On the
first day of the 2014 legislative session, state
Sen. Steven Yarbrough (R-LD17/Chandler) introduced SB1062.
Sen. Yarbrough leads a bipartisan group of legislators and citizen group
leaders known as the Arizona Values Action Team which supports public
policy that is pro-life, pro-traditional marriage, pro-school choice and
pro-religious liberty.
First, the "bipartisan" claim is dubious at best. If there actually is tangible team membership, any Democrats would likely only be token and needed solely to blunt the reality of Dominionism being exclusively a Republican political sect.
Second, the Arizona Eagletarian has already made the connection between
Yarbrough's VAT and Christian Nationalism or Dominionism.
Terms like Dominionism and Value Action Team might sound innocuous, or possibly even noble (Sean Noble? Nah...) but the SB1062 controversy showed clearly that what this "team" really pushes is government control over personal conduct. Personal conduct that causes NO tangible harm to anyone. Or, as Mike Huckabee put it,
"Our party stands for the recognition of the equality of women and the capacity of women," Huckabee told his audience at the Republican National Committee's winter meeting in downtown Washington. "That's not a war on them. It's a war for them. And if the Democrats want to insult the women of America by making them believe that they are helpless without Uncle Sugar coming in and providing for them a prescription each month for birth control, because they cannot control their libido or their reproductive system without the help of the government, then so be it." (emphasis mine)
Why is Mike Huckabee, or Steve Yarbrough, or Eddie Farnsworth (who sponsored, in the House, a bill identical to SB1062) so concerned with what consenting adults do in the privacy of their own bedroom? Granted, that wasn't the direct subject of SB1062, but
Dominionist Republicans have not been shy about that aspect of their legislative agenda for Arizona or America.
hi, nice blog. you call yourself an "egalitarian" (as do i), how can you believe it is okay for a woman to terminate/abort a pregnancy/life? would you be satisfied if your mother terminated your pregnancy? "choice" is bs-coke & pepsi is a choice, these are lives-period. im not against birth control, condoms, morning after pills, etc-they PREVENT pregnancy/life from occuring. but once life begins-thats it, the pregnancy should complete & that life should be born. and yes, before (if you do) you ask about instances of rape-yes those should carry on-the baby committed no crime, y do they get a capital sentence. btw, how many who think these pregnancies should be terminated think the rapist should be aborted-i mean executed? i dont appreciate the left/democrats or whoever else implying that ive declared war on women bc i believe this & believe abortion should strictly be limited to the life/health of the mother.
ReplyDeleteThe sovereignty of actual human beings having the constitutional right to self-determination supercedes all other considerations. Your profile says you are male.
DeleteThat fact may limit your ability to grasp the enormity of this question.
I don't know anyone who believes termination of pregnancy is something society should celebrate.
The issue is NOT your to determine. It is NOT society's to determine. It IS for each woman to decide, preferably in conjunction with her family and her doctor.
For society, in the form of Cathi Herrod or her group's advocacy, to encroach on the freedom of the individual human beings who rightfully own the responsibility for the decision is an abomination.
There are complex moral issues throughout society. The foundation for resolving many of those questions is self-determination.