Don’t forget your rape insurance

I expressed my rather grey feelings about abortion (or rather the legality of abortion) in The Inevitable Abortion Blog a few months ago. Not long after that, I discussed the idiocy of Bobby Franklin, a GA state representative who basically wants to make it illegal to have a miscarriage. And I shared letters from my state’s senators regarding HR1 (the bill that would have banned Planned Parenthood from receiving any funding, including funding for cancer screening and birth control). Between the three of these, you should have a pretty clear understanding of where I stand on the issue of women’s rights, women’s health care, and the legality of abortion. I didn’t really think I would have much need to discuss these issues further, as I’m really not a fan of repeating myself. But when a friend shared this article on Facebook, I just couldn’t keep my opinions to myself.

The issue at hand is whether or not an insurance company’s regular coverage would extend to abortions. The argument against this is that employers who have religious objections to abortion should not be forced to provide insurance policies that cover them. . . . I’ll touch briefly on this. By these same standards, if an employer’s religion rejects medical treatment all together, should he not be forced to provide any medical insurance? If an employer is a Scientologist, can’t he make the argument that his company should not have to provide insurance that covers mental health issues since Scientology rejects psychology? I mean, the last I checked abortion was still legal, so how is it legal to restrict access and coverage for it?

But I digress. That is not the biggest issue that prompted this blog. On May 13th, Kansas legislators approved a bill that would ban abortion from being a part of an insurance policy’s regular plan. Women can, however, purchase a rider. This rider would provide coverage for abortions costs “just in case.” The “just in case” here is referring to a rape that results in pregnancy.

When questioned about women having to plan ahead for such things, Rep. Pete DeGraaf said, “I have a spare tire on my car.”

(Please excuse the language that is about to follow.)


Are you fucking kidding me? Did he seriously just compare planning for a flat tire to the possibility of sexual assault? He did. He really fucking did!

He belongs in the nut house with Bobby Franklin!

What the hell is wrong with this country that we feel the need to dehumanize women to such an extent? This war on women is becoming more and more appalling by the minute. There seem to be those (a lot of those) who would prefer to send us back to a time when we had no rights. They are certainly making strong efforts to move in that direction, to force women into back alleys once again.

If you want to fight against the legality of abortion, that’s your right. And it’s my right to fight back. But so long as abortion is still legal, it is immoral, unethical, and unconstitutional to restrict women from obtaining those services. Suggesting that a woman has to prepare herself to financially cover an abortion “just in case” she is raped is outright ludicrous!


20 responses to this post.

  1. Posted by Tammy W. on May 19, 2011 at 11:08 pm

    Dayle, your title intrigued me so much that I just had to pop over & read this post! Without getting into a whole debate, here (I suppose you’d consider me a “right-wing religious zealot”), I must at least say a few things in response:

    1. The spare tire comment was perhaps as disproportionate a comparison anyone has ever made of rape (with the exception of the purposefully preposterous “Rape of the Lock” by Pope)


    • I was actually a little nervous about posting this, Tammy . . . since the MomSquawk contest, I’ve had a major influx of conservative friends! But me being me, I couldn’t keep my mouth shut!

      And I’m glad the title did what it was supposed to do 😛 (It was actually my boyfriend’s suggestion . . . I suck at titles.)


  2. Posted by Tammy W. on May 19, 2011 at 11:12 pm

    Sorry–my phone wouldn’t let me continue.

    2. You wrote that “By these same standards, if an employer’s religion rejects medical treatment all together, should he not be forced to provide any medical insurance?” Since employers are not currently required to provide medical insurance at all, I’m not sure this arguement holds water. (If I’m wrong, my husband’s boss would be in boiling H2O!)


    • I was wondering where the rest of it was!

      I admit that I didn’t reseach insurance laws with this . . . mostly because I wanted to make sure it was posted in time for the blogathon — when researching, I tend to lose track of time.

      I could easily be mistaken, but I thought that once a company had so many employees they had to provide some kind of medical coverage.

      But if that’s not the case then I’ll stick with my Scientology argument . . . Though to make it more accurate, I should have worded it “Should we make it illegal to provide mental health services as part of the regular insurance plan because Scientologist employers are against psychology?”


      • Posted by Tammy W. on May 19, 2011 at 11:29 pm

        I haven’t researched it, either, but his company has thousands of employees, & basically, unless you’re in mid-management (which we’re hoping he’ll soon be!) you get squat.

        & I’m pretty sure Scientologists could already exempt various types of “medical care” from coverage they provide.


      • COULD exempt . . . that’s the difference. This law doesn’t state that pro-life Christian employers CAN opt out of their insurance companies covering abortions . . . it states that insurances companies are NOT ALLOWED to cover abortion as part of their regular policy.

        BTW, I don’t know if you read The Inevitable Abortion blog . . . but just as a side note, I’d like to point out that I am not pro-abortion . . . I just think there are more effective ways of fighting it.


  3. Posted by Tammy W. on May 19, 2011 at 11:24 pm

    3. Pardon me if I’m misunderstanding your point, here, but when you wrote, “But so long as abortion is still legal, it is immoral, unethical, and unconstitutional to restrict women from obtaining those services,” are you implying that not having insurance cover an abortion would be “restrictive,” as in potentially cost-prohibitive? That’s as silly as the public workers in Oregon who, in response to birth control’s no longer being covered by insurance, marched while chanting “2-4-6-8, You can’t make us procreate!” (Kinda catchy, huh?!) As if they were all forced to have sex & use no protection, simply because “the pill” wasn’t covered.

    Many employers provide insurance that stops short of covering well visits, the majority of pregnancy & birth expenses, & all kinds of life-promoting procedures & medications. Is it “immoral” to fail to pay for all of those, as well? If so, I would venture that your definition of morality is quite broad.

    (On a positive note, you made me think more analytically about the whole abortion issue than I have in years. & I hope we can continue to politely challenge one another’s thinking & logic, even when we disagree.)


    • I have no objection to an individual insurance company choosing to not cover abortions. I have a problem with a law forcing insurance companies not to cover abortions.

      What an individual company chooses to do is its own business. (I suppose I have a tad of a republican in me afterall, but shhh, don’t tell anyone!) I believe businesses should be able operate as they see fit with little involvement from the government.

      My problem is when legislation restricts coverage (and yes as in cost-prohibitive). Is it immoral for an insurance company not to cover birth control? I won’t argue that either way. Is it immoral for the government to say that an insurance company is not allowed to cover birth control? 110% yes.


    • Oh, I should also state that I have always been a firm believer in “reasonable people can have reasonable differences” and I do so love debate . . . So I am all about the polite challenges!


  4. Posted by Joianne on May 19, 2011 at 11:41 pm

    Your post has left me completely speechless.

    I once had this fantasy of moving to another country. Spain, Canada, even Portugal had come up. (I’m random, I know) I threw that notion out the window because my family is here, yada, yada, yada…… But it’s things like this and the recent video I saw of a certain religious leader (I’ll refrain from mentioning a name that might spark another blog post) that has me thinking maybe moving might not be so bad after all.

    I am so appalled that not only has the government wiggled their way into my panties but now they have found a way to rape us without being present for the deed.


  5. Posted by Ginny on May 20, 2011 at 12:52 am

    As you might have guessed from my recent goodblogs post, I’m pro-life, but I will agree with you on that being one of the most ridiculous things I have ever heard in my life. “Whoops! We have a flat tire–good thing there’s a spare”. . .that has to be the worst analogy I have ever heard. I guess it’s the no -TV thing, but I am missing all this. . .thanks for writing about this difficult subject and being brave enough to write your mind.


    • Thanks for commenting, Ginny!

      I tend to tick people off on both sides of the fence here . . . I consider myself a pro-choice anti-abortionist (I explained that in a lot more detail in The Inevitable Abortion Blog). Obviously, I can’t write about something abortion related without touching on the idea of abortion . . . but the flat tire comment was what really fueled this.


  6. Dayle, I love reading your posts and love that you can debate with those with opposite beliefs without it becoming a war. I am completely pro-life but DeGraaf’s statement made my blood boil! Thank you for having the courage to show both sides of the issue, and thank you for standing up for being pro-life, even if you are a little bit of both!


    • Yay Jen, you’re here!

      I have never expected anyone to think like me . . . hey, that’s the whole point of this blog, right? “I shall be a toad!” Everyone else should be toads too! (Or wait, is that thinking like me? I’ve found a paradox!)

      DeGraaf’s statement reminds me of Toronto police officer’s comment that, “women should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimized.” (Oh, don’t worry, that’s on my list of future blog topics!) Stupid, pig-headed men is what they are . . .


  7. I’m pro life….but the idea that someone should be prepared for rape is ludicrous!
    I was raised with the idea of not having sex until marriage and I really planned on sticking with that…like you, I was a virgin until 21 when I fell in love and thought I was going to marry this guy so I broke my promise to myself figuring at least it was the guy I was going to marry..but guess what? Me and that guy broke up and I didn’t marry him….and it caused me to look at things a different way. I think there are a few people out there that could be able to abstain BUT I think the idea of everyone doing so is very unrealistic.
    Now when I have kids, I plan to raise them Christian but I also plan to teach them about protection and let them know that abstaining is a valid option but if they don’t choose that path, at least be protected. In fact, I plan to stress to my kids that the person they choose to be with that way…it’s better if it’s at least someone you truly care about. And never just have sex to make a guy like you.
    So yea, I’m pro life but I’m also for teaching on condoms, birth control, etc. as well.
    I have friends that are completely 100% pro choice and while I may not agree with that, I respect their right to feel that way and I’m not going to judge them.
    The only people that I simply can’t tolerate are the ones that use abortion as their only form of birth control…and I have actually heard people say, “Oh well, if I get pregnant, I can just have an abortion”…..People that have protection available but don’t care to use it cause they know they can get an abortion….I just can’t agree with that….


    • I once did a persuasive speech in college AGAINST abortion and I was asked, “If one of your friends had an abortion, would you hate them? Would you not speak to them anymore?” I answered NO…and I am pretty sure I ended up with not as good of a grade because of that…I think people considered me wishy washy.
      I, on the other hand, as a Christian, see nothing at all wishy washy about that….In fact, if you’re a Christian and you answered YES to that, I would say you’re not a very good Christian. Maybe not all Christians would agree with me but I was taught that as Jesus died on the cross, he looked up to his father and said, “Forgive them father, they know not what they do” about the ones who put him there!
      I believe God wants us to hate what we see as bad or evil and NOT the person doing so….I believe he wants us to forgive and I believe God is love….how is it loving to abandon your friend after she has gone through something of that nature? I would think that would be a time when my friend would need me even more


      • I couldn’t agree with you more. . . . I’m not a Christian, but I do have the utmost respect for Jesus’ teaching and consider him to have been an amazing spiritual leader. . . . And by following his standard, it is not our place to judge. “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.”


    • Sharon, I completely agree with you about those who use abortion as a form of birth control . . . and while I have met a couple of them myself, I do think they are in the minority.

      I had a very short lived fling after my ex-husband and I split up. (I did marry the first man I had sex with . . . . and I kind of had a short – and mild by most people’s standards – wild phase when that relationship ended.) Anyway, the point . . . I had a pregnancy scare. I am eternally grateful that it was a false alarm, but had it not been . . . I’d have two kids right now. When I told him about the scare (after I knew it was false), he said, “it’s okay, I’d have paid for it.” . . . “It” of course being an abortion. . . . . You see why the fling was short lived! The thought that it was that cut and dry for him was so disturbing to me.


      • Yea, I went through a wild phase after the guy I lost it with broke up with me….well, a couple years after anyways…I had already lost my virginity so I justified it to myself as “I already lost it so what’s the difference?” and was with guys that didn’t really care about me, trying to fill an empty hole I had… a “big” girl, I made the mistake of thinking that if a guy had sex with me that he LOVED me but of course that wasn’t true…I also had one big scare and that guy was sooooo horrible to me, IF I had gotten pregnant…I was about 24 and although my parents would have been peeved, they would have accepted it and I would have loved the baby dearly…..BUT I am so thankful I wasn’t because that poor baby would have had a deadbeat dad…..
        I’m so glad for my best friend in the world, who is also a niece…She arranged for me to stay in her state and work at a preschool there where I would not have a car and just really got me to realize how I was going down the wrong path….so thankful for her….I don’t think I would be married now if she hadn’t gotten me to let go of my wildness…..
        A little wild is OK…but I really went crazy ….


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: