Abortion? Not So Much
P. Schultz
March 17, 2012
Well, it is
becoming ever clearer that the current legislation that is allegedly concerned
with abortion is not. Of course, this should have been clear to anyone before
now but it seems to escape them. Nor is this surprising as often, even as a
rule, policies that are sold as being for certain purposes actually serve other
purposes. Does anyone really think that the power brokers in D.C. (a) think
Afghanistan can be democratized and (b) that they really care one way or the
other so long as Afghanistan does our bidding? If you do, I have a bridge in
Brooklyn I will sell you cheap.
The
subtext, as some like to call it, of the abortion issue is sex in general and
women’s sexuality in particular. Liberating women’s sexuality scares the crap
out of a lot of people, as Rush Limbaugh’s rants made clear. In the attached
article, the governor of Pennsylvania said in defense of a “far-reaching”
abortion law – I love the euphemism “far-reaching” – that women should just “shut
their eyes.” Now why is no one proposing legislation regulating men when they
want Viagra for “erectile dysfunction?” Well, it has something to do with the
differences between women’s sexuality and men’s sexuality, the former apparently
needing to be restrained while the latter needs to be reinforced and prolonged!
Unless of course the men in question want to have homosexual sex! Someone
should ask governor Corbett if he thinks gay men ought to be allowed to have
Viagra. Now that would be an interesting question and maybe an interesting
answer.
No comments:
Post a Comment