ABoT Vote NowABoT Vote Here Button
  TULSA METRO'S ONLY INDEPENDENT NEWSWEEKLY
UTW Reader Comments  |  Has Something Made You Mad? Tell Us!    
Home » News » City, State, County, Education
  RSS XML


Leaping Over Women's Rights

Leap Year 2012 -- and SB 1433 -- pulls punches on women's reproductive health rights in Oklahoma


BY JENNIE LLOYD

Technically, Leap Year is an every-four-years calendar correction of the Earth's 365.242-day orbit. But over the centuries, Leap Year and especially Leap Day -- Feb. 29 -- has carried with it a mystical baggage of myths, blessings, curses and traditions.

An Irish Leap Day custom, which came to roost in American tradition as Sadie Hawkins Day, flipped dating and mating rituals on their heads for that one special day. On Leap Day, an Irish woman could ask a man for his hand in marriage -- and he had to say yes. If he said no anyway, he was required to pay restitution to the woman in gowns or cash.

To boost revenues every four years, Tulsa could consider making this a splashy downtown 5K run, with women chasing T-Town's most eligible bachelors from Cain's Ballroom to Boston Avenue United Methodist Church. Now that's a fun run event we might actually show up to watch.

Once our lovely ladies chase down a few special fellas, they'll have to pay close attention to what birth control she chooses. With the passage of a controversial new bill, SB 1433, Leap Year 2012 has seen the biggest uproar over women's rights since the swingin' '60s.

Personhood for Okie Zygotes

The Oklahoma Senate passed an amendment that defines personhood as beginning at the moment of conception. Governor Mary Fallin, who just last year signed seven bills into law that restrict women's reproductive rights, will likely sign the amendment into law.

The personhood amendment will effectively outlaw abortion and many forms of birth control, up to and including emergency contraception like Plan B. The Republican majority voted 34 to eight to approve the bill, which gives unborn cells "the rights, privileges, and immunities available to other persons, citizens, and residents" beginning at the very moment of conception "until birth at every stage of biological development."

This election year wedge issue is being pushed onto states' agendas by Personhood USA, an anti-abortion group in Arvada, Colo. The organization has started up petition drives for personhood amendments in many states.



The "personhood" movement is part of a tactical strategy to overturn Roe v. Wade. The ideology behind the personhood amendment seems uniquely suited to Oklahoma, where even our waving wheat votes Republican. Republican state Sen. Brian Bingman said, "Oklahoma is a conservative pro-life state" and "this bill is one of many Senate Republicans have advanced which affirms the right to life and I am proud to support it."

On Jezebel, one of the top blogs on women's issues, they wrote, "It seems only appropriate that [near Valentine's Day] Republican legislators across the country would show how much they love women by passing laws requiring them to get vaginal probes before having abortions, or stating an official preference for the dumb whims of a developing fetus over the conscious will of the woman carrying the fetus."

But Tulsa ladies support the rights of fertilized eggs, embryos, zygotes and fetuses. State Farm sales manager Anna Smith explained her thoughts: "A baby is a baby, one day developed or nine months developed... There are options, there is adoption, there are many other options."

T-Towners Embarrassed, Angry

Shane Hood, designer and owner of new Deco District shop HOOD Design, said the new personhood amendment "is embarrassing."

"If it is a person -- or if it's not -- the woman carrying it still has complete and absolute autonomy of her own body, including any person residing therein. And there is no law or principle that should override that," said Glenpool artist, writer and designer Marty Coleman.

Keeley Mancuso, who owns Nirvana Body & Soul, said she'd prefer Oklahoma legislators focus on more pressing social issues. "I wish [the Oklahoma legislature] would focus on unemployment, child abuse and other issues affecting the people already on the planet," Mancuso said.

The biggest point of contention in the "personhood" amendment comes back to religion. "This question always comes back to religious beliefs, which have no place in politics," said Clear Channel Radio morning show producer Brett Thompson.

With Oklahoma's overwhelmingly Christian population, the state's separation between church and state has become a very fine and tangled line at best.

Tulsa chef Amanda Simcoe, who creates lovely specialty cheeses at The Cheese Wench, is outraged because she thinks the Oklahoma Senate has overstepped its bounds with the personhood amendment. "We can sit and argue 'personhood' all day but we all know that the real issue here is abortion," she said.

"Don't like abortion? Don't get one. Are you really so arrogant to think that your personal beliefs are more important than anyone else's," Simcoe asked.

"This country was founded on the principle that religion and government should remain separate, and one should not interfere with the other, period," she said. Simcoe said her own mother was adopted, "so I am acutely aware that my very existence was made possible by the fact that an unplanned pregnancy resulted in adoption, not abortion," Simcoe said.

She believes "a fetus becomes a person when it is capable of surviving outside the womb. Until that point, while it may be a living organism, it is still just an extension of the mother, relying on her body to keep it alive. While it may temporarily play host to a developing human, it is still her body, and [no one] should have the ability to take away her freedom to treat it as such," she said.

Whether this amendment stands or is later struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court, Leap Year 2012 has already spun Oklahoma into a frenzy over women's rights. Leap Day may have been an Irish day of celebrating female empowerment, but Oklahoma would prefer to empower embryos over women any day.

Send all comments and feedback regarding City to jlloyd@urbantulsa.com



Share this article:
 
Google Bookmarks  digg  Del.icio.us  reddit  Yahoo My Web  Newsvine  MySpace 

COMMENTS
5 comments posted for this article
Bludawg Democrat
 2/25/2012 - 9:01am
   Protect mother earth by defeating this ridiculous bill.. While the author of this bill talks about unborn human cells, let us not forget the "born" human cells, also. All human cells must be destroyed to help reduce carbon emissions. Save the earth! Vote Democrat!
Report this comment
Byron
 2/23/2012 - 9:50pm
   >>>Obviously, they were exercising their RIGHTS at the expense of others rights!
   
   It's worth pointing out that anytime you exercise your rights by making a decision concerning a public resource, that action will, in some manner, be done "at the expense of others".
   
   It's not the "rights" that need to be the focus of discussion, it's the "relationships". As long as the discussion is focused on "control" and "legality" there will be no middle ground reached; those terms require selfishness as a focus and no one acting so selfishly will ever accomodate anyone else. There needs to be a better framework for discussion; a way to build a foundation that allows for a variety of options to realistically and practically be considered. Right now, that foundation does not exist.
Report this comment
Retiree
 2/23/2012 - 3:40pm
   Women should be upset! It's men making laws that effect women and do nothing to address the other participating person involved in the pregnancy.No laws have been passed or are on the agenda to punished the man for his role in all of this.The fertilized egg is not viable until it has attached itself in the uterian wall.Most contraceptives that are taken by women prevent this from occuring; thus,this type of law essentially outlaws birth control pills and surgical intervention in the case of ectopic pregancies. Many women take birth control medicine to regulate their menstrual cycle. I worked at a Catholic hospital and my stepdaughter could not get medicine the DOCTOR ORDERED to regulate her periods because the hospital felt they NEEDED to FORCED their beliefs on others.Obviously, they were exercising their RIGHTS at the expense of others rights!
Report this comment
Retiree
 2/23/2012 - 3:38pm
   Women should be upset! It's men making laws that effect women and do nothing to address the other participating person involved in the pregnancy.No laws have been passed or are on the agenda to punished the man for his role in all of this.The fertilized egg is not viable until it has attached itself in the uterian wall.Most contraceptives that are taken by women prevent this from occuring; thus,this type of law essentially outlaws birth control pills and surgical intervention in the case of ectopic pregancies. Many women take birth control medicine to regulate their menstrual cycle. I worked at a Catholic hospital and my stepdaughter could not get medicine the DOCTOR ORDERED to regulate her periods because the hospital felt they NEEDED to FORCED their beliefs on others.Obviously, they were exercising their RIGHTS at the expense of others rights!
Report this comment
Byron
 2/22/2012 - 9:53pm
   While I am not a supporter of this amendment as reflected in this article (although further research is warranted given how incredibly slanted this article is--was the editorial staff asleep or are they really this non-objective?), I think the bigger problem reflected here are the incredibly self-centered viewpoints of the people interviewed. Everything revolves around them; nothing and no one else counts.
   
   Shane Hood, is "embarrassed" by the amendment and then advocates allowing the killing of the child the woman carries whether "...it is a person...or not". It's not about a balanced perspective towards life; it's about one life being worth less because it is dependent on another.
   
   Amanda Simcoe states that the argument is really about abortion. But people are only upset about abortion because it ends a life--the majority of the time because of inconvenience, not any life-threatening issue. The argument is also about the value of that life, not just the woman's ability to make a decision. Her claim "...Are you really so arrogant to think that your personal beliefs are more important than anyone else's," could be applied to her own belief that she has the right to kill a child simply because it is dependent on her.
   
   She goes on with ""a fetus becomes a person when it is capable of surviving outside the womb" doesn't make a lot of sense when one looks at that idea in depth. Infants and small children are as dependent for survival on their parent(s) when they are born as when they are in the womb. The fact that they can survive outside of the womb even before their "due date" arrives is also completely ignored by her.
   
   Overall, this article is far too slanted to actually be more than a forum for women upset over the ammendment in question. While I recognize the need for the option for an abortion to remain legal (the simple fact is that there are tragic circumstances in life that require choosing one person to live and another to die), I am fully in support of not allowing abortion simply to avoid the inconvenience of children (or "abortion on demand"). The life or lives that women carry within them are valuable and that should be recognized legally.
Report this comment

Post a comment




MORE BY JENNIE LLOYD
Forty Years in Jail
Cuban artist Pantoja to show paintings in North American debut one year after seeking political asylum in Tulsa [May 16, 2012]
PlaniTulsa vs. INCOG: Round Two
Title match between two municipal mainstays ends in a draw [May 9, 2012]
Where Is He Now?
Mayor's former chief of staff moves onto the fast track with new project [May 2, 2012]

My Profile | My Settings

Subscriptions Available at $124/yr.

Please allow 4-6 weeks for processing. No refunds are issued. Back issues are available for $10/copy.

We accept Visa, M/C, checks and money orders. Call to charge by phone 918-592-5550. Enter your contact information in the form below and we will contact you.

If ordering by mail, make checks and money orders payable to Urban Tulsa Weekly. Send your payment along with your complete postal delivery address to Urban Tulsa Weekly, Attn: Samantha, PO Box 50499, Tulsa, OK 74150

Name:
Address:
Address2:
City:
State:
Zip Code:
Email:
Phone:
Comments:

 

Urban Tulsa Weekly
1924 E. 6th St.
Tulsa OK 74104
Phone: (918) 592-5550
Fax: (918) 592-5970
e-mail: Subscriptions

Powered by Gyrosite © Copyright 2013, Urban Tulsa Weekly   RSS