Grievances Against the GOP from a (former?) Republican Woman by Katie German
Originally posted on the Feminism and Religion Project
This article is cross-posted at Confessions of a Thinking Woman.
I was raised in a conservative, Republican, military family. I support personal freedom and personal responsibility. I... more
I was raised in a conservative, Republican, military family. I support personal freedom and personal responsibility. I support the military. I support a balanced budget. I support individual rights and the constitution. I support small government. But I find myself increasingly separated from the Republican Party, and this is why:
I cannot align myself with a party that repeatedly acts to restrict the rights of women, to deny women protection from abuse and violence, and to trample the rights of women to make their own medical decisions. I cannot support a party where individual rights and freedoms are only protected for people with a penis (so long as they are not gay).
Is Baptism a Male Birthing Ritual? By Michele Stopera Freyhauf
Originally published on the Feminism and Religion project
Quite a number of years ago I had a conversation with one of my professors, a feminist theologian, who posed the... more Quite a number of years ago I had a conversation with one of my professors, a feminist theologian, who posed the question “Why do I need a man to purify my baby with the waters of baptism? Is there something wrong or impure about the blood and water from a mother’s womb – my womb?” Before you jump and shout the words Sacrament or removal of original sin, this question bears merit in exploring, especially in today’s world where women are taking a serious beating religiously, politically, and socially. In today’s world, violations and rants are causing women to stand up and say STOP! This is MY Body. This outcry was provoked by chants of ethical slurs against women– Slut! Prostitute! Whore! The cry got even louder when the issue of religion and government was raised in the fight of healthcare coverage of contraception. The cry got even louder with the enactment of the laws in Virginia and Texas (and many other states to follow suit) that forces women to undergo transvaginal ultrasounds in early stage abortions. The mandatory insertion of a wand into a woman’s vagina (mandated by the government, mind you), is a violation and has women crying RAPE!
WOMEN ARE NOT SLUTS, RUSH, DOUCHE-BAG IS NOT FUNNY, JON, AND SEXISM IS MORE THAN “INAPPROPRIATE,” MR. WHITEHOUSE SPOKESPERSON! by Carol P. Christ
Originally published on the Feminism and Religion project
Why is it OK to insult women, our bodies, and our sexuality in ways that it is no longer OK to insult other groups?
The recent controversy over Rush Limbaugh’s rant about Sandra Fluke would not be so important if Limbaugh were not the “voice” allowed to say things that Republican politicians cannot say in public. Republican politicians wish to appeal to men who would say exactly what Rush said, while watching Fox News or over a beer with their buddies.
The Virgin-Whore split is alive and well in our culture. Sandra Fluke finally did get to testify in a hearing called by Nancy Pelosi. She assumed a woman’s right to choose when and with whom we have sex and whether and when we will have children, but she did not focus on sexual freedom. One of her examples was a married woman who could not afford birth control and another was a woman who needed birth control pills for reasons having nothing to do with sex or sexual activity. She did not appear in Congress in a mini-skirt (though she should have had every right to do so) but in a business suit. Yet she was called a slut and a prostitute and asked to post porno films of herself on the internet.
Preying on Victims: Radical Christianity and Exploitation of Tragedy in the Name of God By Michele Stopera Freyhauf
Originally published on the Feminism and Religion project
It is our moral responsibility, whether we identify as Christians or not, to pray for not prey on the victims of... more
It is our moral responsibility, whether we identify as Christians or not, to pray for not prey on the victims of tragedies.
Over the last month, dare I say years, society has witnessed or been subjected to an all out war from radical Christians across America deploying the wrath of God and reveling in the tragedy of others to perpetuate their apocalyptic message of rhetoric and terror. As I hear the news over the last few months, an old Billy Joel song starts to play in my head “We didn’t start the fire.” Whether we started the fire or not, we should not feed the flames of hatred but figure out a way to extinguish it.
Here is a brief synopsis of current events that reflect this hatred and radicalism perpetuated in the name of God – examples of Christianity terrorizing or preying on victims through their actions.
The Westboro Southern Baptist Church: Preying on Victims at Funerals and Thanking God for their Tragic Deaths
Get Your Laws off my Body! by Elise Edwards
Originally published on the Feminism and Religion project.
After considering Virginia’s Transvaginal Utrasound Bill in light of the womanist critique, I wonder if... more
After considering Virginia’s Transvaginal Utrasound Bill in light of the womanist critique, I wonder if religiously-motivated lawmakers considered that they alone do not have access to God’s intentions, but that the divine spirit is operative in a pregnant woman as well, would they be so willing to negate her moral agency?
On Tuesday, the senate in Virginia approved a law that would require women to get an external ultrasound before an abortion. This is a scaled-back version of an original bill that mandated transvaginal ultrasounds prior to abortions. According to this Washington Post article, opponents like Sen. Janet D. Howell describe the measure as “state rape,” since it is the state, not the woman and her doctor who decides that she must undergo this procedure requiring the insertion of a probe into the vagina. Although proponents of the bill say that it is designed to give women more information about a fetus’ gestational age and development, most would agree that it is ultimately intended to discourage the women from having an abortion.
Catholicism, Contraception, and Conscience: Church Imposed Teaching, God’s Gift of Free Will, and Political Rhetoric by Michele Stopera Freyhauf
Originally published on the Feminism and Religion project
ertainly one cannot turn on the news without seeing a story about the feud over the Catholic Church’s stance on... more
ertainly one cannot turn on the news without seeing a story about the feud over the Catholic Church’s stance on forbidding the use of contraception and Obama’s Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) that mandates free contraception to women. In preparing this article, I took the time to review many articles from liberal and conservative news outlets, law professors who are experts on constitutional law, and statements from the USCCB and Bishops. Before asking questions, I want to outline the following points:
*In the literature reviewed, only two women, Sr. Carol Keehan and Sr. Mary Ann Walsh, made a statement against this policy stating that the government is interfering with the working of the Church. Most voices heard and shouting the loudest are members of the clergy.
*Hospitals considered “Catholic” hire people of all faiths and various beliefs. They also treat patients of all faiths. They are not exclusively “Catholic.”
*Catholic identified Colleges hire professors and staff that are not Catholic. Moreover, their student body is not totally Catholic.
*Catholic Charities, once again, hire non-Catholics.
* Insurance plans currently in place often offer contraception prescriptions at a zero to low co-pay price. These plans are in-force at many Catholic Institutions.
*Under HIPAA, healthcare of employees are protected and the Employer, even the Catholic Church cannot violate the privacy of the patient, even if it is an employee.
*Birth Control Pills are often prescribed for women with endometriosis or other “female” reproductive disorders and not birth control.
Women pregnant, carrying a dead baby, cannot have surgery due to risks are given medication to induce abortion are given
The Rhetoric of Freedom of Religion in the Debate about Contraception Coverage By Elise M. Edwards
Originally published on the Feminism and Religion project
Does freedom of religion include the right to impose your religious views on your employees? Should freedom of... more
Does freedom of religion include the right to impose your religious views on your employees? Should freedom of religion exempt you from financially contributing to a medical benefit for your employees that you consider sinful?
According to an Associated Baptist Press article, Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Convention Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, “called a new rule [by the Obama Administration] requiring insurance plans to cover birth control — including those paid for by religious employers that believe artificial birth control is a sin — a ‘horrible decision’ that poses a problem not just for faiths that object to birth control” in the January 28 broadcast of Richard Land Live. Land believes that this policy infringes on religious freedom. (Note that the health care policy does exempt houses of worship and religious organizations that employ primarily those of the same faith, but not organizations like hospitals and colleges that employ and serve people of all faiths, or no faith. An article by Religion News Service, posted here, also on a Baptist media outlet, explains the policy in more depth.)
Contraceptive Method Switch and Discontinuation among Women Migrants in Indonesia
by Hui Liew
Using the 2000 wave of the Indonesian Family Life Survey (IFLS3), this study attempts to examine the relationship... more Using the 2000 wave of the Indonesian Family Life Survey (IFLS3), this study attempts to examine the relationship between migration and contraceptive method switch and discontinuation in Indonesia. The major conclusion from the multinomial logistic regression is that repeated migrants are more likely than one-time migrants to discontinue use of the same method. However, the differentials in the likelihood of discontinuing use of the same method among women migrants is eliminated after controlling for the quality of health centre/family planning programme and the degree of infrastructure development in a community. The results of this study will contribute important foundational knowledge about the extent of contraceptive use dynamics by women of different migration experiences in Indonesia. This knowledge will provide guidance to policymakers to employ effective means to incorporate migration and issues that are sensitive to women migrants in their family planning and reproductive health programmes.
Preying on Victims: Radical Christianity and Exploitation of Tragedy in the Name of God By Michele Stopera Freyhauf
Originally printed on Feminism and Religion project.
It is our moral responsibility, whether we identify as Christians or not, to pray for not prey on the victims of... more
It is our moral responsibility, whether we identify as Christians or not, to pray for not prey on the victims of tragedies.
Over the last month, dare I say years, society has witnessed or been subjected to an all out war from radical Christians across America deploying the wrath of God and reveling in the tragedy of others to perpetuate their apocalyptic message of rhetoric and terror. As I hear the news over the last few months, an old Billy Joel song starts to play in my head “We didn’t start the fire.” Whether we started the fire or not, we should not feed the flames of hatred but figure out a way to extinguish it.
Here is a brief synopsis of current events that reflect this hatred and radicalism perpetuated in the name of God – examples of Christianity terrorizing or preying on victims through their actions.
The Westboro Southern Baptist Church: Preying on Victims at Funerals and Thanking God for their Tragic Deaths
Is Baptism a Male Birthing Ritual? By Michele Stopera Freyhauf
Originally published on the Feminism and Religion Project.
Quite a number of years ago I had a conversation with one of my professors, a feminist theologian, who posed the... more Quite a number of years ago I had a conversation with one of my professors, a feminist theologian, who posed the question “Why do I need a man to purify my baby with the waters of baptism? Is there something wrong or impure about the blood and water from a mother’s womb – my womb?” Before you jump and shout the words Sacrament or removal of original sin, this question bears merit in exploring, especially in today’s world where women are taking a serious beating religiously, politically, and socially. In today’s world, violations and rants are causing women to stand up and say STOP! This is MY Body. This outcry was provoked by chants of ethical slurs against women– Slut! Prostitute! Whore! The cry got even louder when the issue of religion and government was raised in the fight of healthcare coverage of contraception. The cry got even louder with the enactment of the laws in Virginia and Texas (and many other states to follow suit) that forces women to undergo transvaginal ultrasounds in early stage abortions. The mandatory insertion of a wand into a woman’s vagina (mandated by the government, mind you), is a violation and has women crying RAPE!
Download (.pdf) Anatomy of a Cargo Cult: Virginity, Relic Envy, and Hallowed Boxes
by Ryan Byrne
Resurrecting the Brother of Jesus, eds. Ryan Byrne and Bernadette McNary-Zak (University of North Carolina Press, 2009) pp. 137-186
253 views
Seen by:
Ancient Herbal Contraception
Originally published in Herb Companion
A brief summary of the ancient birth control plant, silphium that once flourished in modern Libya. It must have... more A brief summary of the ancient birth control plant, silphium that once flourished in modern Libya. It must have been effective as it was driven into extinction.
" The New Machine": Discovering the Limits of ECCO
Published in Eighteenth-Century Studies 44:4 (Summer 2011): 437–53.
16 views
Catholicism, Contraception, and Conscience: Church Imposed Teaching, God’s Gift of Free Will, and Political Rhetoric
originally published on the Feminism and Religion Project
Certainly one cannot turn on the news without seeing a story about the feud over the Catholic Church’s stance on... more
Certainly one cannot turn on the news without seeing a story about the feud over the Catholic Church’s stance on forbidding the use of contraception and Obama’s Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) that mandates free contraception to women. In preparing this article, I took the time to review many articles from liberal and conservative news outlets, law professors who are experts on constitutional law, and statements from the USCCB and Bishops. Before asking questions, I want to outline the following points:
In the literature reviewed, only two women, Sr. Carol Keehan and Sr. Mary Ann Walsh, made a statement against this policy stating that the government is interfering with the working of the Church. Most voices heard and shouting the loudest are members of the clergy.
Hospitals considered “Catholic” hire people of all faiths and various beliefs. They also treat patients of all faiths. They are not exclusively “Catholic.”
Catholic identified Colleges hire professors and staff that are not Catholic.
Moreover, their student body is not totally Catholic.
Catholic Charities, once again, hire non-Catholics.
Insurance plans currently in place often offer contraception prescriptions at a zero to low co-pay price. These plans are in-force at many Catholic Institutions.
Under HIPAA, healthcare of employees are protected and the Employer, even the Catholic Church cannot violate the privacy of the patient, even if it is an employee.
Birth Control Pills are often prescribed for women with endometriosis or other “female” reproductive disorders and not birth control.
Women pregnant, carrying a dead baby, cannot have surgery due to risks are given medication to induce abortion are given.
With this background, I want to address the question causing the most controversy:
Reframing the Presentation of Contraception Pregnancy Rates: Integrating Long-Term Planning and Dual Methods
by Aaron Hamlin
The current presentation of contraception pregnancy rates fails to address long-term planning or dual method use. This... more
The current presentation of contraception pregnancy rates fails to address long-term planning or dual method use. This work fills that gap by creating a presentation that deals with both important issues. Framing pregnancy rates beyond one year is important because individuals intend to use contraception beyond just that one year. Including dual methods is also important because of its low theoretical pregnancy rate, and 15% of contraception users take this approach.
Further, future studies may benefit contraception users by including pregnancy rates for dual methods instead estimating them. This estimated calculation for the typical use of dual methods may violate assumptions within prediction models. Researchers should also gain accuracy by differentiating between simultaneous and alternating dual-method users because this classification yields different pregnancy rates. Finally, researchers should reconsider coding dual-method users as single method users. This practice artificially lowers the pregnancy rate for primary methods.
Effects of contraception on obstetric outcomes
with John Cleland.
The contribution of contraception to reductions in obstetric
mortality and morbidity is universally... more
The contribution of contraception to reductions in obstetric
mortality and morbidity is universally acknowledged.
One major pathway is by reducing the number
of unwanted births. Each pregnancy and childbirth
carry a health risk for the woman, and where obstetric
services are poor, maternal mortality is still very high.
In most Asian and Latin American countries for which
relevant evidence exists, it is estimated that about 20%
of births were unwanted at the time of conception. In
Africa, where desired family sizes tend to be relatively
high, the prevalence of unwanted births is typically
lower, closer to 10%. On the assumption that unwanted
births carry the same risk to the health of the mother
as wanted births, it has recently been estimated that
the global burden of disease attributable to unwanted
births amounts to 4.6 million disability-adjusted life
years (DALYs) (Collumbien et al., 2002). Better use of
effective contraception would reduce this substantial
burden. In the extreme scenario, where all women who
wanted to stop having children used effective methods
of contraception, the burden would be eliminated, but
for a small residue resulting from contraceptive failure.
Does contraception contribute to better maternal health
beyond its potential to reduce the proportion of births
that are unwanted? The answer depends on the extent
to which births averted by contraception would otherwise
pose a greater risk to the mother than wanted
or intended births. The risks of childbirth are known to
vary with the mother’s age and may also be linked to
her parity and to the interval since the previous birth.
Contraception is likely to change the age pattern of
childbearing, particularly by reducing fertility at older
ages, and will certainly affect parity-specific fertility. The
first section of this paper reviews the evidence for the
assertion that contraception benefits maternal health
by reducing the number of high-risk births. The second
section examines a related possibility—that unwanted
births represent a greater threat to the mother’s health
than wanted births because less time and money are
invested in antenatal and natal care. Lack of antenatal
care and, to a greater extent, lack of skilled medical
supervision during delivery are established risk factors
for poor obstetric outcomes. This section presents
new evidence on the link between unwantedness and
obstetric care.
The second major contribution of contraception to reducing
obstetric mortality and morbidity is related to
its potential to diminish recourse to unsafe abortion.
Globally, it is estimated that 22% of pregnancies are
aborted (Alan Guttmacher Institute, 1999). By definition
these pregnancies are unwelcome, in the sense of
being either absolutely unwanted or mistimed (i.e. the
mother may want to have a child at some future date
but not at the time of conception). In most industrialized
countries, abortion is legally permitted for a wide
variety of reasons, is performed by properly trained
staff and carries very little risk to the physical well-being
of the mother. Conversely, in most African and Latin
American countries and in many Asian countries, abortion
is legally permitted only in extreme circumstances
and the vast majority of abortions performed are illegal.
It has been estimated that in 2000 19 million illegal/unsafe
abortions were carried out, of which 18.5 million
were in developing countries (Ahman & Shah, 2002).
Abortion legality and safety are strongly correlated.
When a pregnancy is terminated by someone lacking
the necessary skills or in an environment that does not
conform to minimum standards of hygiene, the woman
is at a higher risk of serious complications. Globally,
it is estimated that about 13% of pregnancy-related
and birth-related deaths in women are caused by
unsafe abortion. While it might seem self-evident that
greater use of contraception will lead to a reduction in
abortions—both safe and unsafe—this link has been
challenged and, indeed, it is true that rising levels of
contraceptive use can be accompanied by a rising incidence
of abortion. The third section of this paper uses
published data to re-examine the relationship between
changes in contraceptive practice and abortion rates.
