It's time for the big weapon: ladies, stop having sex (with men).

Do not read this if moral or political discussions bother you.

Too radical, you say? How can you live without sex, you ask? Even though we were warned (and bless the person or persons who leaked the information weeks ago), it is still a shock to hear Roe v. Wade was overturned by a conservative Supreme Court who plans to rule the country according to their religious beliefs and their moral standards. To hell with everyone else. Literally, in their opinion. I can’t resist giving myself the opportunity for a bit of a rant. Don’t continue reading if this will offend you.

Even though President Joe Biden encouraged us all to vote as a solution to this, the remedy has to go even further than that. We voted and look what happened anyway. I’m all for voting and if you’re not exercising this right, please start doing it right away. Voting is critical, especially right now.

However, five of the people making these decisions were appointed by presidents who were not elected by the majority of the people of this country. They were elected by the electoral college system that does not always represent the majority wishes of the people. Moving on.

Over 75% of Americans did not want Roe v. Wade overturned; yet, here we are. We now live under minority rule. If you’re okay with that, don’t bother reading any further. If you’re okay with women being turned into “fragile vessels” for men and baby-making machines, don’t bother reading any further.

I’m referring to the school in North Carolina that made girls wear skirts but not boys. The case went to court. The article in The Washington Post is here. Here’s the short version. A Charter Day school required young girls to wear dresses while little boys had to wear pants. This meant the girls weren’t able to play the same games as the boys since they had to be aware of the modesty required by wearing a dress. Parents sued and won.

“The dress code at Charter Day School in Leland, N.C., no longer can be enforced, Senior Circuit Judge Barbara Milano Keenan wrote in a majority opinion. The school founder’s claim that the uniform rules promote chivalry “based on the view that girls are ‘fragile vessels’ deserving of ‘gentle’ treatment by boys” was determined to be discriminating against female students in the 10-to-6 ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit.”

Anyway, let’s get back to sex. All children deserve to be wanted and loved by their parents. To that end, I propose that unless a woman wants to get pregnant, she stop having sex with men. The morality police have long stated that the best way for women to avoid pregnancy is to stop having sex. Since the morality police now want to make sure pregnant women stay that way, it only makes sense for women to stop having sex so there is no way they can get pregnant, thus no need for an abortion. Problem solved.

And when a woman does decide to have sex with a man - whether or not she’s using a contraceptive because we know how great those always work - she has him sign a legal document stating he agrees to be responsible for any child who might be created during the sexual act with him. Not very romantic, I know, but maybe this could be done over dinner before things get too heated.

I propose that when a woman does become pregnant, a DNA test is done so she can prove who the father is. That father must then care for this child for the next 18 years. This would be enforced with mandatory jail time should he refuse to meet his responsibilities to the child. The state, since it did not allow the woman the freedom to not carry this fetus to term has to provide for her health care, that of the baby, and provide paid maternity leave and child care for four to five years when the child is old enough to go to school. After that, the State should pay the woman a monthly stipend to assist in raising this child she did not want but was forced to produce until the child is an adult and can care for itself.

This is a form of civil protest that might help wake up a few folks who are asleep. It is the ultimate way for women to take back control of their own bodies. I suspect if enough women refuse to have sex, it wouldn't be long before we’d see some changes to some laws. Why should women continue to carry the responsibility for unwanted pregnancies? What shouldn’t men step up to the plate and do their part?

I am not naive enough to think any of this will happen. What does seem to be on the agenda next is denying people the right to contraception (see the trend here?), the right for gay people to marry, and whatever other outlandish “Christian” moral standards the far right folks want to impose on the rest of us.

Here's an opinion piece by Alexandra Petri that sums this up quite nicely.

(As an aside, do you realize that three of the Supreme Court justices are Catholic? Are you old enough to remember how afraid people were that John Kennedy would impose his Catholic faith on the country if he became president? He didn’t do that, but we can only wonder how much of this recent decision is based on Catholic teachings rather than on the laws of our land.)

Of course, we know all of this is a backlash to some of the freedoms granted during the time Barack Obama was president. (How dare we elect a black man to the highest office in the land! Now we must pay the price!) We also know most of this is due to the huge energetic shifts happening on the planet and that ultimately, as Julian of Norwich famously said, “all is well and will be well.” In the meantime, as residents of this planet, we must do our parts to ensure that all born persons can pursue our rights to “…life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” All means all.

Living in grace and ease,

Krysta