OP-ED COLUMNIST
By GAIL COLLINS
Published: February 4, 2011
As if we didn’t have enough wars, the House of Representatives has declared one against Planned Parenthood.
Maybe it’s all part of a grand theme. Last month, they voted to repeal the health care law. This month, they’re going after an organization that provides millions of women with both family-planning services and basic health medical care, like pap smears and screening for diabetes, breast cancer, cervical cancer and sexually transmitted diseases.
Our legislative slogan for 2011: Let Them Use Leeches.
“What is more fiscally responsible than denying any and all funding to Planned Parenthood of America?” demanded Representative Mike Pence of Indiana, the chief sponsor of a bill to bar the government from directing any money to any organization that provides abortion services.
Planned Parenthood doesn’t use government money to provide abortions; Congress already prohibits that, except in cases of rape, incest or to save the life of the mother. (Another anti-abortion bill that’s coming up for hearing originally proposed changing the wording to “forcible rape,” presumably under the theory that there was a problem with volunteer rape victims. On that matter at least, cooler heads prevailed.)
Planned Parenthood does pay for its own abortion services, though, and that’s what makes them a target. Pence has 154 co-sponsors for his bill. He was helped this week by an anti-abortion group called Live Action, which conducted a sting operation at 12 Planned Parenthood clinics in six states, in an effort to connect the clinic staff to child prostitution.
“Planned Parenthood aids and abets the sexual abuse and prostitution of minors,” announced Lila Rose, the beautiful anti-abortion activist who led the project. The right wing is currently chock-full of stunning women who want to end their gender’s right to control their own bodies. Homely middle-aged men are just going to have to find another sex to push around.
Live Action hired an actor who posed as a pimp and told Planned Parenthood counselors that he might have contracted a sexually transmitted disease from “one of the girls I manage.” He followed up with questions about how to obtain contraceptives and abortions, while indicating that some of his “girls” were under age and illegally in the country.
One counselor, shockingly, gave the “pimp” advice on how to game the system and was summarily fired when the video came out. But the others seem to have answered his questions accurately and flatly. Planned Parenthood says that after the man left, all the counselors — including the one who was fired — reported the conversation to their supervisors, who called the authorities. (One Arizona police department, the organization said, refused to file a report.)
Still, there is no way to look good while providing useful information to a self-proclaimed child molester, even if the cops get called. That, presumably, is why Live Action chose the scenario.
“We have a zero tolerance of nonreporting anything that would endanger a minor,” said Cecile Richards, the president of Planned Parenthood. “We do the same thing public hospitals do and public clinics do.”
But here’s the most notable thing about this whole debate: The people trying to put Planned Parenthood out of business do not seem concerned about what would happen to the 1.85 million low-income women who get family-planning help and medical care at the clinics each year. It just doesn’t come up. There’s not even a vague contingency plan.
“I haven’t seen that they want to propose an alternative,” said Richards.
There are tens of millions Americans who oppose abortion because of deeply held moral principles. But they’re attached to a political movement that sometimes seems to have come unmoored from any concern for life after birth.
There is no comparable organization to Planned Parenthood, providing the same kind of services on a national basis. If there were, most of the women eligible for Medicaid-financed family-planning assistance wouldn’t have to go without it. In Texas, which has one of the highest teenage birthrates in the country, only about 20 percent of low-income women get that kind of help. Yet Planned Parenthood is under attack, and the State Legislature has diverted some of its funding to crisis pregnancy centers, which provide no medical care and tend to be staffed by volunteers dedicated to dissuading women from having abortions.
In Washington, the new Republican majority that promised to do great things about jobs, jobs, jobs is preparing for hearings on a bill to make it economically impossible for insurance companies to offer policies that cover abortions. And in Texas, Gov. Rick Perry, faced with an epic budget crisis that’s left the state’s schools and health care services in crisis, has brought out emergency legislation — requiring mandatory sonograms for women considering abortion.
A few of the comments
1.
The "anti-abortion" movement has no actual desire to stop abortions. They wish to force the entire scope of fundamentalist Christian sexual doctrine on all Americans, including prohibiting the use of contraception. If they actually cared only about stopping abortions, we would have real sex education in our schools, and they would be handing out condoms on street corners.
In South American countries where abortion is illegal, the abortion rate is twice as high as America's. In European countries where abortion is legal, and even free, the abortion rates are 50% lower than in America - because they promote contraception and safe-sex education.
We do not have an abortion problem in America. We have an unplanned pregnancy problem in America. Half of all pregnancies in America are unplanned. Half of those pregnancies, or a quarter of all pregnancies, end in abortion. Of the unplanned pregnancies that are carried to term, the percentage of these children that are born into poverty is alarming. Children born into poverty are more likely to drop out of school, have substance abuse problems, get in trouble with the law, and produce unplanned and teen pregnancies.
If we eliminate unplanned pregnancies, there will be no abortions. If we make abortion illegal, we will get illegal and dangerous abortion clinics (like the one that was just shut down in Pa), a thriving internet black market for abortion pills, and a worsening crisis of children born into poverty, children who are increasingly abandoned by Republican politicians at the federal and state level.
In South American countries where abortion is illegal, the abortion rate is twice as high as America's. In European countries where abortion is legal, and even free, the abortion rates are 50% lower than in America - because they promote contraception and safe-sex education.
We do not have an abortion problem in America. We have an unplanned pregnancy problem in America. Half of all pregnancies in America are unplanned. Half of those pregnancies, or a quarter of all pregnancies, end in abortion. Of the unplanned pregnancies that are carried to term, the percentage of these children that are born into poverty is alarming. Children born into poverty are more likely to drop out of school, have substance abuse problems, get in trouble with the law, and produce unplanned and teen pregnancies.
If we eliminate unplanned pregnancies, there will be no abortions. If we make abortion illegal, we will get illegal and dangerous abortion clinics (like the one that was just shut down in Pa), a thriving internet black market for abortion pills, and a worsening crisis of children born into poverty, children who are increasingly abandoned by Republican politicians at the federal and state level.
Recommend Recommended by 2206 Readers
2.
As far as subsidizing abortions in general, I think that opponents of it have a flawed line of thinking. It seems like one part of their scheme is thinking that if getting an abortion becomes easier in a financial way, more women will get abortions. In reality, no one gets pregnant and thinks: "I really want to have this baby. BUTTTT abortions are so cheap so I might as well get one." In fact, if abortions were subsidized, it's main effect would be to ease financial suffering amongst the poor. Interestingly enough, one of the most common reasons women get abortions is because they feel they don't have the financial resources to raise a(nother) child (21%). The other most common reason is not feeling that they are not responsible enough to raise a(nother) child. So it stands that if there were fewer poor people, there would be fewer abortions. But posing as a pimp of underage prostitutes is apparently a much more effective way to lower the abortion rate to some people.
I'm always shocked when I see women rallying against their rights. I'd be like a black person nowadays arguing that segregation should be reinstated. If you're a woman, and you don't like abortions, DONT GET ONE! Seriously though, part of freedom is the individual's, and only the individual, choice of what to do with their bodies. It's difficult to think of a free society where the people with a monopoly on violence (governments) tell others what they can and can't do with their own bodies/health. Oh wait, drugs are illegal. That's been working out really well ...
And as far as alternatives, most people that want to bring down groups like planned parenthood are so idealistic, that they are unable to see the effects of their actions. I like to think that they're like Ben and Elaine from the movie The Graduate. After Ben successfully breaks-up Elaine's wedding and the two hop on a bus, penniless and not knowing where they are headed (and Elaine still in her wedding dress hahaha), their faces fade from overwhelming joy to fear and uncertainty.
If anti-Planned Parenthood groups actually succeeded, I think their reactions would be similar -- overwhelming joy/triumph that would fade to guilt as the stories of less-than qualified people/facilities, suicidal mother-to-be, and exploding welfare/medicaid expenditures start popping up. Almost every pro-life advocate who is sane can see that Planned Parenthood is the lesser of two evils, or even a necessary evil.
As an example, I don't like strip clubs. I feel they degrade women and their sexuality and well as exploit (mainly) men's sexuality financially (They're like prostitution lite really). That being said, I'm 100% in favor of strip clubs. I've lived and practiced medicine in countries where they are illegal and it takes a job (a stripper) that's already a difficult, taxing, high-risk job and makes it into a very difficult, mega-taxing, extremely high-risk job. But most people haven't had to treat strippers who got beat-up and can't go to the police because they'll get arrested.
Most of these same countries also have made abortions illegal. I've seen firsthand what driving a service, a medical service at that, underground does to the conditions and qualifications of facilities and personnel. It makes sense to have abyssal facilities -- why investment money in your business if you could get shut down tomorrow? Furthermore, it makes sense that the personnel have little to no medical training. Why would a legit Dr. or nurse risk being thrown in jail when they could be making ten times the money working at a hospital? And of the people that aren't qualified to perform abortions, but perform them anyways in spite of the illegality -- if you're going to be a criminal it's a lot easier to perform abortions rather than sell drugs or steal or what have you.
But traveling to other countries where abortion is illegal to see what it's like could possibly challenge someone's beliefs. And if it's one thing any blindly idealistic person avoids at all costs -- it's testing and questioning those ideals they hold so dearly because even thinking of the possibility that their sacred ideals might be altered or even refuted is enough for their ego to step-in and stonewall.
I'm always shocked when I see women rallying against their rights. I'd be like a black person nowadays arguing that segregation should be reinstated. If you're a woman, and you don't like abortions, DONT GET ONE! Seriously though, part of freedom is the individual's, and only the individual, choice of what to do with their bodies. It's difficult to think of a free society where the people with a monopoly on violence (governments) tell others what they can and can't do with their own bodies/health. Oh wait, drugs are illegal. That's been working out really well ...
And as far as alternatives, most people that want to bring down groups like planned parenthood are so idealistic, that they are unable to see the effects of their actions. I like to think that they're like Ben and Elaine from the movie The Graduate. After Ben successfully breaks-up Elaine's wedding and the two hop on a bus, penniless and not knowing where they are headed (and Elaine still in her wedding dress hahaha), their faces fade from overwhelming joy to fear and uncertainty.
If anti-Planned Parenthood groups actually succeeded, I think their reactions would be similar -- overwhelming joy/triumph that would fade to guilt as the stories of less-than qualified people/facilities, suicidal mother-to-be, and exploding welfare/medicaid expenditures start popping up. Almost every pro-life advocate who is sane can see that Planned Parenthood is the lesser of two evils, or even a necessary evil.
As an example, I don't like strip clubs. I feel they degrade women and their sexuality and well as exploit (mainly) men's sexuality financially (They're like prostitution lite really). That being said, I'm 100% in favor of strip clubs. I've lived and practiced medicine in countries where they are illegal and it takes a job (a stripper) that's already a difficult, taxing, high-risk job and makes it into a very difficult, mega-taxing, extremely high-risk job. But most people haven't had to treat strippers who got beat-up and can't go to the police because they'll get arrested.
Most of these same countries also have made abortions illegal. I've seen firsthand what driving a service, a medical service at that, underground does to the conditions and qualifications of facilities and personnel. It makes sense to have abyssal facilities -- why investment money in your business if you could get shut down tomorrow? Furthermore, it makes sense that the personnel have little to no medical training. Why would a legit Dr. or nurse risk being thrown in jail when they could be making ten times the money working at a hospital? And of the people that aren't qualified to perform abortions, but perform them anyways in spite of the illegality -- if you're going to be a criminal it's a lot easier to perform abortions rather than sell drugs or steal or what have you.
But traveling to other countries where abortion is illegal to see what it's like could possibly challenge someone's beliefs. And if it's one thing any blindly idealistic person avoids at all costs -- it's testing and questioning those ideals they hold so dearly because even thinking of the possibility that their sacred ideals might be altered or even refuted is enough for their ego to step-in and stonewall.
Recommend Recommended by 905 Readers
3.
It saddens me deeply that so many people were duped into believing the lies that they elected all these Republicans back into Congress. Such short memories. So many people who can't seem to think for themselves, but let the latest political slogans, much like the prime-time ads for pharmaceuticals, make up their minds for them. How prescient Jefferson was in declaring that it takes an educated electorate to have a successful democracy. The majority in the country used to be fairly well educated, and now it would be safe to say that the majority are rather uneducated. Precisely when this happened is unclear. But this column merely points out another situation that could not take place among intelligent people. Congress could not even consider taking on Planned Parenthood if they were not persuaded they had enough sheep to follow them. And yet it is clear that the necessity for Planned Parenthood and its lifeline for health care for so many women offer another reflection of how inadequate health care in this country has been for so many years. If the Republicans have their way, it will only get worse. http://barbaraspen.blogspot.com/
Recommend Recommended by 990 Readers
4.
Conservatives worried about women should endorse the Equal Rights Amendment, unless they're scared of a bunch of women. If they're concerned about a right to life, they might consider abolishing the death penalty or guaranteeing that children, once born, have adequate food, medical care and education. But none of this will happen because conservatives conserve nothing except numbers in bank ledgers, which have never been shown to have nutritional value. Seed must be sown to produce harvest. Storing grain cannot make bread. Investing the wealth of the people in banks and implements of destruction is theft. Those who would deny women equal rights also deny them control of their own bodies, thereby extending a tyranny and a denial of the principles upon which this country was founded, while extinguishing over fifty percent of America's genius only to create cheap labor and a subjugated population. And they cry "Freedom!" Freedom to work at minimum wage as independent contractors with no wages withheld for workers' comp, social security, or taxes. Freedom to raise children who never have parents at home and never learn their so-called family values, but watch reality TV about exclusion and domination and bullying. No wonder Reagan closed the mental hospitals. If he hadn't, there'd be no one to vote Republican. Let Republican Senator Ensign, who paid his aide to accept Ensign's advances on his aide's wife, explain the value of obedient women. The GOP's gotta lotta 'splainin to do. Maybe Justice Thomas can explain why he failed to report his wife's three-quarters of a million income for the last five years. Maybe women are just supposed to be subsidiaries of Republican males. It says more about the males that they can't handle women's equality and don't really believe in America at all. Respected, sassy, intelligent women are a whole lot more fun than those meek GOP babes. And no one is going to tell them what they can and cannot do. This is America, even if the GOP can't believe it.
Recommend Recommended by 575 Readers
5.
Abortion is a perpetual topic in religion, politics and media. Life is a precious and timeless gift from the Almighty and must be respected and preserved wisely. Human life should be cherished, appreciated and honored. Compassion for life needs to accompany the compassion for mother and father without whom life would not be possible. The sad part is that all the discussion is centered around stopping abortions and there is little discussion on eliminating the causes of unwanted pregnancies. Unless the causes of unwanted pregnancies are addressed, abortion issue will hang around persistently. There is need to identify the causes which lead mothers to seek abortions and address those causes. If the causes are eliminated then there will not be any abortions. But if the causes are allowed to flourish then how can the abortions be eliminated?
I read compassionate statements for the aborted child but little on changing the culture which leads to unwanted pregnancies. I read statistics and am appalled at the young age children start out-of-wedlock relationships with multiple partners. How partners get drunk and engage in unplanned relationships. Sports broadcasts are overtaken by beer advertisements. People entering relationships without any ceremony, stewardship or contract between them. So on and so forth.
The churches, schools and media need to teach masses the seriousness and sanctity of starting a relationship and need for contractual commitment and legal responsibility, especially for father to support his child and child's mother. We will not need to worry about abortion if the society honors the value of a relationship and assumes the responsibilities it puts on the shoulders of the father and mother.
I read compassionate statements for the aborted child but little on changing the culture which leads to unwanted pregnancies. I read statistics and am appalled at the young age children start out-of-wedlock relationships with multiple partners. How partners get drunk and engage in unplanned relationships. Sports broadcasts are overtaken by beer advertisements. People entering relationships without any ceremony, stewardship or contract between them. So on and so forth.
The churches, schools and media need to teach masses the seriousness and sanctity of starting a relationship and need for contractual commitment and legal responsibility, especially for father to support his child and child's mother. We will not need to worry about abortion if the society honors the value of a relationship and assumes the responsibilities it puts on the shoulders of the father and mother.
Recommend Recommended by 261 Readers
6.
It is 2011 and women are still perceived as children requiring the courts to determine rights over their bodies. Is it religion or is that the excuse? Politics, the media and society do very little to provide for women. We are not respected for the work we do whether in the workplace or at home. I look at the marriages of my daughters friends thinking things have changed. Most carry the housework, the childcare and outside jobs...a life designed around men and their desires. Having a child is often a great burden to women requiring a lifelong financial and emotional commitment, a commitment men can walk away from. If it is not worth the investment of society, the fathers and families, why do the courts insist on burdening the women who find themselves with unwanted pregnancies. It would seem there are lots of reasons why a women would seek an abortion. Medical abortion gives the woman some safety and choice. The idealism presented in the argument against abortion suggests that society places value on these children but it does not. In addition to rape and other kinds of sexual encounters that end with unwanted children, the social view of women as a sex object blames women for behaviors projected upon them by males. The media is a reflection of how women are perceived by lots of people. Rape and prostitution are fantasies. Lots of males think of sex as entertainment without regard for any emotional baggage. Talk to a teenager or a 40 something male. All about the conquest many directed at young vulnerable girls. I wonder just how many of the unwanted pregnancies are the result of pressure and the lack of birth control. How many children borne from unwanted pregnancies end up in a culture of poverty. Where is the real moral in this story or is it all just a lot of hot air from those who wish to exert controls over womens bodies without regard for what happens to the women or the child.
Recommend Recommended by 537 Readers
7.
"The people trying to put Planned Parenthood out of business do not seem concerned about what would happen to the 1.85 million low-income women who get family-planning help and medical care at the clinics each year."
Sex is expensive. If you enthusiastically embrace it - and do so foolishly - you should bear the brunt of the expense. If the expense is children so the reason goes, it is unfair to the child to bear the expense. However I am pretty sure 99.9% of all persons alive today - regardless of their circumstance - would rather be where they are than aborted. Indeed, abortion is an expense of suffering not expressed for those who suffered it don't express anything. And we tell ourselves no suffering occurred; make our pretty charts and graphs to tell us of that, assure us of that, rationalize that otherwise suffocating silence.
Facts-on-the-ground of the modern pro-choice movement is not 'pro-choice.' It is a goal of lax sexual morality managed via subsidized Big Pharma and gory surgeries. Physically, it amounts to little else
"My rights, my life, my body" goes the slogan. Yet the unspoken but whole slogan goes like this: "My rights, my life, my body, YOUR bill!" If so many people like Gail Collins - who I'm sure has a net worth well in excess of seven figures - loves Planned Parenthood so much, she can cough up some scratch for that moral disaster. Abortions or not, I want my money back.
Sex is expensive. If you enthusiastically embrace it - and do so foolishly - you should bear the brunt of the expense. If the expense is children so the reason goes, it is unfair to the child to bear the expense. However I am pretty sure 99.9% of all persons alive today - regardless of their circumstance - would rather be where they are than aborted. Indeed, abortion is an expense of suffering not expressed for those who suffered it don't express anything. And we tell ourselves no suffering occurred; make our pretty charts and graphs to tell us of that, assure us of that, rationalize that otherwise suffocating silence.
Facts-on-the-ground of the modern pro-choice movement is not 'pro-choice.' It is a goal of lax sexual morality managed via subsidized Big Pharma and gory surgeries. Physically, it amounts to little else
"My rights, my life, my body" goes the slogan. Yet the unspoken but whole slogan goes like this: "My rights, my life, my body, YOUR bill!" If so many people like Gail Collins - who I'm sure has a net worth well in excess of seven figures - loves Planned Parenthood so much, she can cough up some scratch for that moral disaster. Abortions or not, I want my money back.
Recommend Recommended by 91 Readers
8.
This issue is such a problem—it keeps surfacing even though abortion is legal. Apparently, women have no idea of how to control their own bodies so we must do something. Since males feel free to intervene in female reproductive health matters, let us turn it around. Let’s pass a bill to once and for all take care of the this. Let us mandate extra insurance for males. They should take care of this issue--since they know better.
Every male in this country must have “Paternal Insurance"-- Male seed coverage. This coverage must begin at age 12. It will include support for both mother and child till age 21, even if the male wants nothing to do with the child. Included are medical care, education, food, shelter, and swimming lessons. The coverage will pay for DNA testing to be sure we got the right seed. And we may want to have a mandatory database that males register with—like selective service or the database in Ok. We will want to know who, what, where, why and when the deed was done, and how many times. Just because.
Both married and unmarried must maintain the coverage—because you never know. A married man just might stray. The Catholic Church, Evangelicals, and pro-life groups, must subsidize low-income males. Refusal to subsidize or have coverage—will bring fines and jail time. The bill will regulate Erectile Dysfunction drugs and payment of course, will not be covered.
Coverage for life is mandatory, since male seeds never give up. The bill must also provide money for the development of male birth control drugs. Men must have the same right to jeopardize their health trying to prevent pregnancy as women. And of course, coverage for the contraception’s is the sole responsibility of the male.
The policy will be costly—but oh, the benefits to society. This will solve so many of our Nations problems since women are the cause of so many of them. Women will “be in their place”, not working being a “detriment to families” talking all those jobs and there will be no worry about paying for “maternity care” in HC bills, and perhaps we can even give up that pesky right to vote thingy , we will be too busy to participate. Easy peezey--problem solved.
Every male in this country must have “Paternal Insurance"-- Male seed coverage. This coverage must begin at age 12. It will include support for both mother and child till age 21, even if the male wants nothing to do with the child. Included are medical care, education, food, shelter, and swimming lessons. The coverage will pay for DNA testing to be sure we got the right seed. And we may want to have a mandatory database that males register with—like selective service or the database in Ok. We will want to know who, what, where, why and when the deed was done, and how many times. Just because.
Both married and unmarried must maintain the coverage—because you never know. A married man just might stray. The Catholic Church, Evangelicals, and pro-life groups, must subsidize low-income males. Refusal to subsidize or have coverage—will bring fines and jail time. The bill will regulate Erectile Dysfunction drugs and payment of course, will not be covered.
Coverage for life is mandatory, since male seeds never give up. The bill must also provide money for the development of male birth control drugs. Men must have the same right to jeopardize their health trying to prevent pregnancy as women. And of course, coverage for the contraception’s is the sole responsibility of the male.
The policy will be costly—but oh, the benefits to society. This will solve so many of our Nations problems since women are the cause of so many of them. Women will “be in their place”, not working being a “detriment to families” talking all those jobs and there will be no worry about paying for “maternity care” in HC bills, and perhaps we can even give up that pesky right to vote thingy , we will be too busy to participate. Easy peezey--problem solved.
Recommend Recommended by 815 Readers
9.
Gail, thank you for a very insightful column. Having seen the recent developments of the House at the federal level, and our own "lege" here in Perryland, I think the war declared in both cases is on common sense, common decency, and on the people most impacted by the little support offered by "the safety net". Ben Sargent, the retired editorial cartoonist who is still published weekly and online, had a great analogy in his last panel - The governor is shooing away the kids who need the school and health and other stuff since he is too busy "helping" in the gynecologist suite.
The governor here seems more interested in placing "emergency" items to the once every two year carnival known as our legislature in Texas, and while the estimated $28 billion shortfall in the budget starting in September, the already acknowledged $4 billion shortfall in this year's budget, the worst graduation rate for high school in the country, the threatened layoffs of thousands of teachers and even closing community colleges in 4 areas are dire, they are not "emergencies" for him and the GOP leadership in both houses.
Instead, women needing an abortion, which is a very personal and deeply impacting decision, now have an "emergency" per the governor so he and the legislature can insert themselves into their personal(and their doctor's) business.
Other "emergencies" the governor gave to our Lege include a dire need to protect "eminent domain" and to rid the state of "sanctuary cities" along with voter picture ID requirements that lay the path for future polling tests, taxes and other resurrected Dixie bunkers of shame.
None of the other items noted about layoffs, budgets, school closure, or any other mundane task required by state law has risen to the level of "emergency", nor has the governor felt that tasks were too crucial to suspend his new best-selling book tour for pitching "Fed Up" so the other 49 states can too have a governor who has been in a state paid position the majority of his adult life stand on government-paid and maintained property to declare how "Washington is the problem" and to agree to those who want "State's Rights", but complain about not enough federal help for the border, the oil spill, hurricane relief efforts, etc. Of course, we do not seem to be hitting the numbers on scholarly success, so "hypocritical" and "stalling for time" do not come first to non-political people purveying the papers here.
Molly Ivins is so missed - there is so much that needs to be painted in simple tones to help pinpoint this mess to those who did not pay enough attention. As she put neatly after 2000, and I think her spirit would agree with this paraphrased quote again: "When we tell you to not elect the guy from Texas running for president, pay attention!"
The governor here seems more interested in placing "emergency" items to the once every two year carnival known as our legislature in Texas, and while the estimated $28 billion shortfall in the budget starting in September, the already acknowledged $4 billion shortfall in this year's budget, the worst graduation rate for high school in the country, the threatened layoffs of thousands of teachers and even closing community colleges in 4 areas are dire, they are not "emergencies" for him and the GOP leadership in both houses.
Instead, women needing an abortion, which is a very personal and deeply impacting decision, now have an "emergency" per the governor so he and the legislature can insert themselves into their personal(and their doctor's) business.
Other "emergencies" the governor gave to our Lege include a dire need to protect "eminent domain" and to rid the state of "sanctuary cities" along with voter picture ID requirements that lay the path for future polling tests, taxes and other resurrected Dixie bunkers of shame.
None of the other items noted about layoffs, budgets, school closure, or any other mundane task required by state law has risen to the level of "emergency", nor has the governor felt that tasks were too crucial to suspend his new best-selling book tour for pitching "Fed Up" so the other 49 states can too have a governor who has been in a state paid position the majority of his adult life stand on government-paid and maintained property to declare how "Washington is the problem" and to agree to those who want "State's Rights", but complain about not enough federal help for the border, the oil spill, hurricane relief efforts, etc. Of course, we do not seem to be hitting the numbers on scholarly success, so "hypocritical" and "stalling for time" do not come first to non-political people purveying the papers here.
Molly Ivins is so missed - there is so much that needs to be painted in simple tones to help pinpoint this mess to those who did not pay enough attention. As she put neatly after 2000, and I think her spirit would agree with this paraphrased quote again: "When we tell you to not elect the guy from Texas running for president, pay attention!"
Recommend Recommended by 401 Readers
10.
I work as an attorney and provide free legal services in civil cases to the very poorest people in our state. My area of concentration is in health care.
It blows my mind to think that there has apparently been so little rational thought by certain conservative legislators regarding the very real and harmful residual effects of their attempts to deny abortion rights to women, and the resulting costs to our society.
It doesn't seem to be clear to these folks who, according to their campaign rhetoric, were so concerned with getting this country's economy back on track, that the actual effects of de-funding an organization like Planned Parenthood will absolutely result in significantly higher costs to the state and the nation via the many inter-related social services funded (or not) by the government.
For example, women with potentially serious medical conditions will go undiagnosed until they are in medical crisis and the costs for their treatments become much higher. Children born to poor teenage mothers who have received little or no prenatal care will often suffer from expensive and life-long medical conditions, that the government will pay for, that could have been prevented by the opportunity for medical care provided to the mother prenatally or that the teenager (or older poor woman) could have avoided completely by choosing to abort the pregnancy.
The medical treatments provided to women at clinics such as Planned Parenthood are absolutely necessary to the health and financial well-being of our society. The fact that the legislators who were elected, in part, because of their battle cry to rein in government spending and make our economy healthy again do not understand that what they are doing by seeking to de-fund Planned Parenthood and other similar measures, is not only astounding but deeply disturbing and frightening.
It blows my mind to think that there has apparently been so little rational thought by certain conservative legislators regarding the very real and harmful residual effects of their attempts to deny abortion rights to women, and the resulting costs to our society.
It doesn't seem to be clear to these folks who, according to their campaign rhetoric, were so concerned with getting this country's economy back on track, that the actual effects of de-funding an organization like Planned Parenthood will absolutely result in significantly higher costs to the state and the nation via the many inter-related social services funded (or not) by the government.
For example, women with potentially serious medical conditions will go undiagnosed until they are in medical crisis and the costs for their treatments become much higher. Children born to poor teenage mothers who have received little or no prenatal care will often suffer from expensive and life-long medical conditions, that the government will pay for, that could have been prevented by the opportunity for medical care provided to the mother prenatally or that the teenager (or older poor woman) could have avoided completely by choosing to abort the pregnancy.
The medical treatments provided to women at clinics such as Planned Parenthood are absolutely necessary to the health and financial well-being of our society. The fact that the legislators who were elected, in part, because of their battle cry to rein in government spending and make our economy healthy again do not understand that what they are doing by seeking to de-fund Planned Parenthood and other similar measures, is not only astounding but deeply disturbing and frightening.
Recommend Recommended by 818 Readers
11.
Yeah. A lot of us Republicans are concerned that the new House majority, and the newly-emboldened and strengthened Senate minority, are doing a Democrat: too-intensely focused on ideological crusades and insufficiently focused on economic matters, specifically the jobs issue. It was this blindness on the part of Democrats that created the new House majority and prepared the Senate for another switch of chairmen in two years.
As a general matter, they need to get their religious convictions back into their churches, synagogues, mosques and temples; and focus our government on providing a financially sustainable set of high-quality services, and on supporting the creation by the private sector of millions of middle class jobs. They weren't elected to be pastors or priests, and America already has a sufficiency of religious guidance counselors to advise the faithful on acceptable living.
That having been said, and taking government out of the religious equation (where it surely does not belong), Planned Parenthood weaves abortion, pretty much on demand, with a set of unambiguously valuable and needed medical services, as if abortion on demand were not to be distinguished from pap smears and rape counseling ("forcible" or otherwise -- THAT one was a hoot). It may be that a large number of Americans don't distinguish among these services, but it also cannot be argued that a large number of Americans do, on religious or even humanistic bases. It remains a legitimate role of Congress to develop policy that limits the use of public monies supporting private actions with which large numbers of Americans vehemently disagree.
Your argument that you don't throw the baby out with the bath water in this instance doesn't wash. If Planned Parenthood wishes to advance the far-from-universally-accepted premise that abortion on demand is as basic a medical service as pap smears, let it by all means do so with private contributions; but not with public funds that essentially make all tax-paying Americans who regard that premise as invalid nonetheless complicit in what many regard as murder.
As a general matter, they need to get their religious convictions back into their churches, synagogues, mosques and temples; and focus our government on providing a financially sustainable set of high-quality services, and on supporting the creation by the private sector of millions of middle class jobs. They weren't elected to be pastors or priests, and America already has a sufficiency of religious guidance counselors to advise the faithful on acceptable living.
That having been said, and taking government out of the religious equation (where it surely does not belong), Planned Parenthood weaves abortion, pretty much on demand, with a set of unambiguously valuable and needed medical services, as if abortion on demand were not to be distinguished from pap smears and rape counseling ("forcible" or otherwise -- THAT one was a hoot). It may be that a large number of Americans don't distinguish among these services, but it also cannot be argued that a large number of Americans do, on religious or even humanistic bases. It remains a legitimate role of Congress to develop policy that limits the use of public monies supporting private actions with which large numbers of Americans vehemently disagree.
Your argument that you don't throw the baby out with the bath water in this instance doesn't wash. If Planned Parenthood wishes to advance the far-from-universally-accepted premise that abortion on demand is as basic a medical service as pap smears, let it by all means do so with private contributions; but not with public funds that essentially make all tax-paying Americans who regard that premise as invalid nonetheless complicit in what many regard as murder.
No comments:
Post a Comment