Can eugenics for a patriotic fatherland be far behind? Shades of Hitler's new world order ala Bush.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I got my first period when I was ten. I suppose I should have been planning for a baby then and taking my folic acid? What's next with these people? Do they honestly think my biggest goal in life is to pump out baby after baby? That I should stay healthy because I might get pregnant and not because I should be healthy for myself really shows what they think about women in general.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Go to the 'More on the subject' linkand look at the other provisions of the report before you get all het up.

Some people on AlterNet, it seems, just like to provoke. Subject notwithstanding, the degree of slant on this little screed is reminiscent of the worst, most fact-free right-wing spin machine.

Baseless war dances like this one do a lot to encourage anti-feminist feeling, and do not help, but contribute to the denigration of women.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

divide and rule,
thass the name o' the overclass game

same as it ever was.....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

In claiming that this is to 'designate' womens roles as incubators, you seem to be missing the point that this recognizes womens roles in childbirth. How does this impact anyone else than a woman who doesnt know she is pregnant? If you are planning to get pregnant, these guidelines are already being followed, as the article states. This costs nobody anything. You are not being forced to be concerned about your health. However, if you are, these guidelines are meant to help a woman make a choice by having information.

The organisations involved arent exactly what I would call evil; "the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the March of Dimes, Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center, the National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention's Division of Reproductive Health and the National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities."

To me, and yes I am a man, this seems like a rational approach to try to decrease the infant mortality problem that has developed in the United States. In no way does it denegrate women to the status of incubators, in fact I believe it does quite the opposite. It is meant to try to stop the WOMEN who think of themselves as incubators from damaging a fetus they may(or may not) carry to full term. Whether you want to believe it or not, there are women who will not know they are pregnant. This is who this is aimed at reaching. It is sad, but in this world there are people who dont care about anything other than themselves.

Shockingly, there are similar recomendations for male reproductive health, and you chose to omit these from your article. After all, that would have been the balanced and rational approach. You wouildnt be able to use the 'women are objects' line of thought that you try so hard to find in every single article, no matter how non-existant it is. Read the following site from Cornell University to see the horrific approach that men should take in order to look after their sexual health.

If you so hate the perception in your own mind that you are an incubator, feel free to have your reproductive organs surgically removed. Im not being sarcastic. There are both men and women who have that procedure done because they have made the concious choice to not have children.

This isnt a law that was passed, these are recommendations. For now, you have complete and total control over your body and the decisions you make. You are free to make decisions that harm as well as help. Dont make it political.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Well, Pre-pregnant is a bad word choice. However, these kind of recommendations are key in order to avoid some pretty awful birth defects, some of which occur before you know you are pregnant. If you've ever taken care of severely disabled kids, you'd hope that women followed a good diet all the time. If you're fertile, or even just a human being, these are all good suggestions.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

And that is exactly why the government fears fertility rates/ population declining. Wake up.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Basically, that since a large number of pregnancies are unplanned and undetected, and the greatest risk for birth defects is during organogenesis (organ formation) at 4-8 weeks (when a woman can be totally unsure she is pregnant), it makes sense to feed everyone folic acid to prevent nasty birth defects like spina bifida (where the baby's _spinal cord_ winds up _outside its body_ and it can be paralyzed for life). It's the same reason when you take Accutane or other teratogenic (birth-defect-causing) drugs, they have to make sure you're not pregnant. I don't know if they're still doing this, but back when a friend of mine took Accutane it was in little individual blister packs with a silhouette of a pregnant women and a red cross-out sign over it on them.

Not that Bush and Co. aren't doing creepy things. Their attempt to overturn Roe V. Wade and prohibit contraception speaks to their 1950s-era aims. But this is actually pretty standard medical advice.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

As a woman that has bared her children and does not plan to bare anymore, I appreciate that someone is talking about this. I was shocked and offended when I read about this. I agree that women who wish to bare children be educated on how what they put into their bodies affects their babies. But I take offence to the fact that anyone of an age, and ability, to bare children are being told how to take care of themselves with no commentary on what a woman wants to do with her own body. I wouldn't have been so offended if there was some mention of IF a woman is expressing that she may in the future wish to have children, but, at least the article I read in the Washington Post, made no mention of this. Just that if you have the ABILITY to have children.

When in the last couple of years did Roe v. Wade get over turned? There are groups in the US that are trying to do this right now, but it hasn't happened yet. When in the last couple of years did birth control get banned? Oh, I get it... that's what they are going after next. That's why we need to prepare ourselves, because you know they aren't going to help with medical costs, child care, special education or any of the many other things needed when you have a child with birth defects or mental retardation if you didn't take care of yourself. I guess the next step is to define what penalties or sentances can be given to a woman who didn't take care of herself and her baby was born "un-healthy". (I could go on a whole other rant about how "disabled" people are shunned by certain populations in this country, but another time)

When are we going to stand up and say to the powers that be we are not interested in you controling us as in the past? When are we going to get mad enough about the government trying to take back control over our uterus (uteri?)?

Support the efforts of the brave women in (ah, complete memory loss, is it north or south?) Dakota fighting to over turn the draconnian laws banning abortion. Support the efforts of drug companies that are willing (even though it's big pharma, at least we can benefit) to manufacture morning after pills. And I have a feeling in the not too distant future we are going to need to show our support for the pill again also.

Many things about the way our country is going right now trouble me, but this is the worst. THIS IS MY BODY AND I DON'T NEED ANYONE TELLING ME WHAT I SHOULD DO!!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Creepy, yes. But this can back-fire on those who wish to control. My three male off-spring are more likely to join an anti-war rally than any branch of the military. They are skeptical and analytical of whatever the government propounds. Maybe a lot has to do with early and frequent "innoculations" of reality to counteract the propaganda. In any case we mothers can have some influence on the hearts and minds of the next generation.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

All this started (or got a big push) from the war on drugs. Once Americans allowed the government to tell them what they could do with their own bodies, all else followed.

Let us not forget the government's crusade to jail pregnant women who used drugs.

And then more generally, we have such atrocities as drug testing. The fact that millions of Americans allow these government intrusions into their bodies ought to be disturbing.

One thing I wonder is why the left has not protested drug testing more (aside from the ACLU, it's not much of an issue).

Thoughts?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]