I miss making fun of Sharkansky, so here’s some nonsense that took me about 30 seconds of Googling to find that it isn’t correct.
The Seattle Times Nicole Brodeur’s column today is thoroughly hysterical — in all three senses of the word — “Politics again playing tough with women’s bodies”
It’s 2012, and the battle for control of the American uterus rages on …[Rush Limbaugh] reignited a new national debate about how women can maintain ownership of, and responsibility for, their own bodies.
Of course, neither Limbaugh nor anybody else of consequence is advocating that government restrict access to contraceptives, as Brodeur implies.
First, if you can’t get contraceptives because they’re priced out or unavailable on religious grounds, that’s the access to them restricted, even if it’s not the government restricting them. But second, and to the point he’s trying to make here’s Rick Santorum, winner of the second most GOP contests for president this year, on birth control:
One of the things I will talk about, that no president has talked about before, is I think the dangers of contraception in this country. It’s not okay. It’s a license to do things in a sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be.
Anyway, I was just going to make fun of that, but what the hell, I’m already here. Let’s make fun of the rest of Sharkansky’s word salad.
Brodeur’s central premise is that women can “maintain ownership of, and responsibility for, their own bodies” only if the federal government forces third parties to provide free birth control supplies.
The government forces third parties to do all sorts of things. I’d prefer universal single payer, but this improves the current system that in many instances means people who might want to use birth control don’t have that choice.
How is this different from the proposition that people can’t take responsibility for brushing their own teeth and wiping their own rear ends without a federally-mandated supply of free toothpaste and toilet paper?
Who the hell gets priced out of toilet paper and toothpaste? If brushing your teeth or wiping your rear end* cost in the order of magnitude that prescription medicines like birth control, then we’d need a more equatable way to distribute them in society. It would be bad for the people who couldn’t wipe their butts, of course, but it would also be bad for society to have lots of shit covered asses around stinky and unhealthy. That would be one solution, I guess.
God this is a stupid metaphor, but pressing on. If 58% of people who used toothpaste used it for reasons other than (although sometimes including) dental hygiene then it would probably also be more important that society make sure it was available to everyone.
* Rear end? Are you 5?