Trent Franks.
Posted by: Donna
By now I’m sure y’all are aware of his recent comment:
FRANK: In this country, we had slavery for God knows how long. And now we look back on it and we say “How brave were they? What was the matter with them? You know, I can’t believe, you know, four million slaves. This is incredible.” And we’re right, we’re right. We should look back on that with criticism. It is a crushing mark on America’s soul. And yet today, half of all black children are aborted. Half of all black children are aborted. Far more of the African-American community is being devastated by the policies of today than were being devastated by policies of slavery. And I think, What does it take to get us to wake up?
He was being interviewed by blogger Mike Stark on the topic of Rush Limbaugh mocking an uninsured woman using her dead sister’s dentures.
I’ve met Congressman Franks socially on two occasions. Both times in small groups where people were engaging in innocuous superficial chatter, as folks are wont to do in nonpartisan gatherings. Both times, Franks commandeered the conversation into a creepy harangue about abortion and made everyone visibly uncomfortable. Many, many other people have reported similar encounters with Franks.
Think Progress says to start watching the youtube at 6:20 but if you watch from the beginning you’ll see that you only have to get 1:04 minutes in before Trent segues into abortion. I think we can safely say that dude is obsessed with the topic. And this isn’t the first time he’s linked abortion with African American slavery and a genocide conspiracy.
Stark approached Franks with the intention of discussing Limbaugh and to bolster his case that “bipartisanship” is a pipe dream so I can’t criticize him for not challenging Franks on the merits of his bogus anti-choice conspiracy theory mongering. But I’ll do it: Black women do indeed have a higher abortion rate but it’s due to a significantly higher rate of unintended pregnancy in their community, due to less access to reliable birth control and medically accurate information. As I’ve noted numerous times on this blog, anti-choicers get free reign to bloviate about abortion but are rarely, if ever, asked probing questions about their true positions on contraception and sex ed by the MSM. Which is maddening, because anti-choicers have been at the forefront of blocking every program that has proven to reduce unintended pregnancies while advancing dangerous nonsense like abstinence-only sex “education” and crackpot conspiracy theories in the most vulnerable communities.
I googled several permutations of “Trent Franks” and “contraception” and “birth control”. Several links of Franks blathering about abortion and several links to his votes against family planning funding but no direct statements on birth control. My travels on Teh Interwebz led me to this awesome gem by GWU researchers Naomi Chan and June Carbone.
The legal fights over what forms of contraception are permissible, who has access and under what circumstances, are fundamentally about control of the socialization of the next generation. The much more divisive (and seemingly principled) issue of abortion receives the lion’s share of publicity and anger, but contraception has been, and remains, a hidden casualty of the conflict. It is also an issue ripe for reframing – and for making the subterranean assaults on women’s interests visible. While feminist theory can be separated into various strands – liberal, radical, dominance, reconstructive – and various waves – first, second, and third — virtually all feminists would place women’s ability to control our own bodies as a central tenet. Moreover, if there is any issue that should be able to rally consensus support with the general public, it should be the principle of reducing unwanted pregnancies. We believe that both abstinence and abortion are distracters in this effort; the critical issue is the availability and
affordability of birth control. Over 95% of sexually active Americans will use contraception at some point in their lives, over 90% of Americans will engage in non-marital sexuality, and over 60% agree that sexuality outside of marriage is permissible. Moreover, unlike abortion, there is little objection to contraception per se, with even 75% of Catholics agreeing that the Church’s position on birth control should be changed.Yet, amidst controversies over abstinence education in public schools and the continuing abortion wars, the class-based nature of contraceptive access has become invisible. We explore the hypocrisy of a system that, whatever its values, makes reproductive autonomy readily available for the affluent and the sophisticated and increasingly beyond the reach of the most vulnerable. We also consider the potential of contraception as a reframing device, capable of exposing the hypocrisy of family values advocates whose policies disproportionately hurt the most vulnerable. This paper traces the history of attempts to restrict contraception, the legal events securing widespread access to contraception and their importance to a generation of college-aged women, the short-lived nature of the consensus that produced them, and the potential of the issue to serve as a rallying point for a revitalized feminism.
I love it when people smarter than I am put my discombobulated thoughts into words. For a very long time, I’ve been convinced that arguing with conservatives about abortion is a waste of time because the more important issue is contraception, and, more to the point, who is allowed to have sex. If anti-choicers really cared about stopping abortion, then they’d be calling for condom dispensers on every corner and female-controlled birth control on demand. But instead they prescribe abstinence for all unmarried people, regardless of age. I’m 41, I’ve never married. I’m supposed to be abstaining? Really?
Somehow, a marriage certificate is a magical prophylactic.
The only truly “safe sex” out there is sex between married couples that are faithful to each other for life. If you’re single, then the only safe sex is no sex. Abstinence is not engaging in sexual contact (vaginal, anal, oral, or any other genital contact whatsoever) with another person. If you are not practicing abstinence while single then you are making yourself vulnerable to potentially deadly diseases and pregnancy. Condoms simply cannot provide complete protection against STIs or unplanned pregnancies. Having anything other than married, monogamous sex—even with a condom—is like playing Russian roulette with your life. You are choosing to put a bullet in the gun and hold it up to your head. All you can hope for is that it doesn’t fire, this time. But there are no guarantees.
Choosing to save sex for the special person you will end up spending the rest of your life with is the only way to truly enjoy the gift of sex without the risk of getting a life-threatening STI or causing an unplanned pregnancy. This will also increase your likelihood of having a healthy relationship. This is your life we are talking about here. We want you to make it a good one.
If you don’t take control of and responsibility for your sexual life, who will?
Because no one was ever infected by a spouse who had prior sexual experience or who cheated during the marriage. And no one ever got pregnant without wanting to with someone with whom they were married. Nope, no way, that never happens.
Really? Trent, what say you on all of this?
3 Comments
Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI
Leave a comment
If you don’t take control of and responsibility for your sexual life, who will?
After that diatribe, it’s pretty obvious who wants to.
It’s alway amazed me that white male Goopers like Beans & Franks
seem to feel they know what’s best for womens reproductive rights (especially minority women). I’ve not figured out if it’s arrogance, ignorance or taking advantage. Maybe all three.
“Well boys will be boys, but you gals need to take care of things.”
Yes, my big button.
(appleblossom, I have no ears at work, just showing off the tribe. Fire away!)
Told you it was my big button issue.
I always view it as a “right to be secure in my own damn person without the government getting involved” but that is me.