cognitive dissonance responds to "nobody cares about your fucking uterus."

robot-heart-politics:

Anonymous asked: nobody cares about your fucking uterus. get over it. Ron Paul is not taking away anyone’s right to reproductive freedom. This country is fucked in so many ways and you can’t look past a wedge issue like this that will NEVER effect anyone directly.

I care about my uterus and the uteruses (uteri?) of others. I also care about our rights to have a family (or not) when we so choose. This country is fucked in a lot of different ways. Why add to it by making safe, legal abortion no longer safe and no longer legal?

And yes, he would take away reproductive freedom. He’s written and co-sponsored bills to do just that - from defunding Planned Parenthood, to outright banning abortion. Of course, there’s other reasons why Ron Paul is ridiculous. Here’s a laundry list, complete with links. But reproductive rights? That’s something he should be entirely familiar with, considering his job as an OB/GYN. He should be familiar with the complications that can arise when reproductive rights are denied.

And it will never affect anyone directly? How about me? I want to avoid pregnancy, and yet still enjoy sex within my heterosexual, monogamous marriage. (You know, the kind the GOP supposedly likes, and encourges.) So Catholic roulette? That method (rhythm method) has a high rate of failure when a person’s menstrual cycle can’t be tracked well.

So let’s pretend I’ve become pregnant. Oopsies! Well, there goes the likelihood of law school. But whatever, it’s not like I should be educated anyhow, right? And then, in about the fifth month of pregnancy, I begin bleeding uncontrollably. And that doctor looks at me and says, “Sorry, I’m going to let you bleed because I don’t do abortions.” Typically, he’s supposed to call someone - but that doesn’t always happen. And under President Ron Paul, the conscience clause states he doesn’t have to save my life. Because his own reasons. 

Don’t believe me? This already happened. Not to me, but to another woman who barely survived. A historical overview of abortion is here.

Your attitude of “nobody cares” leads to headlines like this:

• 13-year-old Self-Aborts Using Pencil
• Abortion Beating: Aaron Harrison Sentenced for Trying to Cause Miscarriage with Fists
• DA: Young mother botched abortion with ulcer medication
• The Back Alley Revisited: Sepsis after Attempted Self-Induced Abortion
• Self Abortion: Woman took Tylenol, Motrin
• After Fetus Is Found in Trash, a Rare Charge of Self-Abortion
• Mexican Immigrant May Face Two Years in Prison for Self-Induced Abortion Under South Carolina Law
• Trying To Make Becky Bell’s Death Count — Parents Fight Parental Consent Law

Read Mrs. Jones’ story here. Or Susannah Lattin’s story. Or look at the picture of Geraldine Santoro face-down and bloody after dying on the floor of a hotel after an illegal abortion. (Warning: The photo is graphic).

Or let’s go global. Did you know abortion is more common in countries where it is banned?

From Time magazine:

About 47,000 women died from unsafe abortions in 2008, and another 8.5 million women had serious medical complications. Almost all unsafe abortions were in developing countries, where family planning and contraceptive programs have mostly levelled off.

But who cares? They’re just women. We’re all just a bunch of whiny bitches who don’t understand the genius of Ron Paul, right? These are not wedge issues. You want to talk about personal liberty? How about liberty to choose when to raise a family? How about the rights of people to keep government out from between our legs? Come out from behind your gray box and defend your heartlessness.

In summary, fuck your “nobody cares” sentiment and fuck Ron Paul.

It’s worth noting that in 2011, states passed a record number of laws that restrict people’s ability to obtain an abortion, and a number of other bills—like HR3, which seeks to restrict people’s ability not only to obtain a safe, legal abortion, but also to receive a wide variety of health services that impact primarily those with a uterus—went before Congress. Having a pro-life president in office means that they are able to nominate Supreme Court justices who are similarly pro-life and more likely to approve legislation (state or federal) that restricts abortion rights or could even potentially overturn Roe v. Wade. Having a pro-life president in office means that if a pro-life piece of legislation that seriously hinders people’s ability to obtain an abortion passes through both the House and Senate, there will be no one there to veto that legislation and ensure our reproductive rights remain in tact.

This is not merely a wedge issue. Ron Paul’s stance on abortion could have a very real, very negative impact on the reproductive rights of millions of people, both while he’s in office and for years to come afterward if he appointed pro-life Supreme Court justices.

Beyond that, I’m completely fucking baffled by all the pro-Ron Paul arguments by his supporters that the more radical of Ron Paul’s ideas will never happen because they are too radical. If you are this convinced that Ron Paul will be so completely ineffectual in office, then why do you care whether he gets elected or not? What makes you think the things that he advocates for that you do like will happen, even though all of the things he advocates for that you don’t like won’t? This doesn’t make sense, but it’s something I’ve heard over and over and over again from people who support Ron Paul.

If you elect Ron Paul for president, that means you put all of his ideas—even the extremely radical ones, both the ones you like and the ones you are appalled by—on one of the world’s most prominent soapboxes and give them all, not just the ones you like, significant power. Not that this power is unchecked, but it’s still enough to make lasting change. And you have no way of controlling or predicting which of his radical ideas will be successful and which will not.

Banning abortion has far more popular support—and certainly more Congressional support—than legalizing marijuana. He certainly would have a much easier time successfully carrying a platform that restricts people’s ability to obtain an abortion than he would striking any serious blow to America’s military-industrial complex or to the corrupt financial sector. Maybe you don’t care about my uterus, or anyone else’s, but frankly, I’m not willing to put my reproductive rights at risk—or to support someone who has made it clear that he wants to weaken public education, public assistance, or federal support for communities and individuals in the wake of natural disaster, or to support someone who has made it clear he has no value at all for the rights of LGBT Americans, or to support someone who supports draconian border control policies—all to back some very fuzzy ideas about sticking it to Wall Street and end the war on terror. Further, Ron Paul’s strongest policy ideas right now are primarily in areas where he scares the shit out of me.

It is irresponsible and completely absurd to argue that Ron Paul will only make change in the areas where you agree with him, but will not in the areas where you have significant disagreement. That is not how reality works, and frankly, I’m sick of seeing this sort of fantasy land bullshit coming out of the mouths of people so far up Ron Paul’s ass they can’t see daylight. I tried to think of a nicer way to phrase that, but I can’t. If you honestly think Ron Paul will only succeed in the areas where you want him to, and will fail significantly in all the areas where you and he diverge, you are fucking kidding yourself.