Bravo.
OUR OPINION: Daniels’ Planned Parenthood call does us wrongHave Rep. Ed Clere and Sen. Ron Grooms, whose propaganda machines typically cloak all legislative business under the all-purpose mantra of "jobs," even tried to offer a public rationale for their votes on this and other reactionary, theocratic measures?
So much for calling a truce. Instead, Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels decided last week instead to approve an assault on social issues by drawing his sword and thrusting it into the gut of every Hoosier who values any shred of personal freedom they have.
Shouldn't the newspaper ask them to do so?
22 comments:
Again I need a bridge built here...please tell me what cutting off tax payer funding to the largest abortion provider has to do with personal freedom...? And please don't give me the line that women won't get cancer screenings. The question is about personal freedom as in the Tribune's editorial.
Didn't you just make a crack recently about patients being able to keep their chosen health service providers?
How does targeting a particular service provider along purely ideological lines increase personal freedom? What positive outcome results from this legislation? What happened to the truce on social issues? How does it reduce the number of abortions (if that is the goal)? How does it represent the lessened government involvement the GOP constantly waves its flag about? How does it provide better or more efficient services? How does it improve public health? What positive, public outcome results from this legislation?
Why is it that I have this sinking feeling that religion's gonna come into this, say, in about the next two minutes?
But Roger, Jesus said ...
It has to, Roger, because this legislation provides absolutely zero practical value. It's 100% an expression of religion as political pandering.
As you've witnessed on Facebook, Grooms has nothing to say about positive outcomes and Clere, who refused to answer questions about the tolls he'd already voted on under cover of a "cynical" politics claim, thus far is not commenting on it.
The paper should challenge this bit of theater not only with an editorial but exactly as you suggested, with direct questioning of elected officials about how this improves public health.
WOW, this town's paper just took a huge left turn. Thinking maybe I should cancel my subscription, but I love to read about high school sports!
Jeff, my remark about keeping your provider was a crack on Obama's health care takeover plan. Those were his words. Wait a second, Obama's plan is going to save us all anyway. So just wait a year kids and you can get your wellness check on someone else's dime.
Roger, Jesus has nothing to do with this. Our forefathers do though. Let's not pretend that all of us don't know the history and agenda of PP. It is well documented.
I applaud Ed and Ron for their conviction in doing what the voters wanted. You may not like it, but just like Obama said in 2009, elections have consequences.
I'll bite. What is PP's agenda that "we" all know?
That was my point, Daniel. When Democrats pushed a plan that might eventually cause some people to change providers, it was framed negatively as a hostile "takeover".
When the GOP passes a plan at the state level that unequivocally requires tens of thousands of Hoosiers to change providers immediately, it's characterized as a righteous stand on conviction by the very same folks who were against such "takeovers" a short while ago.
As far as my other questions are concerned, I don't really expect you to have answers. The legislators who pushed this bill don't have answers, either. That's why it's so necessary, in order to tell an accurate story, to ask them the questions.
The American taxpayer subsidizes churches by allowing non profit status. Heck, Indiana is now going to allow some of the public's tax dollars to go to church run private schools. As I'm against church "leaders" who sexually molest children and/or adults, how about we stop subsidizing these molesters? End the tax free ride!!!
What? The schools are run separately from the church with separate accounting? What? These bad "leaders" are only a small percentage of the total?
Hmm, where have I heard these arguments before? (And I didn't go so far as to say that 90% of the leaders molest children and then try to claim that I wasn't attempting to be factual)
American freedom....original question....????? The truth is that cutting off funding from anything does not effect personal freedom. However, funding certain things can.
Sorry to have bothered you gents today, but the new mayor should take a look into the water supply in the city. Seems as though the progressive pints have leaked into pipes under bank street.
For my sanity, I think I will take a break from this site, and the Tribune for that matter.
Planned Parenthood ... weren't they the ones on the Grassy Knoll?
Ok Mark, I don't want to leave you hanging, so I will state the obvious.
PP was started by Margaret Sanger. A very nice lady indeed. She was a blatant racist and believer in eugenics. She wanted the sterilization of blacks and yellows. Her wording, not mine. Quite a vision she had. She saw them as "unfit." She even wrote about it extensively in works titled "Some Moral Aspects of Eugenics" and "The purpose of eugenics." Got to love her conviction. Her words in a book geared toward teens: "It is a vicious cycle; ignorance breeds poverty and poverty breeds ignorance. There is only one cure for both, and that is to stoop breeding these things. Stop bringing to birth children whose inheritance cannot be one of health or intelligence. Stop bringing into the world children whose parents cannot provide for them."
But PP is not what it used to be you will argue. The current director is a black female. What a pawn. PP performs over 1 in 4 abortions in America today. How many of those are blacks? 35% of PP's abortions are to black mothers. Remember now that blacks only make up 12% of the population. You tell me, is the eugenics continuing? I think so. PP performs 47 abortions for every prenatal woman that comes in for a visit.
You tell me what their agenda is.
Is abortion legal? I am under the impression that it is.
How is eugenics responsible for abortions today?
Since you've apparently read them, Daniel, can you provide links to "Some Moral Aspects of Eugenics" and "The Purpose of Eugenics" for the rest of us?
Roger, it is legal, but that does not mean that tax payer money will be used for this barbaric act any more. Eugenics was the reasoning for the organization that in now PP. Without Sanger's attitude toward people that were different than her, we might not have had PP and the millions of lives lost with funding from Uncle Sam.
Jeff, why don't you try Google. Read it for yourself. Then get back to me and try to explain it all the way.
Roger, I like you as a person. But, I really do plan a long break from this blog.
Roger, it is legal, but that does not mean that tax payer money will be used for this barbaric act any more. Eugenics was the reasoning for the organization that in now PP. Without Sanger's attitude toward people that were different than her, we might not have had PP and the millions of lives lost with funding from Uncle Sam.
Jeff, why don't you try Google. Read it for yourself. Then get back to me and try to explain it all the way.
Roger, I like you as a person. But, I really do plan a long break from this blog.
Sorry for the double post. My daughter was signed in on google.
Remind me again what portion of taxpayer money actually went to abortion, Daniel. That's right- it didn't. It went to the other services. It has been illegal for tax money to fund abortions for approximately forty years, via the Hyde amendment. Indiana has never, ever been a state that voluntarily, or even involuntarily (via court order) appropriated funds for abortion.
Regardless of how or why Planned Parenthood was formed, it is an invaluable resource to many. While your OPINION may be that women won't stop getting cancer screenings, the fact remains that they cannot afford to go anywhere else (or, there isn't anything in their city that does the same within commuting distance).
Learn your facts and your laws. Talk to women OUTSIDE your church. Talk to women OUTSIDE your subdivision. Talk to young, single moms, high school and college aged women- not in your social circle. It's humbling.
Daniel, if I were to say that because many of the Founding Fathers owned slaves and possessed decidedly unenlightened attitudes toward non-whites, the Constitution could still not be trusted as a playbook more than two hundred years later, you'd surely dispute my judgment, and say that as men of their time and place, they could not be expected to see beyond a horizon they did not know even existed.
If proven that Margaret Sanger was more Nazi than Hitler himself, can it be said that the organization she founded is exactly today as it was then? The problem I'm having is this: Sanger was bad, she founded an organization, therefore the organization is bad, too.
I simply do not believe this to be supportable. I'm sorry you feel compelled to go away for a long time. I also know how strong your feelings are on this matter.
I agree with Jeff: In the matter of Planned Parenthood, we will come nowhere close to examiing the earnestness and veracity of anyone's convictions so long as the issue, as phrased in Indiana under Mitch Daniels, is pure agitprop.
To Roger's point, Winston Churchill, a photo of whom who Daniel uses as his avatar and once described as his "favorite European", was a eugenics supporter during the same time period as well.
http://www.winstonchurchill.org/support/the-churchill-centre/publications/finest-hour-online/594-churchill-and-eugenics
And if one is interested in a young Churchill's views on people "different" than himself, they might examine his involvement in colonial slaughter in Africa and elsewhere. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/not-his-finest-hour-the-dark-side-of-winston-churchill-2118317.html
Tip: If your explorations happen to lead to my friend Jane, whose Kikuyu ancestors were slaughtered and imprisoned trying to fight off British advances in the Kenyan highlands, you might not want to mention that benevolent ol' Winston is a personal fave.
Christians killed mentally ill people that they thought were possessed by Satan. Many Christian churches approved of slavery.
Daniel, just because you quit "growing" at age 5 doesn't mean that it applies to everyone. (your words, not mine)
Post a Comment