Tags
birth control, current-events, health, medicine, mindless drones, politics, Rush Limbaugh, supreme court case
For the last few weeks, the media has focused on the debate over contraception, healthcare, women’s rights and Rush Limbaugh. All these issues, with the exception of Rush Limbaugh, are very important and deserve to be front and center in the political debates leading up to the general election in November. Yet, not surprisingly, the media have missed the MAJOR points in all these stories.
Rush Limbaugh’s comments about Georgetown Law Student Sandra Fluke were repugnant, plain and simple, there is no other description for what he said. But what blows my mind is the fact that he broke the law by saying those awful things, and no one has found it necessary to point this out. Yes, I am aware of the First Amendment and the freedom of speech; but I am also aware that liable is the one exception to that right, and Rush committed this crime. Ms. Fluke is a private citizen. She is not a public figure; she is not running for office, she was not known to the public sphere before this whole controversy began. Rush has a large number of mindless followers; sheep that believe every ignorant and uneducated word he spews, allowing these mindless drones to honestly believe that Ms. Fluke is a “slut” or “prostitute.” So by uttering these tarnishing words about Ms. Fluke, Rush caused damage to her personal reputation, thus, he committed liable. All of this is historical fact as a result of the 1963 U.S. Supreme Court Case of New York Times Co. v. Sullivan.
This groundbreaking case set the rules for what can and cannot be said, in a public forum, about public and private figures. The main difference is a public figure has to prove the intent of malice, while a private citizen does not.
Why is this distinction important in this debate? Many correspondents and pundits have used the examples of David Letterman and Bill Maher using offensive language towards Sarah Palin and Bristol Palin, as an example of “the other side” doing the same thing as Rush. The big difference is both Sarah and Bristol have made themselves public figures by running for elected office and becoming a teen pregnancy advocate respectively. So to compare the two is comparing apples and oranges. Ms. Fluke testified before a Congressional committee, which many private citizens do each year, and the public is none-the-wiser to their identity or their private lives. By thrusting themselves into the public sphere, the Palin’s made themselves public figures.
So for the many advertisers who have pulled their ads from Limbaugh’s program is a smart decision. By distancing themselves from the illegal actions of Rush, they are protecting their brand and effectively saying they will not tolerate the degradation of a private citizen.
Another part of this debate issue that isn’t getting enough attention is the medicinal properties of contraception for women. Birth control pills are not simply used for preventing pregnancy. They are also used to control many conditions women suffer from that are debilitating and prevent them from living a normal life.
Ovarian cysts are extremely painful and can cause incapacitating pain when they rupture. Birth control pills are prescribed to prevent ovulation, which helps to prevent the development of ovarian cysts. It is a lot less expensive that surgery for insurance companies and better for productivity than missing work days due to the inability to stand-up straight and suffering excruciating pain.
Another medical condition that birth control pills help alleviate is PMDD, or Premenstrual Dysphoric Disorder. According to the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Approximately 3% to 5% of women suffer from PMDD, the most severe form of premenstrual syndrome, which is similar to major depression. By controlling the hormonal fluctuations, these pills help reduce the severity of the symptoms.
Another issue that isn’t getting a lot of questions thrown at it is the increase of state legislatures passing bills making it harder for women to obtain abortions. Again, I don’t want to start a debate of pro-life v. pro-choice, I respect both rational sides of the argument. However, to force a woman to undergo a trans-vaginal ultrasound before an abortion is just a violation of her rights to her own body. This is ever more true in the cases of rape victims seeking to terminate a pregnancy resulting from this violent crime.
I have said it before; a woman’s body is the only thing she has 100% ownership of in her life. No one can touch a woman without her permission, or it is assault. No one can profit off a woman’s body without her knowledge or consent, or it is a violation of her right to privacy. So how does legislation allowing someone else to make decisions about what happens with a woman’s uterus not a violation? What a woman does with her body is her personal business. You don’t have to like it, but you have to respect her decisions. If a woman wants to tattoo her body, that is her right. She can pierce, cut, mark her body, she can deprive her body of food, she can clothe herself with as much or as little clothing as she wants; it is her decision. You have no right to legislate my body.
If we continue to allow misogynist governments to legislate our reproductive rights, we start down a slippery slope of losing our identity as individuals. Funny how these uber-conservative members of government are the ones who hate Muslims and their oppressive society, yet they want to mandate how women use their “lady parts.”
For years, women have been asleep behind the wheel of political involvement and activism for women’s rights. As a result these misogynistic, right wing, neo-conservative white men have hijacked our government and are using it to force women into submission. We have to fight back. We have to reclaim our voice as members of our own society. Women make up over 51% of the voting public. We need to come together and use our collective voices to let our government know we will not go backwards.