Let’s Ignore the Facts…

Let’s ignore the fact that the surest route to limiting abortions is having affordable and easy access to birth control (http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1400506?query=featured_home&).

Let’s ignore the fact that ‘abortion’ isn’t typically just the “Oops! We forgot the condoms and don’t need the complications of a kid right now.”

…sometimes it is a medical procedure required to save the life of the mother.

…sometimes it is a medical procedure done because the mother is a child.

…sometimes the mother was forced into intercourse.

And, really, let’s ignore the fact that, even if it was the “Oops!” moment, women have the right to make medical choices which effect their bodies. The person one should consult about medical procedures should be their doctor, not their congressman.

Let’s ignore the fact that the countries with the least hinderances to abortion have some of the lowest abortion rates because education, birth control, and planned pregnancies make abortions unnecessary. (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7971545)

Let’s ignore all this and talk about H.R. 586 — Sanctity of Human Life Act, the bill sitting in our House of Representatives right now. (https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/586)

H.R. 586 is basic. It defines life as beginning with fertilization and affirms that each State can protect life in their jurisdictions as they see fit.

Cool, cool.

Wait. What does that mean?

If you are a woman, that means that you can be tried for murder if you have an abortion.

Or if you use the morning after pill.

Or if you’re on birth control. That cute little family of two you decided you can afford, well, you had better only have sex twice. After that, you’re risking an awful lot.

If you’re a physician, you can be tried for for murder even if you’re upholding your oath and working in the best interest of your patient.

It means, if you fall down the stairs while pregnant and miscarry, you can be charged with manslaughter or reckless endangerment. Really, let’s consider any miscarriage criminal endangerment because you should probably be settled into bedrest for the duration of that pregnancy, amiright?

It means that if you are infertile and are considering IVF, you’d best be ready to have 15 kids because those zygotes are now people under the law.

Now some might say this is speculative but, since Texas doesn’t ever wait for something to become ‘constitutionally acceptable’ before they stick their spurs into it, they can paint you a beautiful example of just how this plays out in the world at large.

Texas currently has a bill that’s largely assuming that H.R. 586 will get the greenlight: House Bill 948. It criminalizes abortion ruling that any and all deaths beyond fertilization should be dealt according to the current law.

And why? Well, Representative Tinderholt, author of the aforementioned bill, would super appreciate if women would just take responsibility for their sexual actions. (https://www.texasobserver.org/new-bill-aims-make-abortion-felony-texas/) You know, because women are the only party involved in these circumstances.

Since we started out this run by ignoring all the sane responses to these bills, there really is only one solution left to us.

Equality under the law has yet to be thrown out with the trash so if these personhood rules become the law of the land, some representatives need to damn well amend their bills to make equal accountability the law of the land too.

If you put the woman away for murder, the man needs to be charged as an accomplice.

If you can’t bring yourself to put some poor, unassuming man away as an accomplice to murder then he really needs to go to jail for child endangerment. After all, he didn’t have the personal responsibility of choosing his partner better.

And, boy howdy, child endangerment is a real threat! There might need to be a registry for individuals who have been convicted of this! — Like a sexual predator registry. He should go on it for life; he should have to report his lack of personal responsibility when he’s looking for a job. (I mean, she’s going to have to write that felony on employment applications). He probably shouldn’t own property near a school and I don’t believe I’d feel safe if his face didn’t get posted on those ‘warning’ walls in the Post Office or Library. You know, so others can have better luck when they’re considering their sexual partners.

If you’re going to legislate women’s bodies, make sure those men don’t get left behind.

Or, maybe, you could be sane about the laws you propurt for our nation and let women work out their healthcare concerns with their doctors?