Read more here.
Tag Archives: abortion
More thoughts on abortion
More thoughts on abortion…
FYI: Whenever I write about, or mention, abortion I get emails asking why I enjoy killing babies so much. No one enjoys killing babies. My sarcastic side, commonly referred to as ‘me,’ wants desperately to add the words more than me but there are a lot of people who cannot understand sarcasm and would probably think I was serious. Actually, there are probably people out there who a, really like abortion and b, really like killing babies but I would argue they are probably insane and hopefully there aren’t many of them.
My view is the same as the Clintons' view. Abortion should be safe, legal (available) and rare. The recent killing of Dr. George Tiller (http://remembertiller.com/) has brought the issue back front and center, though next month’s Senate confirmation hearings for Judge Sonia Sotamoyor would have done the same thing, only with less violence. What troubles me, other than the obvious pang one has when one reads about senseless violence, is that this tactic worked. Dr. Tiller’s family will not reopen their clinic.
While this may seem like a hollow victory for anti-abortion groups, they have said they are glad the clinic will close but worried about the legal ramifications this will have, really the end result may be more chilling. Abortion may be legal in the United States but legal does not equal available. As we debate Roe v. Wade, I have to wonder about its relevance today. I do not want to see it overturned but would like to see access expanded, funding restored and better sex education promoted.
Dr. Tiller’s clinic was one of three in the country that performed late term abortions on fetuses with horrific abnormalities. (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-tiller10-2009jun10,0,6032915.story) Clinics that provide reproductive services all over the country are beefing up their security in the wake of this tragedy. This can only limit people’s access to care, not just abortions but health care. (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j0m25jqgrTdVNnZHlJuXK3DbHG1AD98JE1A80)
It is already more difficult than most people realize for women to get abortions. For low income women it can be almost impossible. This map shows states that restrict access for poor women to abortion. There are 33 states plus the District of Columbia – seen here in red. The blue states (no, the political parallel is incidental) provide them with access, there are 17 of them.
Currently, 23 states have laws banning abortion at 12 weeks or after (red) but these laws are considered to be unconstitutional and unenforceable. Five states (blue) have enforceable laws against abortions at 12 weeks and after.
Five states require women to get written permission from their spouse before getting an abortion. (last map)
This study has data for both side; http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/4000608.pdf. One alarming number from it is that 86 percent of US counties do not have any abortion providers at all. One could argue that the decline in abortions, which began in 1991 following an all time high in 1990, accelerated under President George W. Bush. But I would point to the fact that the high point was under the first President Bush and that 2000 saw the introduction of mifeprisone (RU-486) and cases in which this was used may not be counted in the full abortion count.
All this just makes me more grateful that Barack Obama was elected president. Not only because he will pick judges who are less inclined, or not inclined, to overturn Roe but his Justice Department will take seriously the threats clinics face. That’s good for women and medical professionals in every state.
Same shit, different week
· Bush admits he made mistakes. Ya think? It’s so good to admit that now. Now, eight days before a new president takes office, you are ready to say you made mistakes. Of course, not for anything that really matters. Was the response to Katrina slow? Not according to Dubya. How ‘bout the economy, “I inherited a recession and I am leaving a recession.” While he finally admitted the ‘Mission Accomplished’ banner was not a good idea, he still thinks the war in Iraq was a good idea and considers Abu Ghraib ‘unfortunate.’ Because it happened or because we found out about it? While the White House called today’s press conference the ‘ultimate exit interview’ if you are one of the few Americans out there who will miss George (the) W (rong son got elected) Bush, fear not. He still has plenty of ‘legacy saving’ interviews/speeches on his schedule.
· You voted for Obama, bought the hat, t-shirt, etc. but do you have the commemorative Metrorail pass/smartcard? No? Well, you had better buy one right now because they are going fast. I shouldn’t joke about such seriousness, they probably will go fast. I am still waiting for my Illinois quarter – in color no less – to arrive, what a steal! A quarter only cost me $20.
· Are political pundits like sharks? By that I mean, if they stop talking, do they die? Do they need polls to survive? Was the most important thing about the meeting Obama requested last week of all living presidents, the colors of their ties and/or what they ate? Does anyone really give a shit about that?
· He really likes to work. “I'm a Type A personality…I just can't envision myself, you know, the big straw hat and a Hawaiian shirt sitting on some beach, particularly since I quit drinking," Bush said. (from ABC News among other sources.) Yeah, that’s what I have heard about the President who I believe spent more time away from the White House than any other president and on vacay than anyone in 60 years.
· Say it ain’t so, Joe. Sorry, Joe-the-not-really-a-plumber, your 15 minutes ended about, well 15 minutes after they started. First you were an annoying campaign ploy, then a fraud, then a war correspondent and now are considering running for the US Senate? (http://features.csmonitor.com/politics/2009/01/12/ohio-sen-voinovich-to-retire-could-joe-the-plumber-run-for-senate/) Talk about scraping the bottom of the barrel. Hey, GOP, good luck with that.
Veto Number Three
Stem Cell Research Veto Number Two
In the six and a half years that Dubya has held the position as President he has used his veto power three times. Granted for most of his time in Washington Congress was run by Republicans and acted more like an extension of the West Wing than its own, separate branch of government (the whole point of an independent legislature is to be a check and/or balance on other branches like the executive). Therefore, few bills crossed his desk that had not been vetted by his staff already. Hopefully that is an exaggeration but I do not think it is very far from the truth and is scary.
Back on point, Dubya vetoed S5 or the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Bill of 2007 today marking the second time he has nixed a bill on this issue. This legislation:
“Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2007 – (Sec. 2) Amends the Public Health Service Act to require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to conduct and support research that utilizes human embryonic stem cells, regardless of the date on which the stem cells were derived from a human embryo. Limits such research to stem cells that meet the following ethical requirements: (1) the stem cells were derived from human embryos donated from in vitro fertilization clinics for the purpose of fertility treatment and were in excess of the needs of the individuals seeking such treatment; (2) the embryos would never be implanted in a woman and would otherwise be discarded; and (3) such individuals donate the embryos with written informed consent and receive no financial or other inducements.
Directs the Secretary to: (1) issue final guidelines to carry out this Act within 60 days; and (2) submit annual reports on activities and research conducted under this Act.
(Sec. 3) Requires the Secretary to develop techniques for the isolation, derivation, production, or testing of stem cells that are capable of producing all or almost all of the cell types of the developing body and may result in improved understanding of treatments for diseases and other adverse health conditions, but that are not derived from a human embryo. Requires the Secretary to: (1) provide guidance concerning the next steps required for additional research; (2) prioritize research with the greatest potential for near-term clinical benefit; and (3) take into account techniques outlined by the President's Council on Bioethics and any other appropriate techniques and research.
Sets forth reporting requirements.
Authorizes appropriations.” (From Thomas, – a great research tool that can be accessed through the Senate and House web sites or directly http://thomas.loc.gov. Another wonderful research source is the Congressional Research Service, aka CRS.)
According to the New York Times, “In August 2001, Mr. Bush announced the current rules: tax dollars could be used to study colonies, called lines, of embryonic stem cells, if the embryos themselves had already been destroyed. The bill he vetoed would have allowed research on fresh lines drawn from surplus embryos destined to be destroyed by fertility clinics.”
I know people feel very strongly about this issue and it is often lumped in with another controversial issue (abortion) but I just do not get how people can actually favor denying people access to research that could save or improve their lives, especially when the cells themselves are slated to be destroyed. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has a great website that gives almost all the information you could ask for about this issue and the good stem cells could do for millions of people. I am pro-choice (no one that I know anyway, is pro-abortion or ‘pro-death’ and am probably more ‘pro-life’ than people who call themselves that because I oppose the death penalty) so it makes sense that I support this research.
Dubya has been walking a tough line – for him, not me – politically because I think he knows most Americans support this research but his conservative base does not. He has also pushed this issue to the front and center of the already underway 2008 presidential race, a move that I think helps Democrats. I will not pretend to understand their motivation here and if past acts say anything the only phrase I can think to describe their actions is tone-deaf. When Rush Limbaugh claimed Michael J. Fox was going off his meds intentionally to make his symptoms look worse than they were I think most Americans were disgusted, which was the only rational response to such nonsense.
The only good news for people waiting for this to help them is the knowledge that there is a good chance they will get their wish. I believe it was Limbaugh who also criticized Fox by saying – and I paraphrase here – that it was stupid for Americans to think their vote for a Senator would translate into any meaningful change in because more and more these elections are being won by smaller and smaller margins. Whoever said that was wrong and every vote matters. My hope is that people will see that, will see that – especially when it comes to issues like stem cell research, people’s vote may actually save lives.
I hope anyone reading this is either registered to vote or will go take care of that right away. You can call your local Board of Elections, DMV or go to this web site: http://www.usayfoundation.org/ (I do not know enough about it to endorse or oppose it) but election day is the one day that all of us have a say, we should not let it go.
Wow. Where do you start on a day like today?
The Supreme Court
One of the main reasons it is always important to be careful who you pick to live at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue is that they choose who gets to sit on the Supreme Court. Justices get to stay there for the rest of their lives. Many Democrats, liberals and libertarians were concerned about the court’s composition and what would happen if a social conservative took the White House. This was the one issue that even Ralph Nader said should make people vote for Al Gore over in 2000 (and no, I am not over Nader’s irresponsible actions that year). So now Dubya’s court has decided that the law banning late term abortions is constitutional. While social conservatives all over the country are celebrating tonight, this fight is not over (Washington Post). The abortion fight will never really be over.
“For today, we have a significant victory for life and it is to be celebrated," said Tony Perkins, president of the Washington-based Family Research Council, an influential conservative lobby group with strong evangelical ties. But he told Reuters by telephone that it was too early to speculate when the Holy Grail for social conservatives — a Supreme Court decision reversing the 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling that women have a basic constitutional right to abortion — would be achieved.”
As a very pro-choice woman, I am no longer sure how relevant Roe v. Wade is. A number of states (15) have banned abortions completely and others have just made is as difficult as possible. Look here for more info. For women in a large part of the country access to reproductive health services is limited and abortions are not available. This is due to different laws and regulations but also the lack of doctors who perform abortions. Many women have to drive long distances to get abortions. Worse, in many of these same places laws designed to inspire family unity, do the opposite. Is it really right to make a girl raped by a family member ask that person to sign off on her aborion? Do aborion opponents really think it is better to make 11 year old rape victims mothers than to handle that some other way. Ironically, while most health insurance companies cover Viagra and Cialis, they will not cover birth control. At the same time, Scientific American reported on a Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) study that showed abstinence only programs do not work.
"The vast majority of the public does not see abstinence and contraception as an either/or proposition — they want teens to be informed of both," Sarah Brown, Executive Director of the National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy, said in a statement. "We have been promoting ignorance in the era of AIDS, and that's not just bad public health policy, its bad ethics," added James Wagoner, president of Advocates for Youth.
HHS did not release its findings, as they contradict the current administration’s position on this issue but it was leaked by activists in who were backed by Congressman Henry Waxman (D-Ca). One interesting point is that a few years ago a government official from Senagal was asked about his country’s response to the HIV/AIDS crisis in Africa and how different the results were in Senegal where t hey had been able to halt the spread of the disease through the wide distribution of condoms. The Clintons' position, which they both have always supported is that abortion should be 'safe, legal and rare" should appeal to both sides of this issue and I have never understood why social conservatives refuse to acknowledge this. No one ‘promotes’ abortion or wants to see someone they care about go through that – whether it be a young woman who got pregnant by mistake or someone who has found their baby has some medical problem that could hurt them or the mother – in most instances this is an intensely personal and difficult decision to make. Preventing the former should be a top priority for anyone who cares about these young women and should trump their need to push their religion on other people. Stay tuned, Tony Perkins got one thing right – this battle will continue for a long time. I have to wonder if all the people who picket Planned Parenthood offices, bomb clinics and engage in similar behavior spent that time and energy on prevention maybe we’d have less pregnancies to worry about. If only…
And in our ‘pro-life’ oriented world…
More information has surfaced regarding Cho Seung-Hui, the student who killed 33 people at Virginia Tech. He sent a package to NBC News, which included video images taken ‘during the rampage':
“April 18 (Bloomberg) — The Virginia Tech University student who shot 32 people to death on campus this week mailed a package of images and video messages to NBC News during his rampage. After killing two students in a dorm on the , campus on April 16, Cho Seung Hui, 23, sent the package, NBC News said in a statement today. He went on to kill 30 more in a classroom building before taking his own life. One image released by NBC shows Cho wearing a backward black baseball cap and glaring at the camera while extending two pistols in gloved hands. NBC News broadcast a video tonight showing Cho delivering a profanity-laced tirade. “When the time came I did it. I had to,'' Cho says in the video. He also says, “You forced me into a corner and gave me only one option. The decision was yours.''
Additionally, multiple news sources say he had been committed in 2005 for being suicidal and students who knew him said he never spoke to anyone, most people who knew him thought he had mental problems but no one did anything. One of his suitemates told Chris Matthews on tonight’s Hardball that his own suitemates did not even know his name until the RA posted it on his door. The same person knew him for almost four years and thought he was a business major – he learned of the gunman’s true major when he read it in the paper and was surprised. He assumed one reason Cho kept to himself was that his English was not very good and that he was shy about it. My only question remains: why did no one step in and try to help him before this? Colleges all over the country will take another look at students who may struggle with their own inner demons but it should not stop there.
Depression is a major problem for adolescents. ABC News reported tonight that the benefits of antidepressants outweigh any risks. It does not seem hard to see why people at this age are so prone to be depressed. It is a hard time.
“Depression, when it occurs, is potentially lethal. Suicide is the third-leading cause of death in adolescents and is most often preceded by a major depressive episode. Adolescents are particularly vulnerable to developing suicidal thinking in the context of depression, in part because adolescence is a time of identity formation during the human lifespan.” (ABC News)
The story above gives warning signs people can look for. Of course, we still have to move beyond the idea I mentioned yesterday that people are to blame for any mental illness they have. We need to give them the same support we would give someone with cancer. It would be nice to think something will change because of this horrible act but once the news story dries up the country’s attention will move on to something else. The people directly affected will never be the same but the nation will go on.
Iraq
Much to the dismay of the White House, the new (barely) Democratic Congress is not going to back down on Iraq. Karl Rove predicted last week that the Democrats would bow to what Dubya wants but it looks like that is not going to happen. According to the Post:
President Bush sparred across the table with Democratic congressional leaders opposed to the war on Wednesday in a prelude to a veto showdown over a conflict that has claimed the lives of more than 3,200 troops. During an hourlong meeting at the White House, the president told lawmakers directly he will not sign any bill that includes a timetable for a troop withdrawal, and they made it clear Congress will send him one anyway. "We believe he must search his soul, his conscience and find out what is the right thing for the American people," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of , told reporters after the session. "I believe signing this bill will do that."
It is hard to envision this president signing any bill that would make it look like he is changing his position on this war, a war that he said when it started would ‘make or break’ his presidency. He was right. Back then thousands of people marched against invading Iraq and they continue to do so but this White House does not see or hear any views that differ from theirs. Part of me has to respect someone who believes in something so much that public opinion will not sway their view. This does not seem to be the case here. Here it seems we have a president who sees any change of opinion as a show of weakness. He believes he is right and we should all fall in line. That is not what our country is supposed to be about.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
– Theodore Roosevelt
Wanna learn more about me? Click on my gravatar!
I am a Democrat, a New Yorker and a Met fan. If that is not the ultimate trifecta of cynicism, I don't know what is.
Recent conversations.
AlysonChadwick.com 