In Honor of the 41st Anniversary of Roe v. Wade: My Modest Proposal

A Modest Proposal:

A plan to rid the world of superfluous arguments such as whether or not women should be allowed to control when and if they procreate

It is lamentable that, in such an enlightened age as this, the issue of who controls a woman’s decisions regarding her body is still in question. Nearly a century has passed since the female sex was granted the right to vote. Fascinatingly, women even hold office now, and we very nearly experienced either our first female vice president or our first female president. Both scenarios were happily avoided, but that such a thing was remotely possible shows just how far we have come toward the end of fighting with women over their place in society.

Yet, the battle does rage on. The war has yet to end. The largest point of contention upon which conservatives refuse to budge is that of a woman’s ability to decide whether or not she will become pregnant and what she will do in the event that such a thing occurs. Various laws have been established to either protect or revoke the rights of women to make these decisions, and they have been subsequently upheld or rejected by the ruling courts with little cohesion. Although the 1973 Supreme Court case Roe v. Wade established that the government could not institute an outright ban on abortion, it left a great deal of room for states—particularly those of a reddish hue—to make the practice difficult for unenthusiastic mothers-to-be.

The problem, of course, is not that abortions and birth control are not as widely available as they should be. The real issue is that women believe they should be given the full latitude to make these decisions for themselves. In order to correct this egregious error, I propose this simple, effective and efficient plan. To alleviate this female notion of rights to her own body, the government must assume full control of the female body. The state must regulate where the female will live and work, what she will eat, and with whom she will reproduce if she is given such an option. Clearly, both the government and the opponents of women’s rights to autonomy over their bodies are in the correct state of mind on this matter. Women simply cannot be allowed to decide anything for themselves any longer. Ergo, women shall become wards of the state placed in the custody of conservative groups who oppose abortion and birth control.

Of course, this will seem like a massive project at first glance, but I did not exaggerate when saying the plan was simple and efficient. The state is ill-equipped to handle the state wards they already possess, i.e. children in foster care. That is why the conservative groups are so important in this plan, so that the state will not be economically overburdened by an influx of new wards. These groups are often composed of elderly white gentlefolk of means who have only the best interests of others at heart. They are more than happy to donate any amount of their wealth to the betterment of humanity so long as it is by their terms, which often includes that the recipient of such charity accept Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ into their hearts as newborn babes of the one true religion. Such selfless and undemanding charity is to be highly prized in any society. Here such a gesture is instrumental to the plan of retraining the female collective to understand that as the mothers of our future generations, they cannot be allowed to decide whether or not they procreate. Someone of much more wisdom, such as the local parish, must be allowed to make these important decisions for them.

Critics may ask why it is necessary to strip all autonomy from the women of our nation in order to achieve this goal of continuing the species. I will use the example of rehabilitation camps for troubled teenagers, a type of charitable program popular with the groups who will most aid the economic model of my plan. These programs submerse the teen in various modes of therapy in order to reconstruct the undesirable parts of his or her personality in order to create the model child. Such therapy would be ineffective if the parent were around to interfere. It is their ineptitude which landed the teen in such a spot in the beginning. In this simile, women are both the teenager and the parent. In order to strip away and reorganize the undesirable behavior (making bad decisions regarding procreation) women must be separated from their “parental self” or the therapy will not have the desired effects and liberals could end up claiming that the plan did not work.

Other critics may say that perhaps it is time we allow women full autonomy over their minds and bodies instead of the partial control they now possess. This is preposterous. Why would we allow women to decide for themselves whether or not they are ready to have a child? Why give them the option of deciding anything remotely important about their lives like who to love and when or if to procreate with them? If we allow such things we may as well allow them to vote. Ah, yes, that has already happened. Of course, as part of my plan, that too must be done away with.


Opinions, Thoughts, and Questions belong below!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s