Harriet Miers has been asked countless questions about her stance on a variety of topics, however the topic most covered has been her belief or disbelief in a woman's right to choose. We know that Harriet Miers is not married, I do not believe she has ever been married. Secondly, she has no children. Thirdly, she has a crush on a married man, President George W. Bush. (Can you picture her in a cat fight with Laura?) In sum, her sex life isn't looking to peachy. I don't think that she has what it takes to get good old Dubbya to do her in the oval office, Clinton style. (I apologize if this is too raunchy).
So, shouldn't the real question be: Has Harriet Miers ever had sex? Perhaps if she had a relationship, had a sex life, she would understand that birth control is not perfect and neither are human beings. Some women get pregnant easier than others, and sometimes you just slip up. More importantly, some women cannot use the pill because of blood disorders or because they smoke, and the risk of clotting is too serious. These women often use other forms of birth control, but forms that are not as effective as the pill. There is always a chance of pregnancy, no matter what.
So, back to my point about Harriet not having sex. If she has never had a sex life, never had a steady relationship, never taken the pill, never taken a pregnancy test while crossing her fingers that the result is negative, HOW IN THE HELL DOES SHE UNDERSTAND A WOMAN'S RIGHT TO CHOOSE?
If I could ask her any question, I would ask her the last time she had sex, and what type of birth control she uses. Then I would ask her what the effectiveness of the various forms of birth control are (none of them are 100%).
Then I would ask her what her thoughts on a woman's right to have sex are? Should we not have sex if there is a 2, or 5% chance we could become pregnant when not ready? What then?
If Harriet wants to make judgments about American Womens' private lives, I think we have a right to understand her private life.
In response to a recent comment, I wanted to leave a message to alert readers that I am being sarcastic. Please, do not take this writing literally.
On a serious note, it is frightening how relevant politician's personal and sexual health is to their work and their beliefs. Our personal experiences and views of sex are highly correlative to our view of ourselves (either as man or woman). It is sad that men who beat or sexually assault women are given microphones and put upon stages to speak on their views of women's rights, abortion, and any family issue. While no person is perfect I do believe lines should be drawn. For instance, when I worked as an advocate at a police department, I was made to undergo a lie detector test and full background check. If a politician is given a government position, should he or she not undergo the same type of test to make sure that he or she is not bringing values into the government that we as a society do not condone?