For years now I've totally and completely misunderstood the Republican call for smaller government. Silly me, I thought they were talking about individual liberties and responsibilities and the fact that Democrats wanted a big cumbersome government that would intrude into all corners of our lives.
As it turns out, they meant "small enough to fit up a woman's vaginal canal.
Really?
Republican governors, senators legislators, congresspeople railed against HPV vaccinations that prevent cancer because it represented big, bad government intruding on parental choice. More than a couple of Republicans have complianed bitterly and publicly about TSA screenings at airports.
And yet.
They think women need more - and more intrusive - tests before undergoing a legal abortion. Well, heck, she already agreed to be penetrated when she got pregnant. Does that really fucking mean what it implies? Because a woman has had sex once (or twice or 100 times) it can now be concluded that she's agreed to have sex anytime anywhere by anyone? Including the government?
Smaller government ought not mean government that intrudes into my private life. When smaller government means less regulation on business, fewer protections for the working poor, a smaller safety net (hey! it should be harder to get food stamps!) there's no way it should mean making a woman spread her legs for the government.
No comments:
Post a Comment