Last week, it was pointed out that in some states,  our so-called health insurance companies are allowed to consider domestic violence a pre-existing condition.  As Think Progress points out, having had a cesarian section can also be considered a pre-existing condition.  Never mind that the U.S. has a sky rocketing c-section rate and that said c-sections are often performed for reasons other than because of medical necessity, such as soaring malpractice insurance rates.

If that doesn’t make you fume, check out Anthem’s explanation as to why c-sections are a pre-existing condition:

“The point of insurance is to insure against catastrophic care costs. That’s what you’re trying to aggregate and pool for such things as heart attacks and cancer,” said an Anthem Blue Cross spokesman. “Having a child is a matter of choice. Dealing with an adult onset illness, such as diabetes, heart disease breast or prostate cancer, is not a matter of choice.”

OH NO! ! It looks like we’re being accused of making reproductive choices again!

On the one hand you’ve got the faux family values folks telling us that we are baby killers if we exercise the right to end a pregnancy and we also have the insurance companies  sticking us with the risk of going bankrupt if we have a c-section.  Some choice.

And women are bearing all of the financial risk why?  And what about pregnancies where the mother would have preferred to get an abortion and couldn’t?  And what about pregnancies that are because the  parents didn’t understand about contraception because they attended a school with abstinence only sex ed?  Does this spokesperson comprehend that the “choice” to have children is how the human species propagates?

This isn’t about choice.  It is first of all about insurance companies being out to insure one thing only–their profits, at the expense of the health of the citizens of this nation and secondly that there are not adequate laws protecting women from misogynist profiteering that violate their human rights.  Full stop.  Enough.  We need single payer universal healthcare now and we need to pass the Equal Rights Amendment and CEDAW to insure that these horrifying practices end immediately.

DeliciousFacebookGoogle+RedditStumbleUponTwitterPrintFriendlyEmailEvernoteDiggShare
 
Yes, That is Barbie, not Phyllis, see below :-)

Yes, That is Barbie, not Phyllis, see below :-)

When it comes to fair and balanced reporting, you’ve got to hand it to the U.S. media
for doing whatever it takes to present both sides of the story, even when there aren’t two sides and when the best they can do to pretend otherwise is to present regurgitated hate-filled spew.  Which makes it, I suppose, not at all surprising that TIME Magazine has trotted out that old stand-by Phyllis Schlafly to offer her predictable diatribes about the recently re-introduced Equal Rights Amendment.

Here are a few of the highlights:

What would have happened, do you suppose, if the amendment had passed? What would we be living with now?
It would have given vast new powers to the federal courts because the Equal Rights Amendment did not define the operative words, which were sex and equality. So what does sex mean? Is it the sex you are, or the sex you do? What does equality mean? Does it mean equality of individual people like the Fourteenth Amendment, or does it mean the equality of a group? In America we really don’t believe in group rights. I think it’s pretty clear that if the Equal Rights Amendment had passed, we would have had same-sex marriage 25 years ago.

On gay marriage and feminism:

My own belief is that the problem [facing] marriage is maybe only 5% a problem with gay activism, and 95% a problem with feminist activism. [Feminists] have given us divorce, millions of fatherless children and the idea that it’s O.K. to be a single mom. I’m not talking about women who lose a husband for one reason or another. We’re talking about the idealization of a single mom. I believe that the worst thing the liberals did in this country was the Lyndon Johnson welfare system, which broke up millions of marriages by funneling taxpayers’ money solely to the woman. That made the father and husband irrelevant.

So what’s the next cause?
Well, I guess the next cause is to keep Obama from taking this country into socialism…

I do want to proudly note that one of my favorite measures of the effectiveness of this blog is this kind mention by Schlafly regarding our ongoing support of International Women’s Day:

“Today, IWD serves to advance radical feminism in the form of promoting pro-abortion and pro-gay rights legislation, ratification of ERA, affirmative action for women, Title IX, government babysitting services, and government wage control, commonly camouflaged as “pay equity” or “comparable worth.” The supporting organizations are not women’s groups, but feminist groups, including Feminist Peace Network, Aurora Women’s Network, UNESCO, and the United Nations Development Fund for Women, also known as UNIFEM. Even media groups, such as CNN, the BBC, and Aljazeera TV have signed on as sponsors. Tomorrow, over 450 rallies and “events” are planned in 44 different countries across the globe.”

Lastly, just to point to TIME’s bizarre sense of the appropriate, there are links next to the story to other related pieces, one about Barbie’s 50th birthday and one about whether women should lie about their age.  Nuf said.

DeliciousFacebookGoogle+RedditStumbleUponTwitterPrintFriendlyEmailEvernoteDiggShare
 

When my kids were learning U.S. history, I used to recite a version of the Gettyburg Address that went something like this,

“Four score and seven years ago our foremothers were at home cooking dinner, doing the laundry and caring for their children and our forefathers got so jazzed up listening to the sounds of their own voices that they forgot to mention the womenfolk in the Constitution.  Oops.”

Bless their little hearts, I’m sure it was an inadvertent omission.  Well okay maybe it was more like an overt usurpation of patriarchal  power.  So either let’s get this thing passed already or as an alternative  get honest and pass an amendment clarifying that we are second class citizens in this country.  Geez.

Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) and Rep. Carolyn Maloney at ERA Rally

Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) and Rep. Carolyn Maloney at ERA Rally

Via the Alice Paul Institute (click link for excellent history of the ERA).

We shall not be safe until the principle of equal rights is written into the framework of our government.”–Alice Paul at  Seneca Falls, 1923

Section 1. Equality of Rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state on account of sex.

Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

Section 3. This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification.

Via Ms.

In a press conference Congresswoman Maloney stated, “Women have made incredible progress in the past few decades. But laws can change, government regulations can be weakened, and judicial attitudes can shift. The only way for women to achieve equality in the United States is to write it into the Constitution“.

DeliciousFacebookGoogle+RedditStumbleUponTwitterPrintFriendlyEmailEvernoteDiggShare