PSA: S.4381

Quick note before I begin the content of this post:  I know that this is not a political forum.  And I also know (and am thankful you have been very kind NOT to point it out) that I have not been producing any content recently.  This is because what I want to talk about is very much not “on brand” for The Epicurious Texan.  It has nothing to do with travel, food, drinks, or even cute dogs.  But it is important to me, Sherry aka Shez aka The Epicurious Texan.  I need an outlet for all the thoughts swirling in my head and I have no desire to start yet another blog devoted specifically to this topic.  I have had a few political posts in the past and will re-share them again as, sadly, they are still applicable, maybe even more so. But what I want to do now is start a series of more specific and pointed conversations from now until the election in November.  Maybe even a little beyond, but we’ll play that by ear.  If you’re just here for a good time and some great recipes, great!  Thank you for stopping by!  I don’t want you to feel ambushed, so all my political-centric posts will be clearly denoted with a PSA (a Political Science Adhoc, if you will) in the title so you can skip right on past them if it’s not your jam.  Although for the record, I hope that you don’t skip them because I would like to think they will be insightful and thought-provoking rather than random, conspiracy fueled rants.  But I guess only time will tell. Oh and before I forget, a link for sources for my research will be provided at the end of each post.

Last Wednesday (June 5^th), the Senate voted on S.4381, which was “[a] bill to protect an individual’s ability to access contraceptives and to engage in contraception and to protect a health care provider’s ability to provide contraceptives, contraception, and information related to contraception.”

Republicans opposing the bill—and they all did except for Senators Murkowski of Alaska and Collins of Maine—stated it was because this bill was redundant. They proclaimed that Democrats were fearmongering, and we the American people do not need to codify the right to contraception into law.  And maybe, just maybe a few years ago I might have felt a little more ambivalent about whether it passed into federal law because a few years ago I still had autonomy over my body. 

But June 24, 2022 shattered all of those delusions and feelings of protected ambivalence when the Supreme Court issued the Dobbs decision, reversing the constitutional right to have an abortion.  Of course, the majority opinion of the Supreme Court argued that the federal government had no right to mandate access to abortions and that it was the states who could determine abortion rights within their own states.  Conservative states quickly moved to vote strict abortion laws into place, nearly all of which do not include exemptions for rape or incest. 

They do include exceptions for life of the mother.  However, these same states have harsh punishments and repercussions for doctors who assist in abortions even where there is clear evidence that the mother’s life is in danger.  The threat of severe punishments have left doctors in these states fearful to perform the procedure even when it is the best or only option available to save a woman’s life.  Devastatingly heartbreaking stories of women with life threatening pregnancy complications being denied care began emerging on the news and social media feeds—and it seems every day there are more and more.  Let me just reiterate that: WOMEN’S LIVES ARE IN JEOPARDY BECAUSE THEY ARE BEING DENIED CARE IN HALF OF THIS COUNTRY. All because Republican legislatures feel they and they alone are competent to decide what is best for a woman.  

So, no.  I don’t think Democrats are fearmongering.  Until Dobbs arrived at the Supreme Court, overturning Roe vs Wade was a hypothetical.  And certainly the odds of it happening increased with every Trump appointed Justice, but even the erroneously named Pro-Life movement looked a little stunned when the decision was leaked. 

With no control over her body after she’s pregnant, the next logical step is to protect a woman’s right to have available methods to prevent pregnancy in the first place. But that’s not what this is about.  This is about two things: 1. subjugating and controlling women and 2. pushing a false evangelical Christian narrative that life begins at conception.

Let’s start with #2 first.  NO WHERE IN THE BIBLE DOES IT STATE THAT LIFE BEGINS AT CONCEPTION. Sure there are some verses in the New Testament that talk about life in the womb, but these point more to fetus viability rather than conception, like Ecclesiastes 11:5 and Luke 1:36-43. If you want something more definitive from the Old Testament, Genesis 2:7 states that life begins with first breath.

But you know what?  The entire paragraph above about the argument of the Bible’s perspective of when life begins is a moot point. The First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America reads “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” As such, the entire debate about when the bible says life begins has ABSOLUTLEY NOTHING to do with the constitutional protections of abortion or contraception.  Your religion only gets to dictate what you do in your life.  Your religion does not get to dictate what I do with my body. And if it turns out that there is a higher power and she is Christian, I and I alone will have to answer for my actions.

The 1^st point is actually the reason that made me want to address this issue.  If it were truly about abortion and contraception, men would also be held accountable.  But they are not.  There aren’t any discussions about what punishments and repercussions are for a man who impregnates a woman who either doesn’t want to get pregnant or needs gets an abortion for health saving reasons. There are no legislative discussions about mandatory vasectomies for men to ensure that women do not get pregnant.

No. These measures are meant solely for the purpose of controlling women.  To treat us like we are merely here to provide our bodies for their services.  But we do not have to comply.  We can fight back and should.  Dante Alighieri wrote that “the hottest places in hell are reserved for those who, in times of great moral crisis, maintain their neutrality.” For all women out there and the men that love them, this should be your fight.  Not because of what you believe about abortion or contraception, but for the right to have control over your body and the right to have all health care services available to you without having to ask permission from the government or leaving your home state to get the care you need. 

What can you do?  Contact your representatives. Vote. Keep talking until people start listening. Join a group. Strike on June 24th. Send me a list of other things we can do!

In the meantime, here is a list of all the Senators who voted no or abstained from voting (denoted with an NV).  Yes, you will see that Senator Schumer of New York listed. He very publicly changed his vote to no to allow him to right to bring the bill back for another vote later.  Senators marked with an * are running for re-election this year and at first I thought I would just list those, but everyone else who voted no or abstained should also be held to task and this should be remembered when they are up for re-election.

• Barrasso (R-WY)*
• Blackburn (R-TN)*
• Boozman (R-AR)
• Budd (R-NC)
• Capito (R-WV)
• Cassidy (R-LA)
• Cornyn (R-TX)
• Cotton (R-AR)
• Cramer (R-ND)*
• Crapo (R-ID)
• Cruz (R-TX)*
• Daines (R-MT)
• Ernst (R-IA)
• Fischer (R-NE)*
• Grassley (R-IA)
• Hawley (R-MO)*
• Hoeven (R-ND)
• Hyde-Smith (R-MS)
• Johnson (R-WI)
• Lankford (R-OK)
• Lee (R-UT)
• Lummis (R-WY)
• Marshall (R-KS)
• McConnell (R-KY)
• Mullin (R-OK)
• Paul (R-KY)
• Ricketts (R-NE)
• Risch (R-ID)
• Rounds (R-SD)
• Rubio (R-FL)
• Schmitt (R-MO)
• Schumer (D-NY)
• Scott (R-FL)*
• Scott (R-SC)
• Thune (R-SD)
• Tillis (R-NC)
• Tuberville (R-AL)
• Wicker (R-MS)*
• Young (R-IN)
• Braun (R-IN)—NV* (not running for re-election in the Senate, but is running for Governor of Indiana)
• Britt (R-AL)—NV
• Graham (R-SC)—NV
• Hagerty (R-TN)—NV
• Kennedy (R-LA)—NV
• Menendez (D-NJ)—NV
• Moran (R-KS)—NV
• Romney (R-UT)—NV
• Sullivan (R-AK)—NV
• Vance (R-OH)—NV

Thank you for listening, please feel free to share, let me know if you want to discuss this further, and click here for a link to research materials.