Democrat Wants Abortion In Health Care Bill
Abortion Preferable to Single Motherhood?
Over the years, many crackpot arguments have been made in favor of abortion- however, this one takes the cake.
The argument is that single motherhood is the biggest threat to pro-family efforts, not abortion. This is a very defensible position, as abortion merely ends a life and single motherhood is likely to bring a life through a cycle of poverty that will lead generations after it through the same cycle. Of course, I disagree strongly with this position, as should all pro-life supporters. Murder is murder, after all.
What is not defensible, however, are the author’s presumptions as to why single motherhood is the biggest threat to pro-family supporters, including the following: “Virgins are now considered losers, and people who save themselves for marriage are considered weird or extreme religious nuts. ” There are a number of things wrong with these points, including the following:
1. Speaking as a male, female virgins are considered very attractive, classy and worthy of raising one’s standards to impress, as I see guys doing every day. It’s the free-living, one-night-standers who are considered losers, of bad morals, etc. even by those who partake in sexual activities with them. (To paraphrase the old adage, a guy is “cool” for sex, a woman is an R-rated word. Britney Spears, anyone? Lindsay Lohan, perhaps?) To clarify, no, I have no experiences with these matters, as I am a virgin. Perhaps my viewpoint is biased regarding abstinent women. If so, I would contend non-virgin viewpoints on the benefits of having sex are biased as well.
Related, there are many consequences to those who have pre-marital sex at a young age; The Heritage Foundation shows a number of them, and the Journal of Youth and Adolescence had this study in February, 2007. The consequences, detailed in the linked research, include high delinquency rates and lower educational success, among others.
2. People who save themselves for marriage are considered respectable religious followers, as Americans generally respect others’ spiritual and religious beliefs (or non-beliefs, as the case may be). As a conservative Catholic, I am told by many that they “wish they had done that [been a virgin]” until they met their current significant other, often a fiancee. Too, even those who don’t regret their past actions often say it’s respectable to have the kind of strength they believe it takes not to have pre-marital sex. There are, of course, those who are virgins due to social awkwardness, but there are also those who have sex because of peer pressure, so the “losers” argument holds no water. (One example of an abstinent non-loser, by the way, is retired NBA player A.C. Green.)
The fact is that abortion consists of the taking of a human life, and most pro-family advocates recognize this. They also recognize that not having sex, staying married, having a good education etc. are major keys to keeping single motherhood rates down. On the other hand, encouragement by those who are distinctly not pro-family for actions such as abortion, contraceptive use, “shacking up” and “The Pill” definitely keep single motherhood rates up. Want proof? Look at how out-of-wedlock birth rates have changed over the last half-century, when all of the liberal and not pro-family concepts listed above became more popular. Too, as The Heritage Foundation put it, “For decades long, this well intentioned program had the unfortunate consequence of encouraging single women to have more children out of wedlock and penalized them if they got married or found employment. Not surprisingly, the welfare caseloads exploded and the out of wedlock birth rate steadily rose.”
The fact is, however, that all arguments against the author’s points are weaker than the basic point that abortion is wrong. Supporting the killing of humanity’s weakest for the sake of single motherhood prevention is a flawed argument akin to saying we should shoot poor people for increasing our health care costs or execute people for the sake of decreasing global warming.
Alan Grayson Is Enjoying His 15 Minutes of Fame
Imagine if a conservative or Republican did this about abortion. Unfortunately, it’s a very effective tactic- minimal effort, lots of attention and it excites the base.
Support These Democrats
I posted about President Obama’s abortion sleight-of-hand yesterday, and one commenter wanted to know who the Democrats were that challenged the president and Speaker Pelosi in a letter about abortion funding in any health care reform bills. The list can be found here, along with the letter to Speaker Pelosi.
Please take the time to contact the offices of these Representatives and offer your support for their admirable efforts. Representative Bart Stupak (D-MI) has led the charge and has done a great job thus far, even acknowledging his willingness to lose his seat by opposing government-supported abortion.
Democrats Lied- Kids May Die
According to LifeNews.com, pro-life Democrats and Republicans are unlikely to get a chance to vote on portions of the House bill currently being worked?on by Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) that will create a new method of funding. According to the Associated Press: “The main point of contention [among pro-life Democrats and pro-choice Democrats]?is the proposed new federal subsidies that would help lower-income people purchase health care coverage from private plans ? and potentially from a new government-sponsored plan ? within a new purchasing exchange.” Later in the article: “But the Democrats’ health overhaul bill would create a new stream of federal funding not covered by the restrictions….[Representative Bart] Stupak [D-Michigan]?says language specifying that someone obtaining an abortion must use her own money, not federal money from the subsidies, doesn’t go far enough because it’s impossible to clearly segregate funds in that way.”
I guess Nancy Pelosi and other pro-choice (read: pro-abortion) Democrats don’t get it- without a stipulation against abortions in the final health care bill coming out of the House, organizations like the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops can’t support their bill.?Furthermore, representatives who would otherwise like to see more government involvement in health care but are against killing children?may not vote for the bill.?29 Democrats joined Stupak in sending a letter to Pelosi, and given how many Blue Dogs are joining with Republicans with regards to concerns over the cost of the bill and the public option…keeping abortion in the bill may just kill the House version of health care reform.
(One addendum: if President Obama really wants to be the “post-partisan” president he talked about on the campaign trail, and wants to find the “middle ground” on abortion as he said at Notre Dame…he could always pressure Pelosi and Co. into accepting Stupak’s bill. Then it would probably give the House the votes it needs to pass a health reform bill. The question, however, is will the president do that, or will he stick to his ideological belief that any unborn child is worth killing?)
Can’t I Dissent on Anything?
The following was originally published and is the sole property of NewMajority.com
Like thousands of other undergraduates, I flocked to Washington, D.C. this summer to intern and build up my political resume. As summer is coming to a close and I will shortly be trading long days at the office for long nights at the library, an interesting event occurred during my final week at my internship at Brent Bozell?s Media Research Center.
I was chatting with one of my fellow interns when I noticed she had a stack of Pro-Life stickers, T-shirts, and pamphlets piled up on her desk. She apparently was given the material at one of Grover Norquist?s ?Wednesday Meetings,? by someone who asked her if she would be interested in starting up a Pro-Life group on her college campus. Like a good young conservative activist eager to fight the liberal establishment, without hesitation she precipitously agreed.
My intern friend proceeded to ask me if I would like to have a sticker for my car. When I replied with a solemn ?no,? she proceeded to Socratically question my position on abortion. When I told her that I do not consider myself ?pro-life? or an evangelize for the movement, my friend was quite taken aback and looked almost insulted. My young colleague ardently disagreed with me, to no surprise as she is Catholic and a strong social conservative. But what?s notable was her initial response to my view of the issue, ?Maybe you are working in the wrong place.?
Now of course the MRC is a conservative organization, and leans to the right on abortion. I chose to intern there because I am a conservative on foreign policy, immigration, economics, and basically every social issue, I don?t even consider myself ?pro-choice.?
This kind of seclusion regarding social issues seems to be an overwhelming theme of the conservative movement and Republican party politics lately. More than once, I have been labeled a ?squishy moderate? by my College Republican counterparts because of my view on abortion.
Apparently, gone are the days of Frank S. Meyer?s and William F. Buckley?s ?fusionism.? While maybe supply-side economics won?t fix the financial problems of today, and SDI won?t help win the Cold War, a return to Reagan?s ?big tent? philosophy would be a positive for conservatism. How can we rebuild a party when we practice seclusion rather than inclusion? Does one need to check every box on the conservative ideological checklist in order to be a Republican or a conservative?
Thank Goodness Nobody Likes Chris Matthews…
I was glancing at Hardball last night after returning from work, when Chris Matthews had the following exchange with his guest:
CHRIS MATTHEWS: Let’s talk about, let?s get to something really tough.
JONATHAN MARTIN, POLITICO: Sure.
MATTHEWS: Kathleen Sebelius, very likeable, very impressive. I think of the woman who becomes the governor in Mr. Holland?s Opus, remember the one who comes back?
LOIS ROMANO, WASHINGTON POST: Right.
MATTHEWS: Who becomes the governor, the woman governor. She looks like her, in fact. Is she gonna get through the, the terrorism of the, of the anti-abortion people?
ROMANO: Yeah I think she?s gonna do that and I think they?ve got a clear shot.
MATTHEWS: I mean verbal terrorism.
ROMANO: Yeah they?re, she?ll get through that.
I DO take solace every time I look at Mr. Matthew’s pathetic ratings… placing him behind CNN’s NEWSDESK!
| CNN | CNN NEWSROOM | 809 | 227 | 68 | 194 | 365 |
| MSNB | HARDBALL WITH C. MATTHEWS | 740 | 212 | 71 | 167 | 352 |
| HLN | NANCY GRACE (RPT) | 683 | 309 | 73 | 238 | 408 |
And the media wonders why Conservatives have been slightly angered lately…
rj
