Published on June 28th, 2012 | by Hannah Riley
Image © [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="566"] © American Life League[/caption]   Two Democrats, Rep. Lisa Brown and Rep. Barb Byrum, were banned from speaking in the Michigan House of Representatives after causing controversy during debates surrounding  an abortion bill. The legislation under discussion was attempting to make it harder for women in the state to have abortions; making it illegal to have one after 20 weeks into the pregnancy. Critics argue the proposed content is one of the most hard line recent attempts at passing anti-abortion legislation in the US. The state’s house, which is dominated by Republican males, heard the propositions of the two women. However, they were so offended that they found it suitable to ban them from speaking on an educational bill. Rep. Lisa Brown spoke of her Jewish faith and stated that not only is it acceptable for women in her religious circle to have an abortion if the woman’s life is in danger, it is mandatory; regardless of the stage of the pregnancy. She pointed out that the Jewish community does not force their religious beliefs upon others, so why should they have laws imposed on them that run contrary to their beliefs? She concluded with: “Mr speaker, I’m flattered that you’re all so interested in my vagina but ‘no’ means ‘no’.” It was this comment that caused the controversy and lead to her being banned. Republican representative, Mike Calton, argued that: “What she said was offensive. It was so offensive I don’t even want to say it in front of women. I would not say that in mixed company.” The irony being that Calton does not have a vagina, unlike all the women who he’d refuse to repeat the sentence in front of. If the male republicans in this house cannot deal with the word, how can they make laws that affect all of the vaginas in Michigan state? This point was outlined by Lisa Brown herself. I find it quite astounding that in a liberal country in the 21^st century, using a correct medical term for a body part during a floor debate amongst a house of mature, professional, well respected adults can be seen as being so preposterous. It’s unacceptable that such a bill was passed with 70 votes to 39, as a result of politicians who appear to miss the point of what the legislation is doing. If these male politicians are narrow minded enough to find vaginas so offensive, how can they even begin to understand what they are voting on? Furthermore, if the comments made violated the decorum of the house, as Jim Stamas ruled, then doesn’t the bill as a whole? It’s a sensitive subject; sensitive speeches from politicians attempting to make a stand for those whom they represent should not only be acceptable; they should be expected. The fact that the house as a whole believe that they can go about debating abortions and avoid the talk of female genitals is baffling. It’s as though women as human beings are ignored and are instead, for the sake of the bill, simply objects. Meanwhile, it’s argued by those in favour of the legislation that they are saving lives. The hypocrisy of this argument is almost laughable; what about the women themselves, their state of mind, their physical well being, and their quality of life? Banning the two representatives is an act of misogyny in American politics. Rep. Barb Byrum and Rep. Lisa Brown were voted into the house by the public of Michigan, they are entirely legitimate and so their voices deserve to be heard. Instead, both of them were oppressed and humiliated by the dominating male Republicans. Power was abused to stop the women being forward and it most probably sent a message to any other female politicians in the house who shared their views. More to the point, there ARE supporters, watch the footage of Lisa Brown and you’ll hear cheering at the end of her speech. Furthermore, the idea that the male Republicans want to assert their authority for their own benefits is supported by Rep. Barb Byrum’s ban in the house. She stated that she would support the bill if it included her proposed amendment- that men could only have a vasectomy if they could prove their life was at risk without the operation taking place. Byrum, was enforcing the point that the men were imposing laws on women and restricting their freedoms. In response, she did the same. She was subsequently banned from speaking in the house on the next debate. The hypocrisy continues; men can force laws upon women but if women do the same, there’s up roar. The underdog was attacked to prevent them gaining power. The two women, whose points were relevant, rather than offensive, were illegitimately banned. The public were not consulted. How democratic is that?All of this suggests that women don’t have much of a chance from stopping this step backward becoming reality. The land of the free is a paradox.