kauricat (kauricat) wrote,
kauricat
kauricat

  • Mood:

You know those women dressed as suffragettes in the recent march? THEY ARE RIGHT.

You know, I was kind of joking for a while that the women's right to vote might be repealed, that we might end up somewhere like the society in "Native Tongue." Then I found out that my own Secretary of State had pushed through a bill that purports to be about proving your identity when voting, but which actually has a provision within it that forces new voters to present not just an ID like a driver's license, but to provide a birth certificate. And those who have a different last name now than the name they were born with (married women, mostly), will have to go to their election office and fill out an affidavit or something. Just because of a name change; because she got married and decided to take her husband's last name.

So that was kind of shocking, because it seemed like a provision that would primarily affect women and their ability to vote. But then with it only applying to brand new Kansas voters, it should affect relatively few women's registrations. I was relatively mollified when I learned that not EVERYONE in Kansas who had changed their name would need to reregister under the new standards.

Finding out that a couple of Kansas women (outspoken women) had checked on their voter registration and found that their registrations had been suspended (Why? Unknown at this time) or had expired kind of threw me. Usually "expiration" is due to not responding to a "change of address" query or due to not voting in a few elections. The women in question might meet those qualifications, but they seem pretty politically active, so I am still suspicious.

And now, this. I am currently watching the video of his sermon (which is linked at the end of that article), and so far everything they wrote that he said, he did actually say. I am more than stunned. Here is a man who has enough of a following that he has been on Fox News, and whatever you might think of that network, they do pull in some pretty significant people. And he's saying women should not be able to vote. That it was a mistake.

You know, years ago (it was 2005) when Cherie Priest wrote her famous post against men who would deny women greater access to birth control in the name of reducing unwanted pregnancies, I thought "What?" I will admit, at that time I thought she was a little overboard with her language. I thought her post was funny, and had truth in it, but that it just wasn't that big a deal.

And now look where we are.

So I am unwilling to just take men like Jesse Lee Peterson with a grain of salt, and assume they are outliers or anything of that sort. This is how it starts. If one person gets brave enough to say it, pretty soon other people who secretly believe it will feel safe to come forward and try to make it a reality.

I realize that I am seeing these things because I am looking for them, but for God's sake, A MAN STOOD UP IN FRONT OF PEOPLE, ON CAMERA, AND SAID WOMEN SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN GIVEN THE VOTE, AND HE DID THIS IN 2012.

To quote a sign from our Topeka rally, "If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention."
Tags: dw, war
Subscribe

  • Something Fun

    Most people are semi-familiar with the children's book, "Goodnight, Moon." I did not know until just now that someone had created, " Goodnight,…

  • Antikythera out of Lego

    I'm not sure this is right - wasn't one of the gears elliptical to correct for Earth's orbit?

  • Refusing the bottle

    So we were in the hospital last week. Stormy had an ear infection, which we were treating, but he wasn't eating well. Last weekend he nursed less,…

  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 0 comments