the embryos, as is usual now. There are a host of other possible implications, too, as Slate’s David Plotz waggishly wrote:
* Tax deductions for dependent embryos
* “Anchor babies” whose parents had sex in Mississippi, conceived, then went back to their own countries to deliver
* The products of fatal ectopic pregnancies being prosecuted for murder-suicide
According to the Times, even anti-abortion legal experts believe this amendment is a bad move. It will probably be declared unconstitutional, and in the process, they fear, laws allowing abortion may be strengthened. Others, though, hope that the Supreme Court will not only uphold it but overturn Roe v. Wade while they’re at it. On the other hand, opponents fear it will seriously hamper medical care and contraceptive efforts in Mississippi while it grinds through the courts.
Incidentally, Mother Nature regularly wages a holocaust against fertilized human eggs. A huge proportion–something like 50%–either never implant or spontaneously abort.
Here’s what arose during our dinner conversation on this topic: If the Founding Fathers knew of the existence of abortion, which as educated men they surely did, then why did they (a) decline to outlaw it in the Constitution and (b) declare that those eligible for the presidency had to be born in the United States, rather than merely conceived there? Might one not conclude from (b) that they viewed birth as the beginning of legal rights? Just sayin’.
Occasionally it’s good to check in and see what our favorite anti-gay hate groups are up to when they’re not hating gay people. Lest we fail to understand that the fights for LGBT equality and reproductive rights are inextricably linked — they are both about the ability of fundamentalist Christian men to control the bodies and sex lives and autonomy of anyone who doesn’t look like them — let’s take a look at the “personhood amendment” being debated in Mississippi right now.
If you’re not familiar with a “personhood amendment,” it goes like this:
Garden variety “pro-life” people tend to be concerned with stopping abortion, and favor using the law to enforce that, rather than actually fighting for things like economic freedom for poor women and sex education, things which have been proven to reduce the need for abortion. [Those are the things the pro-choice movement works toward.] However, there is a subset within the activist anti-choice movement which seeks dominion over all female bodies, and will go to any length to achieve it. A “personhood amendment” would codify in a state’s Constitution that human life begins at the point of fertilization and grant that embryo all the rights of an actual human being. This is patently insane to anyone with a rudimentary understanding of the human reproductive process. By this definition of “personhood,” millions of people “die” every day when embryos which haven’t yet implanted simply don’t turn into actual pregnancies. They aren’t even miscarriages.
The result of such an amendment would, of course, go around Roe v. Wade and ban all abortion in a state, but it would also put in danger lots of other things 99% of women take for granted in the United States. Irin Carmon has a great piece in Salon today which exposes what Mississippi is trying to do right now:
[T]he Personhood movement hopes to do nothing less than reclassify everyday, routine birth control as abortion. The medical definition of pregnancy is when a fertilized egg successfully implants in the uterine wall. If this initiative passes, and fertilized eggs on their own have full legal rights, anything that could potentially block that implantation – something a woman’s body does naturally all the time – could be considered murder. Scientists say hormonal birth-control pills and the morning-after pill work primarily by preventing fertilization in the first place, but the outside possibility, never documented, that an egg could be fertilized anyway and blocked is enough for some pro-lifers.
On the chopping block: the morning-after pill, IUD’s, most forms of in vitro fertilization and, according to some, the regular old birth control pill. Moreover, the door would be open to investigating women who have recently miscarried. It happens in lots of countries.
You may be reading this and thinking, “that is insane. Nobody is that insane.” Have you met Fundamentalist Christian men before?
But a Colorado-based Personhood activist, Ed Hanks, is more than willing to publicly take things to their logical conclusion. He wrote on the Personhood Mississippi Facebook page that after abortion is banned, “the penalties have to be the same [for a women as well as doctors], as they would have to intentionally commit a known felony in order to kill their child. Society isn’t comfortable with this yet because abortion has been ‘normalized’ — as the Personhood message penetrates, then society will understand why women need to be punished just as surely as they understand why there can be no exceptions for rape/incest.”
[...]
At several public forums organized by the secretary of state to discuss ballot initiatives, resident Scott Murray’s statement was typical: “I know there is an issue with pregnancies, unmarried pregnancies, but I tell you the greatest prevention is God, and we’ve got to return to God.” So was Stephen Hannabass’ assertion that “we’ve got to repent. We’ve got to come before God and beg for mercy for our state and for our country.”
You see, if Mississippi just “repents” and “turns back to God,” there won’t be any problems anymore! Left unmentioned by these men, of course, is the fact that Mississippi has one of the worst infant morality rates in the nation, as well as one of the worst rates of child poverty. For these people, life truly begins at conception and concern for it ends at birth, especially if you happen to be a woman.
Irin explains that this measure [which was once supported by most Mississippians, until they actually heard the details of it] didn’t really have legs until one of our favorite hate groups got involved. Yes, the American Family Association is an anti-gay hate group, but it’s also an anti-woman and anti-family hate group:
It was the American Family Association endorsement that put media muscle behind the movement in Mississippi, with email blasts, radio PSAs and interviews, promotions on its own website, and combined with the grass-roots energy, the state’s anti-choice groups took notice. Suddenly, people who had previously focused on incremental change – parental consent laws, waiting periods, ultrasound laws – were ecstatically heralding an end of the “murders.” Mike Huckabee keynoted a fundraiser and even presumed GOP front-runner Mitt Romney to endorse the concept on his show.
Ta-da! When they’re not letting Bryan Fischer lie shamelessly about gay people and screaming and crying about hardware stores being mean to them, the AFA is quietly working to take away most of women’s fundamental rights over what they can and cannot do with their bodies. I cannot imagine what the next step would be, should something like this ever pass. Once they have women’s reproductive systems firmly in their hands, will they move on to controlling what they eat or when they speak? I wouldn’t be surprised.
Please, do yourself a favor and read Irin’s whole piece. The part about how this could affect the treatment of ectopic pregnancies will make you sick. There is a good chance that, as the details of the Personhood Movement, and their true goals, come to light, that this will go down in history as one of the patriarchy’s grand overreaches. I hope so. Again, 99% of women think birth control is just great.
And remember — groups like the American Family Association don’t just hate you as an LGBT person. They hate you in any way you might be different from their poorly conceived, bastardized fundamentalist “Christian” view of how people should live.
UPDATE: Two more things. First, here is the video from Freda Bush, a proponent of the amendment, who is also an OB-GYN. Watch as she lies through her teeth about what this bill is about.
Her lies are solidly refuted in Irin Carmon’s piece.
John wrote this morning about Herman Cain’s inexplicable belief that homosexuality is a choice, something that can be washed off on a whim. Indeed, just this morning I woke up and washed the gay right outta of my hair. It was back within thirty minutes, and I’m already back to making musical theater references, but y’know.
But in the same Piers Morgan interview John referenced, Herman Cain revealed that his attitudes toward choice go a bit further than that:
No, it comes down to is, it’s not the government’s role — or anybody else’s role — to make that decision. Secondly, if you look at the statistical incidents, you’re not talking about that big a number (abortion because of rape – LHW). So what I’m saying is, it ultimately gets down to a choice that that family or that mother has to make. Not me as president. Not some politician. Not a bureaucrat. It gets down to that family. And whatever they decide, they decide. I shouldn’t try to tell them what decision to make for such a sensitive decision.
. . .
No, they don’t. I can have an opinion on an issue without it being a directive on the nation. The government shouldn’t be trying to tell people everything to do, especially when it comes to a social decision that they need to make.
Uh oh. The new frontrunner for the GOP nomination is, um, ahem!, pro-choice. As in, about abortion.
Well, that was a nice run for Herman. Back to the old pizza stone…
It’s been 38 years since Roe v. Wade, and the fundamentalists resent every minute. Just watch Jesus Camp. They’re teaching the date to their children and praying that pro-life judges will be “elevated.” If they get their way, abortion will soon be made illegal or impossible in the US.
They’re making progress, doing what the right does so well: nibbling away at the issue at the grass roots, state by state. The Nationdetails the legal strategies involved, and The New York Timesreports the right’s stealthy success in passing a flurry of recent laws so restrictive that in some areas abortion might as well be “a right on paper only”:
[The map shows states that] have enacted five of the most harmful restrictions: mandatory waiting periods; demeaning “counseling” sessions lacking a real medical justification; parental consent or notification laws that pose a particular hardship for teenagers from troubled homes, including incest victims; needlessly onerous clinic “safety” rules governing such things as the width of hallways and the amount of storage space for janitorial supplies; and prohibitions on abortion coverage in insurance policies. States in lighter shades have fewer of these restrictions. Twenty-seven states have enacted three or more of these laws, while only 12 states, shown in white, have none….Sixty-one [major state abortion restrictions] were enacted during just the first eight months of this year — nearly triple the number in all of 2010, and more than double the previous record of 28 set in 1997. …[The graphic] fails to capture other negative developments, like the big decline in the number of abortion providers. In 1982, there were 2,908 providers nationwide. As of 2008, there were only 1,793. In 97 percent of the counties that are outside metropolitan areas there are no abortion providers at all.
Just as they wish homosexuality would just go away, the right presumably hopes abortions will end if they’re outlawed. That isn’t true, of course. Throughout history, many women who do not want to be pregnant have tried to do something about it–overdosing on chloroquine, inserting a coat hanger, or jumping from a height being just a few of the many methods of choice. (And why, moreover, is the right not crying out to reduce the natural miscarriage rate?) Just as pretending homosexuality isn’t legitimate can lead to gay youth suicide, so the lack of access to abortion services will simply lead more women to seek unsafe illegal abortions. Which, as we all know, often kills them.
To my surprise, the festivities, which were aired on God TV, were appreciably toned down. Sure, there was red meat on the menu, but it was not the all-you-can-eat buffet that I had come to expect from Engle and other leaders of the 7 Mountains Movement (aka The New Apostolic Reformation) that he is a key part of.
It took several hours to figure out what was really going on – but I gasped when the disturbing pattern finally revealed itself. This elaborate show had all the trappings of a modern religious revival – from the thumping music to the two gargantuan video screens suspended above the enraptured audience. But this ostensibly religious event was little more than a political front.
