Warning: Today, as always, Magick Sandwich may be offensive to some readers...but not for the usual reasons.
In a back room deal brokered to get the votes necessary to pass the House health care bill, one amendment was allowed an up-or-down vote on the floor. The Stupak Amendment passed Saturday night with a vote of 240 to 193.
The amendment stipulates that private insurers who participate in the new exchange created by the health care bill will be banned from covering abortion -- a legal medical procedure -- as a part of women's reproductive health care. (Insurers may pay for termination in cases of rape and incest. The amendment's supporters are comfortable with that particular judgment call.)
I was informed of this vote by Credo Action. Twenty so-called pro-choice Democrats voted yes on this amendment. I signed a petition to "send a coat hanger" to those Democrats. Over 78,000 others have done the same so far. I was uncomfortable with its harsh symbolism. But in a time when people invent death panels and call the president a Nazi, perhaps brutal tactics are necessary.
I understand that this is a difficult issue. I also believe that Credo, Alternet and other progressive sites are getting it wrong. It's true that tens of millions of women will be affected by this back-door effort to take away their rights.
But I've seen no mention of its effect on the untold millions of people who love and support these women. The burden is not confined to whether or not one can find the money to have the procedure after making an incredibly difficult decision. The institutionally-sanctioned shame of this puts even more pressure on women and families that are struggling and unprepared financially or emotionally to raise a child. Grandparents become parents again. Children are raised in squalor.
It's hard to put this into words without sounding callous. I think it's important for everyone to understand that abortion is not an easy decision. It is not something that women use cavalierly as a form of birth control. Women are not demons who set out to murder children. Nor are the loved ones surrounding her whose lives will be irrevocably changed by her decision.
Though it's abhorrent to admit, we should not close our eyes to the reality of the life an unwanted child may face. I do not presume to know what is right in each case. I do not believe birth can be mandated when legislative care ends as soon as a child leaves the womb.
Now the Senate will vote. President Obama, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi have the power to ensure that the Stupak amendment is stripped from the bill that emerges from the Senate as well as the legislation produced by the merger of the House and Senate bills in conference committee.
I signed a petition appealing to them to defeat this amendment. This petition does not raise the specter of back alley abortions in such a stomach-turning way as the other does. If you feel strongly about this, you can sign this petition here.
I believe that the advent of grassroots movements on the internet gives us all the opportunity to be heard. It is up to us to gather information and stand up for what we believe. That's what I'm doing here in my little corner of cyberspace. I hope you understand that.
2 Comments; Click here to comment.:
I don't even want to think about the process that insurers will go through to determine "rape or incest". What about low-income bullies (or Catholics, for that matter) who refuse to use birth control for either manly or religious reasons? Or those women who are raped or molested but are too scared to fill out a police report (which is what I'm guessing insurers will require as proof).
You can bet virtually all incest cases will not make it onto a police report.
How about this: How about only women are allowed to vote on this one?
Thanks for the riling up - Grrrrrr!
@Nanny Goats: You're right. What constitutes "proof" will be the next hurdle for women if this passes. The shame of rape and incest keep so many silent. Would spousal rape count? Would a woman's demeanor or mode of dress influence the decision?
Would there have to be a conviction? A trial or any sort of inquiry could postpone matters until it's too late.
Thanks for your comment. I feel very strongly about this but I wasn't sure if I should write about it.
Post a Comment