THAT OLD TIME RELIGION
The Supreme Court decision Roe vs. Wade was passed in 1973. Once women had access to both birth control and abortions, they were able to stop living as first and foremost reproductive units, and were able to participate more fully in society than as primarily wives and mothers.
I don’t think the conservative power structure, at that time for the most part older white men, could ever accept this new reality which shattered the old, so-called “double standard.” Back in those days men were, with a wink and a nod and a little macho bluster, allowed to have as much sex as they could get; it was a male privilege. At the same time, society imposed severe cultural and moral sanctions on women who did the same.
I believe that is why so many conservatives have been working hard to take away those rights ever since. They just liked it the old way. It’s nice, and easy, to feel all powerful and dominant over half of humanity when culture and law are your side. Especially if you yourself are just one more powerless nobody. And now, after the present Supreme Court overturned Roe, they have contraception clearly in their sights.
In truth, it has never been about “saving babies.”
And yes, it is true. Today, many Christian Evangelicals, 89% of whom are white, are known to subscribe to another outdated concept called” complementarianism”. This belief system alleges that men and women have different but complementary roles, and is supported by their interpretation of the Bible. It says that men are the providers and protectors, and women the nurturers and child-rearers who must submit to male domination.
Today, in fact, support for this cave-man theology comes straight from the highest level of government. Throwing the First Amendment to the wind, Donald T****’s new White House Faith Leader Paula White-Cain is an advocate of this theory.
I maintain, however, that if this submission was natural, there wouldn’t be thousands of sermons every week reminding women they must submit. Nature doesn’t need constant reminders in order to run its course. Indoctrination, however, depends on constant reinforcement.
So if someone insists that I have to respect their religion and their beliefs regardless, I reply: If your religious convictions call for indoctrination which supports the oppression or submission of other human beings, I have only response:
“The hell I do.”
#1PathForward
Leave a Reply