SalemNews.com, Salem, MA

Opinion

October 29, 2012

McFeatters: If election is about women, what are they gaining?

Hey, women! The election is suddenly about you. Sort of.

This was supposed to be the election about job creation (although we’re still waiting for specifics). But in recent days, it is about President Barack Obama losing women voters to Gov. Mitt Romney. It’s about Republican candidates for the Senate mouthing such absurdities as rape victims can’t get pregnant and pregnancies conceived through rape are intended by God and must not end in abortion. It’s about Romney refusing to disavow such politicians.

How ironic that as much of the world moves to repress women (a 15-year-old girl is shot in the head for advocating education for females), many in the United States want to take reproductive rights from women.

How ironic that those who advocate less government want government deciding that women should not have control over whether or when they bear children.

This is not about each man or woman’s personal decision to be pro-choice or pro-life. This is about politicians taking away the control women should have over their own bodies. This is about a few people (mostly men) using their personal religious beliefs to affect the futures of millions of women they’ll never even meet.

The current Congress has managed to get very little done, but Republicans have held more than one vote each week trying to curtail reproductive rights.

By the way, a lot of these control-freak politicians want to cut the budgets for government programs that help women trying to rear children on their own while increasing military spending by $2 trillion.

Romney said on the record that he would be delighted to see the end of Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion. He said he would be a pro-life president who would defund Planned Parenthood, which provides contraception and health care to millions of women. He wants to deny funding to any international organization that supports abortion in any form. He undoubtedly would nominate Supreme Court justices (three vacancies are likely in the near future) who would strike down Roe v. Wade.

Text Only | Photo Reprints
Opinion

AP Video
Two Women Narrowly Avoid Being Hit by Train In Virginia, the Rise of a New Space Coast New Sanctions on Key Sectors of Russian Economy Crayola Announces Family Attraction in Orlando US Ready to Slap New Sanctions on Russia Kerry: Not Worried About Israeli Criticism Boater Rescued From Edge of Kentucky Dam Girl Struck by Plane on Florida Beach Dies Rodents Rampant in Gardens Around Louvre House to Vote on Slimmed-down Bill for Border Looming Demand Could Undercut Flight Safety Raw: 2 Shells Hit Fuel Tank at Gaza Power Plant Raw: Massive Explosions From Airstrikes in Gaza Giant Ketchup Bottle Water Tower Up for Sale Easier Nuclear Construction Promises Fall Short Kerry: Humanitarian Cease-fire Efforts Continue Raw: Corruption Trial Begins for Former Va Gov. The Carbon Trap: US Exports Global Warming Traditional African Dishes Teach Healthy Eating
Comments Tracker
Roll Call
Helium debate
Helium