I wrote this bit of a slacker-post-holiday Don’t Rush Me column, last Tuesday. Then I erased it (or, more honestly, back spaced over the already typed letters) and decided a different tact.
The tact I chose is questioning and then going off the reservation to pose a fantastical situation that will never come to pass to get my point across. (Sort of like what science fiction writers, do.)
* * *
This column was rewritten after 50% of the political types across these fruited plains weighed in immediately, and for a straight 24 hours after the Supreme Court ruling about workplace-provided contraception for women. In short, the high court said, ‘Businesses do not have to pay for it.?
The president of these United States and those standing with him, retorted, ‘This will hurt a women’s right to choose!?
To which I counter, ‘No. No it doesn’t mean a woman cannot choose. Does not a woman still have the right to use or not use a contraceptive? Does she or does she not have the right to have sex or not have sex? And, With whomever she chooses??
I believe a woman’s body is her body to do with it what she chooses.
Her body is her responsibility. It is not her employer’s responsibility to choose for her the path she treads.
Question: Does anybody, man or woman want their employer (or the government) involved with their sex life?
* * *
And, for the record . . . my employer does not provide me with contraceptive, virility, libido, or any other kind of ‘enhancing? drug or devices. If I choose to use them, I gotta? walk into the pharmacy — in full view and hearing of the entire world — to make my order and pay for the stuff. Myself. My money. Cash. No credit cards. (Those could be tracked.)
* * *
Now that I think about it, it ain’t fair the government says employers gotta buy contraceptives for women, but not for men. Hey, what’s up wit? dat?
* * *
Come to think about it some more, I think if I were the Imperial Ruler of The Universe For a Day, I would amend the United States Constitution to only have the first ten amendments, aka The Bill of Rights. And, in my own ‘special? naive and overly simplistic way, have somebody smart put it there something like, ‘all people are created equal.?
And, then have an asterisk next to the word ‘people.?
And, then have the asterisk note something like, ‘All people means everybody.?
And, then maybe a double asterisk to note something like, ‘And, just like each snow flakes is beautifully different, each person is special in their own unique way.? (That should get everybody on board with my wholesale changes.)
* * *
And, then if I were the I R TU FaR (Imperial Ruler of The Universe For a Day), I would put in a clause so my rulership would come into play again on election days. On every election day for five years I would decree every voting American must not vote for their favorite partisan, but the best person of another party.
I think that might be fun.
Oh, and since I’m on a roll, and the I R TU FaR, and I started with talking about a recent Supreme Court ruling . . . I think to help solve the financial malady caused by our leaders? inability to govern with wisdom and any kind of financial restraint, we tax any and all political advertising and or marketing efforts.
Since the Supreme Dudes and Dudets of the High Court are opening the floodgates of political spending (on First Amendment grounds), we the people, might as well benefit from it, because we are not now. Now, we only get 20 million robo calls, angry, mean, nasty, cynic-producing advertisements, mind-numbing, nonlogical (and sometimes outright false) social web postings and ‘get out the vote? groups who harass us in person to keep voting to keep da bums in office.
Therefore, be it known throughout the land, I, as the great and powerful I R TU FaR, hereby say, ‘Tax it. Heavily.?
It’ll be something members of Congress know lots about: creating new ‘revenue? sources.
* * *
Okay, okay. Let’s tone it back a little. Bring in the reins, so to speak, to something more realistic.
I think if I was ever elected as a state representative, I would put my energies in NOT passing new laws like, ‘everybody MUST where a bicycle helmet.? Instead I would work on weeding out all the old, stupid and redundant laws.
I think we have too many laws.
I think state law makers (and their federal counterparts) spend too much time making new laws to look good to their supporters. (And, when I say supporters I don’t mean voters, I mean financial backers.)
Your thoughts? E-mail them bad whamojammas to Don@ShermanPublications.org