Last week, the Obama campaign unveiled a range of graphically attractive but intellectually bereft e-cards trying to convince women that a Republican administration would take us back to the puritanical days of yore in which women had no control over their health care decisions (for goodness’ sake, what mature adult would send a plea like this to their mother?), and earlier today, this appeared on the campaign’s tumblr (the Weekly Standard got the screenshot):
So why would someone voting merely for their lady parts want to vote for Democrats, who do everything they can to apologize to totalitarian islamists and bend over backwards for islamists (as seen in the last few weeks with the Libya debacle), who do, in fact, want to destroy lady parts? Even the nonjudgemental WHO recognizes it as a bad thing:
Female genital mutilation (FGM) comprises all procedures that involve partial or total removal of the external female genitalia, or other injury to the female genital organs for non-medical reasons.
The practice is mostly carried out by traditional circumcisers, who often play other central roles in communities, such as attending childbirths. However, more than 18% of all FGM is performed by health care providers, and this trend is increasing.
FGM is recognized internationally as a violation of the human rights of girls and women. It reflects deep-rooted inequality between the sexes, and constitutes an extreme form of discrimination against women. It is nearly always carried out on minors and is a violation of the rights of children. The practice also violates a person’s rights to health, security and physical integrity, the right to be free from torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, and the right to life when the procedure results in death.
The practice is most common in the western, eastern, and north-eastern regions of Africa, in some countries in Asia and the Middle East, and among migrants from these areas.
The Democrat party is composed of people who are famous believers in cultural relativism, that every culture is as good as another, and that moral judgements should be eschewed because they’re discriminatory. That leads down a dark road of razor blades and maiming girls. Maybe a few decades ago, when there were a rare few democrats (like Patricia Schroeder) willing to stand up to mutilation and try to pass laws against it some kind of argument could be made, but that would still hinge on the ridiculous notion that Americans of other political stripes would want to mutilate women. Today, when any criticism of islam (which does favor oppression of women, even in some quite visible ways in the west) is decried from the White House on down, and arguments are made for sharia law in the US, there is a difference in who does stand up for human rights and who says it’s merely a cultural tradition that we should respect, like killing apostates.
That’s not even getting into honor killings and how that’s covered up or ignored. Also, why would you vote for a party that has consistently argued against a woman’s right to self defense by denying her the tools of self defense? Seems a “lady parts” voter would be concerned about that, too.
There must be some audience for this silly idea, though. Last night on a nationwide radio show a female host talked about how “our sisters fought for birth control”, and not drug companies and pharmacists who sought to provide a desired product by women and men who wanted consequences-free sex, as though there was some glorious crusade to free women from the shackles of patriarchal biology or something. Oh well.
Voting with lady parts or man parts means you’re lowering voting to some of the simplest instincts. Even in the course of making those parts meet, we also tend to listen to our brains, at least a little bit.