Friday, February 10, 2012

Guttmacher Institute: An Anti-Woman Coalition

Yes, I know that our president allegedly "compromised" on an issue that cannot be compromised, while citing a ridiculous figure of "99 percent of women have used contraception". This is quite some news to the virgins, NFPers', and people like my mother, my aunt Terri, and countless married friends who never used contraception.

More on that alleged compromise here: http://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=13292 taken from CatholicVoteAction. Please read; there's some good explanations there.

 The story is, alas, nothing new. The figures the president cites are from the Guttmacher Institute, named after the first president of Planned Parenthood. Here's a charming quote from Mr. Guttmacher:

 "No woman is completely free unless she is wholly capable of controlling her fertility and...no baby receives its full birthright unless it is born gleefully wanted by its parents."

This sentence encapsulates two chief problems that Christian humanists (particularly we Catholics) have with the entire ethos behind abortion. Starting with the first section of the quote, the idea that womanly fertility should subdued and discarded like a stinking dead thing that enslaves women to their men. Guttmacher and the Planned Parenthood attitude towards fertility is insane, and I will tell you why:

It runs counter to all Judeo-Christian and pagan ancient writings, where fertility is seen as an unqualified positive. In Genesis: Hagar bears Ishmael to Abraham, and even though this was outside God's plan, he provides for Hagar and Ishmael after Sarah drives her out. Greek myth: Niobe attempted to set herself up as a goddess on her qualification as a mother of seven sons and daughters. 1 and 2 Kings: The kings' consorts in Israel held very little power, but the Queen-mother could confidently intercede with the king for his subjects. In Eastern and island cultures people created and adored fertility idols shaped like voluptuous women, associating them with the success of crops and the blessings of deities.

In essence, to be woman was to be fertile, and fertility was Good. Womanhood in its fullest sense contains the idea of being fruitful with children, with works, with life. The "three faces of Eve" has the Mother- the mature and fertile genius- as the mid-point in female identity between the Maiden and the Crone. This is not to say that woman who lack fertility are less womanly, but the womb and fertility are crucial to the identity of women, not separate from it.

 This idea carries serious implications on the character of people who say that fertility is separate from being a woman and should be squelched as a distraction to the "sexy" aspect of women. The external appearance of feminity only is what determines womanly nature. Instead of empowering women with autonomy, this view cuts women adrift from their own identity. Women are expected to act like mini-men in their personal and professional lives, competing with men or titillating them, with value being assigned based on their attractiveness or their ability to keep pace with masculine standards for careers and financial achievement.

The push for autonomy in the bedroom in particul has damaged the relationship between men and women. Men are shut out from the women's decisions regarding the children that they both created. Women excuse themselves from any accountability, even though their decision affects two people. Good news for the irresponsible and callous men, who will refuse responsibility for their children (aside from state-mandated financial responsibility). Bad news for men who want children, whose fatherhood is at the mercy of a whim.

Speaking of deciding the role of parenthood, here's the second part of the quote again: "no baby receives its full birthright unless it is born gleefully wanted by its parents."

'Receives its full birthright'? Does this mean that the child isn't going to be completely happy when it's born, or that it won't really be a human person? Either way, if you could ask the baby, I'm sure it would prefer to be born and thus have the possibility of finding happiness!

"Gleefully wanted by its parents"- Both parents? If one of them doesn't want it, should they make the other one give in and agree to an abortion? He also speaks of it being wanted at birth; did he advocate partial-birth abortion and late-term abortions, as many Planned Parenthood clinics performed?

Guttmacher's "full birthright", whatever he means, the context spells it out: If both parents didn't want the baby, it's not a real person with rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Rights that our Constitution said were both "endowed by our Creator" and "inalienable", so foundationally, America's principles uphold the human right to life.