Tag Archives: Mississippi

Social Security Administration > NY DMV

27 Feb

Here is the latest update for those of you who have been paying attention to my on-going identification saga.  (For those of you who haven’t, you can either continue to not pay attention or you can update yourself here and here.)  Here is the next, and hopefully last, installment of my story.  Last week when I went to the Social Security Office* to try and obtain a new card, I overheard a lady behind the counter tell a woman to make sure that her name appeared on the mailbox that corresponds with her apartment.  Without the name, the United States Postal Service would not deliver the Social Security Card, the gatekeeper for the New York State driver’s license.  Note to self… do NOT forget to write your name on the mailbox.  So, what did I do?  I forgot to write my name on the mailbox.  Actually, backtrack.  It’s not so much that I forgot, more that they said I had to wait 10 days to 2 weeks to receive my replacement card so I figured I had plenty of time to update the mailbox (also, I totally forgot).  Anyway, I came home today, Monday, less than a week after I went to the Social Security Office to request a new card and what was in my unmarked mailbox?  My new Social Security Card!  Which immediately led me to four conclusions:

1.  The Social Security Card is just as ridiculous a form of identification as I thought

2.  My mailman has gone rogue

3.  The USPS, as a dream I had a month ago predicted, is totally going to stop existing…thereby leaving the Social Security Card no means of conveyance and making it even more ridiculous than I already knew it was.

4.  The Social Security Administration is totally superior to the New York State Department of Motor Vehicles

Also, in other fun news, the car we are driving to New Orleans has Tennessee, not New York, plates.  Score.  The likelihood of us getting pulled over in Mississippi as I had feared just diminished considerably.  Our road trip, Three Girls One Cat, might just go off without a hitch.

*Capitalizing it makes it seem more legit and important.

An Update! An Ultrasound!

24 Feb

I would like to first announce, for those of you who read my previous post, that I have successfully obtained my driver’s license.  The ways in which I went about doing this cannot be disclosed in a public forum, but suffice it to say that when me and my New York plate-sporting rental car get pulled over on our drive through Mississippi en route to New Orleans this coming week, I will be in possession of the proper documentation.  And not a moment too soon.

In other news, I am dismayed by an article I read today in the New York Times by Sabrina Tavernise entitled “Virginia Lawmakers Backtrack on Conception Bill.”  As many of you may have been following, Virginia recently introduced a personhood amendment very similar to the one that was defeated by Mississippi voters in mid November.  The initiative essentially defined a person “to include every human being from the moment of fertilization, cloning, or the functional equivalent thereof.”  So, no more abortion rights.  Serious road blocks to all kinds of contraception.  Really ugly stuff.  Virgina, however, threw in a little bonus by trying to require women seeking an abortion to undergo an involuntary vaginal ultrasound before being allowed to seek an abortion.*  I am, obviously, pleased that this bill has been quashed, for now.  I am not, however, pleased by this particular paragraph in this article where Tavernise says,

The rapid-fire procedural maneuvering came one day after Mr. McDonnell (governor of Virginia) ordered Republicans in the House of Delegates to soften a bill requiring a vaginal ultrasound before an abortion.  The new version, which requires a non-invasive abdominal ultrasound, appeared aimed at defusing a mounting controversy over the bill that included spoofs on television shows. (Italics mine.)

As far as I am concerned, any involuntary ultrasound, whether administered internally or externally, is invasive.  A woman is being forced, against her will, to undergo a procedure that is not of medical necessity.  There is no reason for it other than to shove the religious and “moral” beliefs of some** into the bodies of many.  I understand that, physically, it can easily be argued, and I would tend to agree, that an internal ultrasound is perhaps more physically invasive than an external one, but to say that women are so unthinking that they cannot be trusted to make the “right” decision unless they undergo this procedure is incredibly insulting.  Every woman is full well capable of deciding for herself what is right for her without seeing the development of a blob of cells in her, not the government’s, her uterus.  I was incredibly dismayed that it was a woman who wrote this article and that this acceptance of a required ultrasound of any kind is so unchallenged by so many that it would be mentioned as a return to the reasonable status quo.  There is nothing reasonable about this requirement and there is nothing non-invasive about it.  It is invasive as hell.

*I would love more than anything to go on a rant here about how incredibly unjust and inhumane this is, but I find myself incapable of reining my disgust in enough to write something that will get my point across.  Also, I imagine people who have read this far probably agree with me and therefore I would be preaching to the choir.

**I also would like to interject here my disgust with the all male panel that was slated to decide the issue concerning religious freedom and the mandate that requires health insurers to cover contraception in the United States.  It seems as though, and I think the lovely Republican Representative from California, Darrell Issa, would agree with me, that women don’t really matter when it comes to issues regarding their own health, of which contraception is one such issue.