You may find Mac and my discussion very interesting. They share a very interesting story that makes a good case for late term abortions. See the comments on this post.
MPP Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act
Thoughts?
(Originally I thought Mac was writing a story from personal experience, it turns out they were posting Christy Zink's story. Sorry for the ensuing confusion...)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
35 comments:
You wrote : Quotes may help clarify things next time.
So you think they should use their time spending and taxing more…. Surprise…
I think you skipped some of my questions. I cross posted at G2A, we will see if my readers have anything to add.
Thanks for reading my response but apparently we have miscommunicated … which items do you want quotes on … are you asking about my reference to Moriah Miles, you can view highlights and a link to her testimony here.
I failed to understand the reference to “spending and taxing more” … I support “smart spending and fair taxation”.
“Smart spending” means less spending on unnecessary items and spending that is necessary.
For example, a recent House votes involved $53,948,949 that could have stopped.
That’s $29,962,425 for advertising with NASCAR, $14,496,424 for Indy Car racing, $3,960,100 for American Motorcycle Racing, $5,150,000 for World Wrestling Entertainment, and $380,000 for Motocross. The advertising is to promote the National Guard … at a time when recruitment goals are being met/exceeded and the plan is to reduce the size of the military.
Is it smart to advertise now ? Is that advertising the “key” to recruitment ?
IMO, that is money that should be saved … but the House rejected the spending reduction.
MORE TO FOLLOW
The public has to wary of politicians … they will “spin” a yarn, duping people and getting re-elected … take for example, John Kline’s “saving” of TRICARE … $56 million so that some beneficiaries who were grandfathered in the old system won’t have to leave TRICARE Prime (they still have their coverage through the new TRICARE Standard) … what Chairman Kline does not mention is that to pay for it, the pension benefit for other veterans is being changed.
IMO, everyone should be on TRICARE Standard … it will save money.
Or, how about Michele Bachmann who self-promoting the need for a Special Committee to POW/MIA Affairs (press release) … who would be against addressing POW/MIA families …. Well, since the proposal always gets lots of co-sponsors but never gets enacted, there must be some “Powers that be” realize that this is just “show” … its something that has been on the House’s agenda as far back as 2003 … long before Congresswoman Bachmann was in the House.
There needs to be smart spending … for example, funding so that communities can address wildfires can be prepared, and possibly contain fires. The funding was offset … yet, some Members voted against it.
I could go on but you get the drift.
Regarding the direct questions that I did not respond … my response is that is a personal decision … not a political decision.
IMO, Barry Goldwater got it right … abortion has become a litmus test by various religious leaders :
“On religious issues there can be little or no compromise. There is no position on which people are so immovable as their religious beliefs. There is no more powerful ally one can claim in a debate than Jesus Christ, or God, or Allah, or whatever one calls this supreme being. But like any powerful weapon, the use of God’s name on one’s behalf should be used sparingly. The religious factions that are growing throughout our land are not using their religious clout with wisdom. They are trying to force government leaders into following their position 100 percent. If you disagree with these religious groups on a particular moral issue, they complain, they threaten you with a loss of money or votes or both.
I’m frankly sick and tired of the political preachers across this country telling me as a citizen that if I want to be a moral person, I must believe in “A,” “B,” “C” and “D.” Just who do they think they are? And from where do they presume to claim the right to dictate their moral beliefs to me?
And I am even more angry as a legislator who must endure the threats of every religious group who thinks it has some God-granted right to control my vote on every roll call in the Senate. I am warning them today: I will fight them every step of the way if they try to dictate their moral convictions to all Americans in the name of “conservatism.”
~Barry Goldwater
BTW, I am an independent voter --- never have given one dime to any candidate or political party … I vote … but not by party line … incumbents have more of a problem retaining my vote.
First time visitor, so let me know if my hyperlinks do not appear as formatted.
Mac Hall
Mac,
Links worked great !!! Nice use of quotes... Welcome.
If you comment once in awhile I am sure my readers will try to determine if you are a real independent or just think you are. So far your comments seem pretty well aligned with the DFL, but time will tell.
Just curious, where do you think your beliefs vary from the DFL's platform?
Also for perspective, are you a man or a woman?
To All:
I misinterpretted Mac's comment on MPP. The story that was posted in the comment was about someone else.
Here are the questions I asked, however some are incorrect given my new found knowledge.
"1. Just curious, how old were you when this occured?
2. Would you support 20+ week abortions in cases of rape & incest? Should “society / Congress” have any say in this? Why or why not?
3. Would you allow the Mother / Doctor to kill a 1 month old infant because it had the same condition that your fetus did? Why or why not? How is this different?
4. You sound like a loving and compassionate Mother. Do you think women should have the right to use abortion as a form of birth control? (ie abort a healthy fetus)
Remember: I am pro-choice and anti-abortion. I really wish women would make another choice, however my Libertarian leanings say it is their right, responsibility and burden. And by the way, for the same reason I am pro-physcian assisted suicide." G2A
Mac,
"my response is that is a personal decision … not a political decision."
Interesting way of avoiding answering... Maybe we should eliminate most of the murder, tort and other laws where "society/politics" defines moral behavior.... I wonder how that work out for our society. Or are you an anarchist?
Christy Zink's Testimony Video
GOP Rep Gohmert Response Video
Think Progress Thoughts
G2A Some Past Discussion on Abortion
If I was a moderate republican I think I would call myself independent and vote for candidates from both parties, although I think real moderate republicans, if there are any left, still vote republican.
about abortion- if it were up to me I would make abortion legal during the first trimester and after that when chosen for the physical health of the mother or fetus. I would trust doctors to ethically follow the law.
Laurie,
So does the reverse logic apply?
"If I was a moderate Democrat, I think I would call myself Independent and vote for candidates from both parties. Although I think real moderate Democrats, if there are any left, still vote Democrat."
Or is it impossible to have a moderate Democrat??? Now there is an interesting question...
In the Christy Zink case, no one's physical health was at risk. Though there was a great deal of mental anguish on Christy's part. However it does not seem to meet your criteria... (ie "after that when chosen for the physical health of the mother or fetus")
Thoughts regarding these questions... Would you allow the Mother / Doctor to kill a 1 month old infant because it had the same condition that your fetus did? Why or why not? How is this different?
We seem to agree for the most part, but this confusing zone at or after viability is chock full of ethic, belief and value issues. Definitely worth discussion.
Collin Peterson is a moderate democrat.
I am amazed at how little you learn from the great links I provide, such as this one from not too long ago:
Political Scientist: Republicans Most Conservative They've Been In 100 Years
the graph shows that a moderate republican (0.1) is closer numerically in his views to the congregational democrats (-0.4) than he is to the GOP (0.7)
about abortion - the story I read described severe health problems of the fetus.
to me a fetus does not have the same right to life as a 1 month old, that is why I would allow some second trimester abortions.
I really think additional abortion laws are a solution in search of a problem, as second trimester abortions are already relatively rare.
I think we had some differences of opinion regarding the validity and accuracy of that link... G2A Approval Ratings (ie shifting time based relative scales vs fixed principle based absolute scales)
It seems to me the fetus was medically physically stable in the womb. It's brain would just not function correctly ever.
So it was okay to disconnect life support at 22 weeks gestational and not at 1 mth old???
I agree that this does seem like a non-problem, however it is a fascinating values discussion. Of course, being a physician assisted suicide supporter I would approve both. But at what level of disability should parents be allowed the right to kill their fetus or infant?
In the animal world, runts often die. It is that survival of the fittest thing...
This all ties back to our high cost of healthcare discussion, usually we spend a lot to save everyone for better or worse. Therefore defying the "law of the jungle" and natural selection for better or worse.
what is interesting to me is your inability to see that republicans have become much more conservative than they were 30 years ago.
about abortion I would give the mother wide latitude in deciding whether to abort a fetus with a known disability, especially before viability.
ending a child's life by turning off life support is a much easier and legal decision than physician assisted murder, as an infant is incapable of committing suicide.
I have an uncle who would seem to be a candidate for assistance in ending his life as he is deaf, blind, advanced alzheimer's, and in need of much assistance with mobility, but I don't think my aunt would choose it even if it were legal and he had a living will stating his preferences.
These are certainly not easy issues to deal with.
I agree... I can't understand why you won't see that the Democrats keep drifting futher Left like a ship without an anchor. (Ie gay marriage, socialized healthcare, amnesty for illegal aliens, etc)
you know I don't recall you providing a single link to back up your opinion that the democrats have moved as far from center as the GOP.
While it is clearly a waste of time trying to persuade you of the obvious, it is mildly amusing to me and quite easy to find sources that agree with my point of view.
The numbers prove it: The GOP is estranged from America
So at 6 mths gestational it is a choice that deserves latitude, and at 1 mth old it is murder... That is a pretty important 4 mths...
So what health issues deserve this latitude? (Down's, Cystic Fibrosis, Other)
I'll read your link later.
However... If a ship and the small boats tied to it drift away from it's shore bound moorings, are the moorings actually moving in your view of reality? Or is it the ship and boats that are moving away?
It may be that the USA is becoming more socialistic as the citizen's keep voting for more free money... While GOP is staying true to their Christian and Capitalistic principles.
I think the viability line should be drawn at 5 months and there is a great deal of difference between a 5 month fetus and a 1 month old infant.
and just for fun here is another link for you:
Let’s just say it: The Republicans are the problem.
I think most of the difference is in our heads... Both have hearts, hands, feet, etc.
Here is one describing the moving ship drifting away from shore... 5 Signs
Maybe this is a good image... The GOP is the rope that is trying to prevent the ship from being drawn into the whirlpool that will destroy it. (Ie socialism /sin) An interesting thought...
So are they the hero or the villain ???
Good evening,
Just checking in on this post and I see that because of the size constraints on your comment section, the very first comment was not included ... did I say something inappropriate ?
Mac Hall
Not that I know of. I'll check my emails and see if there are any comments that aren't on the site. It would be odd if one of several got caught in moderation, but I'll check.
Just curious, as I see that the House is scheduled to vote on H.R. 1797 - Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, this week ... WHY NOW ?
I suspect that this legislation could have easily passed during the 109th Congress (2005 - 2007) as breakdown was as follows:
Senate: 44 D, 55 R House: 202 D, 231 R
and the President was George W. Bush ?
Cannot you see that this is simply a Show-the-Base-We-Care bill ... as previously stated it will die in the Senate.
BTW, another bill scheduled to be voted on is H.R. 475, do you support or oppose it ?
H.R. 475, which would add a new excise tax on flu vaccines … a meager 75 cents a shot but with the potential of 135 million doses of flu shots distributed in a year, the revenue generated would be $100 million. The monies go into the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund … which was created by the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986. The law was passed at the specific request of pharmaceutical companies who threatened to stop making vaccines without product liability protection, as well as organizations representing pediatricians who were reluctant to give childhood vaccines without liability protection. It is a matter of public record that the Departments of Health and Human Services and Justice were strongly opposed to the legislation. Currently, a $.75 excise tax is imposed on each dose of specific vaccines based on the number of diseases that is prevented by the vaccine. Trivalent influenza vaccine for example, is taxed $0.75 because it prevents one disease; measles-mumps-rubella vaccine, which prevents three diseases, is taxed $2.25. Now, Representative Jim Gerlach wants a Flu Tax to go to the VITF. While it may be well-intended, the fund currently is over-funded … as its current balance is higher than what it has paid out in over 25 years. Congress has known about this situation for years but has ignored it … Because the trust fund has spent less than what it has collected, the remaining $1 billion was loaned to the Treasury and used for other federal programs and activities. In exchange, the trust fund received Treasury securities to be redeemed if needed to pay future claims. Why the claims are so low is the nature of the system … To file a claim, the vaccine must have caused an injury that lasted for more than six months after vaccination, OR resulted in a hospital stay and surgery (both), OR resulted in death. Not all vaccines are covered, although most vaccines recommended for children are covered, including MMR, polio, tetanus, pertussis and others. It may take two to three years to work through the claim process. And the success rate is low … the most recent report (April 1, 2013) indicates that 3,217 claims were compensated while 9,454 were dismissed. Now, Congressman Gerlach wants to add the flu vaccine to the vaccines that an excise tax is collected … no outrage about the cost to consumers nor the concern to make health care more affordable. -
Something in the comment landed it in my blogger spam folder. It is back now and I used it as today's post. I work hard to be the laziest blogger on the web.
MN Unborn Child Protection Info
Wiki Pre-natal Research
It seems the research has improved a lot since 2005-2006. Maybe that's why it did not become a tactic until now.
I always wonder why Obama did not raise taxes in 2009-2010, instead using his clout to pass Obamacare, but it is somewhat pointless to ponder...
Both parties use whatever they can whenever they can to support the desires of their constituents/ supporters. And to put a stick in the other party's eye...
FYI, moved drug tax to its own post. Things get so messy when I don't do that.
John,
Thanks for finding the first entry ... without it, the message was a little confusing.
The jest of what I was trying to convey is that I see hypocrites ... they claim they want to save money but when given a choice to stop sending money to WWE / NASCAR, etc. ... they don't. Did you know that Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune and Fort Bragg have had to eliminate celebrating Independence Day because of the sequester ? Maybe they can get tickets to a NASCAR race.
Do you know how many military bands we have and at what cost .... but they have not been reduced because of the sequester ... just their performance travel trips.
Do you know how many naval carrier groups we have (and how many the next largest country has ?
There's money that could be cut ... and we could still have fireworks on the Fourth of July and still maintain the Best Defense.
It's not just the military spending ... look at the "Flu Vaccine" bill ... and earlier this month the House approved Safeguarding America’s Pharmaceuticals Act (H.R. 1919) which could have been paid for through user fees instead it will cost taxpayers $15M.
They talk about saving money ... but they really are protecting their business friends.
That's what I was trying to convey about "smart spending and fair taxation".
Regarding my gender ... frankly, that should be irrelevant ... it's the words that should be judged.
Regarding the DFL platform, since I am not aligned with any party, I have not read it. Frankly, I do not pay much attention to the local Minnesota scene ... by reps are incumbents and they are set for life based on the quality and lack of competition.
Regarding "we should eliminate most of the murder, tort and other laws where "society/politics" defines moral behavior." ... that is a subject for philosophy class ... which we could go round-and-round about ... and as far as I recall, the US Constitution does not say anything about murder.
The abortion laws are on the books and what I find interesting is that it is the "religious-minded" that are trying to change it to fit their interpretation of their religious teachings. Funny thing is that many of those people would never cite Shari'ah law as a basis, but they would cite the Bible ... but what about the Halacha where Shulchan Aruch (the Code of Jewish Law) says to test for a dying person's breath to know whether or not they are alive. So, if death is the absence of breath, life is the presence of breath. Thus the thinking is that life begins when the baby takes its first breath. Thus the difference between a fetus and a baby. And what about the agnostics ... and are you familiar with the case of Savita Halappanavar, an Indian woman who suffered a miscarriage and died after being refused an abortion in an Irish hospital staff because of Irish abortion law ?
I see some politicians playing to their crowds ... knowing that nothing will change Today, but it could have in the 109th Congress.
Mac Hall
Your readers may enjoy this reporting on the bill to be approved today ... key takeaway :
The bill stands no chance of becoming law, with Democrats in control of the Senate and the White House. Republican leaders acknowledge that its purpose is to satisfy vocal elements of their base who have renewed a push for greater restrictions on reproductive rights, even if those issues harmed the party’s reputation with women in 2012.
Yap, appeasement ... as previously stated, this legislation could have been enacted when the Republicans had control of the House and Senate during the Bush years ... for why they did not, if you have not done so already, please read J. David Kuo's (an evangelical Christian conservative and former top official of President George W. Bush's faith-based White House program) Tempting Faith: An Inside Story of Political Seduction.
Be sure to watch for the Roll Call to see how Charlie Dent (R-PA) votes. “I think it’s a stupid idea to bring this up,” said Representative Charlie Dent of Pennsylvania. “The economy is on everybody’s minds. We’re seeing stagnant job numbers. Confidence in the institution, in government, is eroding. And now we’re going to have a debate on rape and abortion.”
Gosh, the last Pennsylvania Republican to make a similar statement was Jim Gerlach about the "FlexTime / Overtime" legislation ... btw, Gerlach voted for John Kline's Working Families Flexibility Act of 2013.
I'll probably post it in a few days.
My question however is going to be, so what?
Obama and the Senate play games also. Of course theirs usually involve lightening our wallet and giving the money to someone else... (ie Obamacare, Jobs programs, Tax increases, etc)
I have finally concluded that this whole charade would be funny if not literally a life-and-death issue. That is, there is a great wailing and gnashing of teeth because the Republicans are so "extreme" and because the bill has no chance of passing the Democrat-led Senate or being approved by Barack "infanticide is okay" Obama. Doesn't this depend upon your point of view? Why is it extreme to believe that a child which could survive outside the womb can be killed at whim? Why do we criticize Republicans for doing the right thing – passing this law – rather than criticize the Democrats for obstructing it? The Republicans should be credited for giving the Democrats the opportunity to get on the right side of this issue. After all, 100% of all voters were NOT aborted.
So you would have insisted that the Mother deliver her child with the severely deformed brain?
What is your rationale? The child at best would have been breathing. Certainly its qaulity of life would have been low, and what a burden on society...
I do not propose a flat out ban on all abortions, not even after the fetal viability stage. I side with the sizable majority of Americans who would restrict such abortions, however, to those involving rape and incest, life and reproductive health of the mother, or gross fetal deformity. Even then, I think it should be required to be an informed choice.
What do you mean by "informed choice"?
I mean women should be informed of the risks of the procedure versus the risks of delivery, including mental health risks. They should be informed of the state of their unborn child (the ultrasound would be one way), and offered counseling on alternatives. In short, all of the things we require of any other surgical procedure.
On what basis do you believe that is not happening today?
I really don't know any Pro-Choicers that are in a hurry to abort a fetus, they just want the Mother to have the option. See this for more on the counseling provided by that "terrible" organization... Seems they are doing what you describe...
Planned Parenthood Counseling
"On what basis do you believe that is not happening today?"
On the basis that every time pro-life legislation is proposed that would mandate such counseling or even simple "informed choice" the pro-abortion people scream bloody murder. Which is pretty ironic when you think about it.
Usually it seems those rules would force the poor woman to stand in front of a pro-life inquisition panel... Not am impartial party who provides information.
Post a Comment