I always know when women are singled out in the legislative process that the debate will be:
1] Divisive and derogatory.
2] We will be singled out as a single issue that can be discarded for the 'better' good.
3] Being [women] immoral some form of higher patriarchal morality will be used against us.
4] Being poor, poor you.
In this respect yesterdays despicable show in the House did not dissapoint.
Its nothing new take the Abrahamic religions for example
Genesis Chapter 2
And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.
Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
from another ancient legend
One story is that God created Adam and Lilith as twins joined together at the back. She demanded equality with Adam, failing to achieve it, she left him in anger. This is sometimes accompanied by a Muslim legend that after leaving Adam Lilith slept with Satan, thus creating the demonic Djinn.
Merely demanding equality was enough to condemn since subservience was the 'divine' intent.
It is often a struggle against our Judaic-Christian heritage and its inherent sexism that is the hardest.
Why bring up religion?
Poverty and pregnancy
The rate of unintended pregnancy in 2001 was substantially above average among women aged 18-24, unmarried (particularly cohabiting) women, low-income women, women who had not completed high school and minority women. Between 1994 and 2001, the rate of unintended pregnancy declined among adolescents,
Women in America are more likely to be poor than men. Over half of the 37 million Americans living in poverty today are women. And women in America are further behind than women in other countries—the gap in poverty rates between men and women is wider in America than anywhere else in the Western world. Consider the following facts:
There is no point in inviting single payer proponents to the table, their point of view has no bearing on the debate.
A watered down version of the public option with probable opt out clauses, still its better than nothing.
There better not be a fourth slap is all I can say:
You always know when an amendment is really bad, the Republicans block vote in favour of it:
Have a fine Sunday
[As some Kossacks are well aware I am not a good writer and when angry I tend to use images to make a point. I am happier with chemical formula and mathematics which I use to create images in CFD for my business so please be patient]
PS there is and interesting table in today's
Well worth a look and it explains a lot about the deabate