This week in the good old USA and especially here in Colorado, the tax paying public has been treated to several examples, some good, some bad and some just plain ugly of our American justice system at work. Unfortunately, there is plenty of material to draw from on the ugly side. Let’s take a look.
The first item that crossed my path and set me on fire is Michigan’s new law which forces women who want the ability to have an abortion to pay for an additional “rape” policy or, as Jessica Valenti put it in her article, “planning for an unplanned pregnancy.” This was a measure passed by Michigan’s legislature for abortion coverage in their latest effort at banning such items in private health care plans.
As far as I understand, this law does not discriminate about the nature of the sex which caused the pregnancy even though I believe it discriminates against women. The sex can be forced or consensual, casual or otherwise, but no matter the cause, if a woman for any reason, want’s to have an abortion procedure, she has to purchase additional insurance in addition to her regular health care plan in order to have the procedure done. The reason I’m bringing this up is because more and more states are attempting this type of thing and one day, it might be a reality here in Colorado as well.
When I was a kid growing up on the farm, there were bulls and cows, boars and sows and one of the things you learned at a very early age (and evidently something the Michigan legislature hasn’t been privy to yet) is that it usually takes two (normally) to tango. Right? Under this law, I see nothing being said about the responsibilities belonging to the male donator of the sperm that created this little being in the first place! Therefore, please allow me to offer a suggestion or two.
The way I see it, the additional insurance policy a woman is going to have to carry to cover herself in such an event is punitive as well as discriminatory. It’s a financial penalty and it’s a moral penalty. Financial because no matter what the personal finances of the lady in question might be, she’s paying out of her pocket for something a man doesn’t have to. Moral because she carries an insurance policy which allows the rest of the world to look at her as some kind of an ogre because she is, after all, attempting to have a procedure to terminate a pregnancy! Do the scales of justice seem a little bit out of balance here?
Not trying to appear too Solomonesque, but there is another party in this picture who is not being mentioned in any of this and that would be the lady’s partner. Since it usually takes two to have sex or for a rape to occur, then why shouldn’t it take two to be responsible for the result of that sex rather than just assigning responsibility to the lady and forget everything else? With all the ways we have of making positive identifications these days, I will guarantee that if the lady herself can’t identify little junior’s daddy, then we have plenty of scientific ways to get the job done! Then, I believe it is the duty of the state to inform the man responsible of his options. First, if the baby is to be carried to term, would be to man up and fully accept financial responsibility of the raising of this child until college graduation. Second, if the pregnancy is aborted, then he must accept sterilization by the state in order to guarantee that he will never burden anyone with anything like this again!
Cruel? Maybe. Barbaric? Maybe, but it’s no more cruel that making a lady carry this entire burden for something as draconian as this rape law all by herself. Besides, I would be willing to make a small wager that since many state governors and legislators are men (or boys) and boys will be boys, that it would only be a short time before women’s healthcare and family planning laws would be restored to their former status! Wha’dya think?
As usual, send me your critiques and comments. I’ll be sure to read them all and use them if I can. Happy Holidays Everybody!
Posted by All Around Seniors at 12/18/2013 5:55 AM