As if someone taking control of a woman’s body via rape isn’t bad enough, he may be able to sue her if said rape ends up in a pregnancy with his child that she chooses to abort, according to a bill recently passed by Arizona Republican Trent Franks.
Formerly the Susan B. Anthony and Frederick Douglass Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act, PreNDA slips in a section that actually protects the sexual assailant instead of the victim; it essentially states that he would hold the power to sue the woman in the case that she aborts a child that is his own. While the bill states that this is only if the father of the child is not guilty of a crime that lead to the rape, it is statistically proven that sexual assault is a very underreported crime, and thus many fathers in this case would be excused from that part of the law.

I find this to not just be unnecessary, but quite sexist, unfair, and potentially dangerous. Someone who sexually assaults another person should not have a say in any of the next steps that the woman chooses to take post-rape. It brings up issues of privacy, the woman’s right to her own body, and the future safety of the child. The law also states that the woman’s parents would have a say in the matter if she is not of legal age, which also does not completely sit right with me, since again it allows other people to control a woman’s body. If they do not have to give permission for her to have sex, they should not be allowed to have involvement in the results; as for the rapist, if he does not have her consent to have sex, he should not have those rights either.

This is especially scary to think about for college-age women who have plans for their futures that did not include a child—especially one that was a result from an incident that was against their will.

Rick Santorum recently stated that abortion should be uniformly illegal, even in cases of rape or incest. He even went as far to suggest that physicians who provide abortions to such victims should be criminally charged as well.

Santorum is a right-wing candidate in the GOP presidential field who repeatedly expresses his extreme anti-choice position, which would fully eliminate a woman’s right to choice, even in instances when she did not choose to have sex.  He insists that his position is not a matter of religious values, and that all sexual assault survivors should accept their horribly created pregnancy because it is still a gift from God. Survivors should just make the best out of a bad situation, which is a not too dissimilar way of saying, “Just relax and enjoy it.”

Here is what he said word-for-word:

“Well, you can make the argument that if she doesn’t have this baby, if she kills her child, that that, too, could ruin her life. And this is not an easy choice. I understand that. As horrible as the way that that son or daughter and son was created, it still is her child. And whether she has that child or doesn’t, it will always be her child. And she will always know that. And so to embrace her and to love her and to support her and get her through this very difficult time, I’ve always, you know, I believe and I think the right approach is to accept this horribly created — in the sense of rape — but nevertheless a gift in a very broken way, the gift of human life, and accept what God has given to you. As you know, we have to, in lots of different aspects of our life. We have horrible things happen. I can’t think of anything more horrible. But, nevertheless, we have to make the best out of a bad situation.”

Santorum seems to have confused his definition of “choice.” He thinks he can choose to tell women that a baby created through rape is a joyous gift, when it is up to her to make that decision. This isn’t just a decision to get a haircut or a new pair of shoes, it’s committing to a child for the rest of your life, knowing you did not willingly want to convince him or her. Even though it is illegal for a man to force himself upon women, he wants the women to be the unwilling incubator of her rapist’s offspring, regardless of what it does to her mental or physical well-being.  If he gets his way, any women of child-bearing age could, presumably, be forced by any man to breed his child, all while being cheerful and grateful.

He thinks that he has the right to tell women to share his religious beliefs, even if those beliefs limit her right to make her own decisions. Rape and sexual assault causes enduring emotional and physical trauma, often leaving women feeling robbed of any control over her own body and welfare. If she is not able to choose to abort her baby, this will only further her feelings of being “out-of-control,” causing further trauma. Santorum does not understand the complex symptoms that rape and sexual assault survivor’s experience, but still feels the need to strip women survivors of their basic rights. It should be a woman’s choice to abort or keep a child, regardless of how it was created. It is not the government’s choice, and it is certainly not Rick Santorum’s choice.