In the midst of a Seattle P-I article about trying to convince more young women to vote comes this little tidbit of information:
This week, Cavendish said, the falling piece of sky was Bush’s reappointment of “Hagar the Horrible” — W. David Hagar — to the influential Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory Committee of the FDA.
…there were the 25,000 pro-choice activists who pleaded with Bush not to make this move. Hagar, Time magazine reports, refuses to prescribe contraceptives to unmarried women. And in his book, “Stress and the Woman’s Body,” (co-written with his wife, Linda) he recommends reading Scripture as treatment for premenstrual pain. More urgent to young women is the fact that Hagar used his position on the reproductive health committee to oppose the otherwise overwhelmingly approved vote to recommend over-the-counter sale of the morning-after contraceptive Plan B. The vote to approve the sale of Plan B was then overruled by the Bush administration.
<
p>Old white men using religion to dictate what young women can and can’t do with their bodies. And people say that there’s no reason to vote?
I read something earlier this week — unfortunately, I don’t remember where — that gave me pause to think. One of the tactics that the right has used to counter the “Pro-Choice” designation of abortion rights activists has been to deem themselves “Pro-Life”, implying that Pro-Choice equates to “Anti-Life” or “Pro-Death”.
Given Bush’s track record of sending more people to their executions while he was Governor of Texas, plus his railroading America into sending almost 1000 soldiers to their deaths in an unjust war, can he really campaign on a “Pro-Life” platform?
iTunes: “Hypocrisy is the Greatest Luxury” by Disposable Heroes of Hiphoprisy, The from the album Hypocrisy is the Greatest Luxury (1992, 3:47).
CJ
Brandon
Tim Who?
ندى
3 Responses
Stay in touch with the conversation, subscribe to the RSS feed for comments on this post.
We’ve called them “Anti-Choice” for years: perhaps we should push that idea a little harder.
Reading Scripture for pain relief? WTF?
While I heavily disagree with Hagar’s policies (and everything Bush has ever done), I have problems with both sides of this issue. A friend of mine was complaining about the use of the term Pro-Life, and I said that the use of the term Pro-Choice irritated me. Whatever my beliefs regarding abortion may be has little to no bearing on whether I support Life or Choice in general. Just my 2 cents.
I’m a little curious as to what about “pro-choice” irritates you. To me, it makes sense (not necessarily personally for or against abortion, but for allowing someone the ability to choose what they want to do for themselves). The “pro-life” label annoys me, simply because of the implication that the other side is “anti-life” or “pro-death”. “Pro-choice” gives the implication that the other side is “anti-choice”, though…which is exactly the situation, as by attempting to outlaw abortion, they remove the ability for someone to make the choice for themselves.