If you don't support our troops, let them shoot you...

You read that right. I saw it on a bumper sticker. The actual words were "If you cannot stand behind our troops, then stand in front of them". I just extrapolated the real meaning.
I was pretty dismayed, to say the least. There are a multitude of reasons why someone might choose to stand away from our troops, instead of behind them (or in front of them for that matter). For me, it is my Quaker convictions about peace. In real life--that is to say beyond the realm of the deeply-thought world of religious hypothetical events--a tragedy helped me see the fallout from violence. My neighbor died of a self-inflicted gun shot wound. It was a sad, cruel end. And the rest of us were left to pick up the pieces, as is often said. As someone who played a very minor role in his life, I was struck by the grief I experienced. I thought I would never recover. I was an acquaintance. What about his family? How much worse has it been for them?
What does this have to do with war? Nothing. But violence is violence--whether it is on behalf of the state or due to a fractured mental state. The result is the same--someone dies, and the rest of us are left to make sense of such a cruel end.
No, I cannot stand behind our troops. Yes, it's because I am a Quaker. But it's so much more than that. What about you? On what side are you standing?

Do you know why?

Why?
I have been asking this question for weeks now. Why are women's reproductive rights under siege? Our access to a safe, legal abortion is being threatened. More hurdles than ever are placed before a woman that is seeking an abortion—a medical procedure that we legally have a right to receive. Some politicians in Virginia—mostly men—want a law that requires a woman to have a vaginal ultrasound--from personal experience I can attest that this is very invasive--before she has an abortion. And I thought Republicans wanted the government out of our lives.
Why do so many want to roll back access to preventive healthcare for women? Legislative ideas put forth would deny many women access to affordable birth control--and just so everyone knows, birth control isn't always used to simply prevent pregnancy. There are a host of reproductive disorders that can be controlled with the use of hormone-based contraceptives. But really, what is the problem with a woman preventing pregnancy?

What motive is there to rip away all the gains we've made in healthcare, family planning, and even the work force (no birth control means a lot more pregnant, stay-at-home moms)? Who benefits from such draconian measures?