Contraception, Abortion and the “War on Women”

Those of you who know me, have read my blog or listened to me speak on CRF Radio, know that I’m a fiscal and constitutional conservative, but that I’m more of a moderate on the social issues. So it should come as no surprise that I’ve never written about prophylactic-contraception or abortion.

Frankly, until President Obama made it an issue by putting a mandate in the “Affordable Care Act” (aka Obamacare) that requires hospitals and schools run by religious institutions – as well as private companies run by people of faith – to provide coverage for contraception and the “morning after” pill in their healthcare coverage, it wasn’t something I felt a need to address in any great detail.

I believe that Roe v. Wade was decided incorrectly because it’s a Tenth Amendment, State’s rights issue. The Supreme Court should have ruled to let each state make their own laws and then Congress should have passed a law protecting a woman that goes to a state that permits abortion from being prosecuted when/if she returned to her home state. If you don’t like the laws in your state, you’re free to move to another state. As the census showed us, in the last 10 years millions of Americans have left states like New York and California and moved to states like Texas and Florida. So evidently, whatever their reasons, people do and have voted with their feet.

I want to try to examine both contraception and abortion in terms of the so-called “moral high ground”, which somehow Democrats seem to have seized (at least in the media).

I should note that I have no objection to people using contraception. That is a personal choice. And frankly it’s also the personal responsibility of both the man and the woman if they choose to have sex and don’t want to have a child. What I do have a problem with is people expecting taxpayers and people of faith that disagree to pay for what happens in their bedrooms.

I also should make it clear where I personally stand on abortion. I neither want to outlaw all abortions, nor do I think it should be legal to terminate a pregnancy once the fetus is viable outside the womb. Both positions are extreme to me.

Once the baby can survive outside the mother it is, in my opinion, no longer simply a matter of the woman’s choice. There is clearly another person who has the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness involved at that point. And six months is more than enough time to decide to have an abortion if you truly don’t want to have a baby.

Hopefully having clarified my own positions, I want to address the way that progressives like Barack Obama, Sandra Fluke and Debbie Wasserman-Schultz talk about these issues and the “moral high ground” they claim to stand on.

Whether it’s contraception or abortion, progressives claim that the issue is a “woman’s access to healthcare”. This is an intentionally false and deceptive argument.

Read more here.

Ron Pagano: Salisbury’s Loony Occupy Leader Who Spouts Lies

A Letter to the editor:

Everyone leaves a legacy. When you die, you’re remembered, perhaps, for how you tried to make a better world for your children and grandchildren. Rep. Andy Harris’ legacy will be one of “lies, misleading distortions and half-truths” resulting in a less-safe, less-healthy world for women, children and the chronically ill.

The Republican playbook in 2012 includes taking credit for other people’s work. Romney tried to take “a lot of credit” for the auto industry recovery. Bogus is the nicest word I can muster on that claim.

Not to be outdone, Harris issued a news release last week claiming credit for keeping the U.S. Postal Service from closing facilities or offices. Can anyone tell me what Harris did? Anyone familiar with this issue — including hundreds of postal workers on the Eastern Shore — know it was Sens. Barbara Mikulski and Ben Cardin who led that fight. Mikulski even sent letters to Harris seeking his support to save these jobs — without even a response. Chalk one up for lies.

Polls show how most women feel about the lack of Republican support on issues ranging from health insurance to equal pay for equal work. Harris and his extremist cohorts have failed to support women’s issues. Of course, it should be different when it comes to violence against women, right?

Wrong. Last month, Harris and other right-wing radicals refused to extend the Violence Against Women Act, which has reduced domestic violence by 58 percent since 1994. Last week, in an attempt to fool women everywhere, Harris voted for a gutted version. The purpose was to muddy the waters and by confusing people, to appear to care about women.

What is it about the treatment of women in the 1800s that is so appealing to Harris? Here’s one for the misleading distortions column.

Now, for half-truths.

Truth: Harris talks big on making America energy independent. So why do we sell America’s oil and natural gas abroad? Why hasn’t Harris supported research into alternative energy sources that could reduce traditional energy costs? Why is he so intent on supporting fracking? The answers: Harris’ contributors want bigger profits. Fracking is being suspended by other countries and across the United States, because of health and pollution dangers.

Will it create jobs here on the Eastern Shore? No. But Harris gets lots of money from the Koch brothers and other out-of-state supporters in the oil industry. Harris has even voted to take away all powers of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to control greenhouse gas emissions, which affect our health and the environment.

These are just a few issues that affect Harris’ legacy. Ask yourself: Is this a legacy I would be proud to leave my children and grandchildren? I sure wouldn’t.

Ron Pagano is a retired attorney, entrepreneur and disability activist.

———————————————————————–

The lies just keep coming from the left. Are they capable of telling the truth or being moral at all? I do not think so.

Who the hell is Julia and why am I paying for her whole life?

In the new Barack Obama campaign piece The Life of Julia, voters can “Take a look at how President Obama’s policies help one woman over her lifetime — and how Mitt Romney would change her story.” It is one of the most brazenly statist pieces of campaign literature I can ever remember seeing.

Let’s for the purposes of this post forget the misleading generalizations regarding policy (no one is innocent on that account, obviously). What we are left with is a celebration of a how a woman can live her entire life by leaning on government intervention, dependency and other people’s money rather than their own initiative or hard work. It is, I’d say, brazenly un-American, in the sense that it celebrates a mindset we have — outwardly, at least — shunned.

It is also a mindset that women should find offensively patronizing. When they’re old enough, I hope my two daughters will find the notion that their success hinges on the president’s views on college-loan interest rates preposterous. Yet, according to the “Life of Julia,” women are helpless without the guiding hand of Barack Obama.

Julia can enroll in a Head Start program to help get her ready for school. Because of steps President Obama has taken to improve the program … Julia can take the SATs because she was trained by the useless “Race to the Top” program, yes, implemented by President Obama … During college, Julia undergoes surgery, which is thankfully covered by her insurance due to parents’ coverage until she turns 26 … thanks to Obama.

Julia works as a full-time web designer, and thanks to Obamacare, her health insurance is required to cover birth control and preventive care, “letting Julia focus on her work rather than worry about her health…”

…because children are bad for your health, obviously.

And so on and so forth.

Read more here.

Obama Says What???

President Obama warned women voters today that Republicans in Congress and presumptive GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney want to “close doors of opportunity we thought we’d kicked open a long time ago.”

“This is a party that prides itself in being rabidly anti-regulation. These are folks who claim to believe in freedom from government interference and meddling. But it doesn’t seem to bother them when it comes to women’s health,” Obama told a crowd of 600 Democratic women at a campaign fundraiser in Washington.

The president cited efforts by several Republican state governors and legislatures to enact laws that would restrict access to contraception, redefine personhood or require ultrasounds before obtaining an abortion.

“If you don’t like it, the governor of Pennsylvania said you can ‘close your eyes,’” Obama said of Republican Gov. Tom Corbett, who has backed a mandatory ultrasound bill.

“It’s appalling. It’s offensive. It’s out of touch. And when it comes to what’s going on out there, you’re not going to close your eyes,” Obama said. “Women across America aren’t closing their eyes. As long as I’m president, I won’t either.”

The president explained that as a husband and father of two daughters he has a “vested interest” in advancing rights for women, and would fight efforts to “turn back the clock to the ’50s or the ’40s or the ’30s or maybe further than that.”

And though he never mentioned Romney by name, he made clear that his general election rival was in his sights.

“When you talk about how ‘marvelous’ your party’s economic plan is,” Obama said, making a veiled reference to Romney’s characterization of the House GOP budget, “when you break out the numbers, what you’re really saying is, you want to pass massive new tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires and pay for them by gutting programs that among other things support low-income women and children.”

“When you say we should ‘get rid of Planned Parenthood’,” he continued, with another jab at the former governor, “you’re not just talking about restricting a woman’s ability to make her own health care decisions, you’re talking about denying the preventive care like cancer screenings that millions of women rely on.”

Read more here.

%d bloggers like this: