Birth Control is not just birth control

In the early case of Union Pacific Ry. v. Botsford, 141 U.S. 250, 251 (1891), the Supreme Court recognized the right of the individual to control his own body in stating:

"No right is held more sacred, or is more carefully guarded, by the common law than the right of every individual to the possession and control of his own person, free from all restraint or interference of others."

The 2012 Olympics are a testament to the strength of the world's women. But, I wonder if someone should tell Paul Ryan how many of these women had to be on birth control in order to regulate or even eliminate their periods so that they could compete on the world's stage?

Access to birth control is a basic fundamental right for every woman and girl. Birth control is not just about controlling pregnancy (although this is a very important aspect of the medication) it is also about allowing women to have safe and productive lives, unfettered by the medical problems that come with the burden of periods. Girls who have heavy or irregular bleeding, girls who have massive headaches or cramping during their periods and cannot get out of bed, women who are approaching menopause and need to regulate their bodies - these are all legitimate uses for the medication. 

Our technologically advanced societies make it harder for women to deal with their periods, and participate in society. Estrogen in milk, and many other foods have brought on early menses in girls, sometimes now as early as 8 years of age. Perhaps in the past, when women had lived together closer to the earth and more in tune with the moon's ebbs and flows (healthy menses rotates closely with the moon's cycles) the concept of bleeding might not have been such a problem. Also, in ancient times, girls probably rarely bled because they were either pregnant or nursing their infant, and then they often died before they reached menopause. 

Today, in the United States, if certain politicians have their way, women will not have the freedom to control what goes in or out of their bodies, to be able to regulate their periods or reproduction so that they can lead a 'normal' life. Whereas, a man will have the freedom and the ability to impregnate them, or, to buy a gun and to walk out on the street and kill people. The unwillingness in our country to control guns and bullets is analogous to the unwillingness to control the penis and sperm. Does this make any sense? Is this logical? That a person can freely buy a semiautomatic weapon online without a background check and go into a theater and shoot but that a woman does not have the freedom over her own body? That a boy can rape a girl, but a girl cannot even correct and protect herself from that crime? What is this issue really about? What is the origin of this need to control women?

Birth control medication regulates a woman's periods so that she can go to school or a job without interruptions. Irregular or heavy periods are sometimes so painful that they disrupt a girl's study and work. Irregular periods give some girls headaches and acne. Periods cause girls anxiety because they do not know when they will be bleeding and do not have control over their bodily functions.

The question here is: Are women human beings? Sojourner Truth asked this question during women's suffrage and it is still valid question. If we are human then we deserve the same rights as any other human being.  After all, what is being human, if not to have an "inalienable right to determine what shall be done with his or her own body"? 

If women are indeed human beings, then no one has the right to be in control or possession of her body, in other words, no one has the right to determine what comes in or out of her body, except her own self. She must be given this unalienable right in order to become a complete citizen and human being participating fully in the world.