Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Friday, September 30, 2016

toddakin

There’s a reason why Todd Akin and Richard Mourdock both lost their U.S. Senate races after simply making astonishingly dumb comments about rape and pregnancy.

In just a few words these two Republicans seemed to sum up latent suspicion about the anti-abortion-rights movement: While they claim to be pro-life, they’re actually just anti-woman.

Or at least they’re extraordinarily insensitive to the difficult choices that women have to make.

Former congressman Barney Frank summed up a lot of Americans’ feelings about the “life” movement when he said, “… [they] believe that life begins at conception and ends at birth…”

Beyond the hypocrisy of Governor Rick Perry (R-TX) pursuing anti-abortion legislation in between supervising executions of possibly innocent prisoners, right-wingers work toward anti-family policies when it comes to health care, education and the social safety net. And when they fight policies that would help prevent abortions, their agenda seems to be revealed as reversing the sexual revolution and preventing women from acting with the same sexual freedom that men take for granted.

The movement also ignores the crucial finding that abortion rates are higher in countries where the procedure is illegal.

Here are five ways the anti-choice movement actually makes abortion more likely (and more dangerous) and puts America’s most vulnerable families at risk.

  • dtgraham

    What is being done to Planned Parenthood right now is really, really dumb at best, and horribly paternalistic and mean spirited at worst. It smacks of the practices of many of the middle eastern fundamentalist countries. I’m not big on hyperbole but It’s along similar lines and one can’t help but make the comparison.

    There’s just too much misinformation purposely spread concerning Planned Parenthood being just one big abortion factory. Actually only 3% of their activities involve abortion, and federal law forbids any public funding received from financing those services. About 35% of their services provided go to contraception funding. Another 35% go towards STD testing and treatment, and about 16% are earmarked for cancer screening and prevention. On average roughly 75% of Planned Parenthood’s clients are women with incomes below 150% of the poverty line. In a nation without universal health care, they obviously provide an extremely valuable service.

    This is really just some strange, religious jihad masquerading as public policy. It’s not even about cutting spending. Defunding them will increase public expenditures on women’s health and health care overall, and likely significantly so. Planned Parenthood estimates that their services prevent around 620,000 pregnancies a year and extrapolate that to a prevention of 220,000 abortions a year. I don’t know what quantitative methodologies they’re using but I think it should be fairly apparent that their presence has a positive impact on both.

    In short, Planned Parenthood’s services save the federal government a lot of money, and you would hope that might be of interest to conservatives. I don’t think it’s possible to reach Republicans on a human level any more, but a cost accounting analysis might get some attention if they can be persuaded to lighten up on the religious crusade and stop being penny wise and pound foolish. Good luck with that though.

    • silence dogood

      “Are Guttmacher’s studies peer-reviewed?? How in the name of science was this ‘research’ published? As a former student of proper statistics and research, this was painful to read about– type I and type II errors everywhere!

      This leads me to conclude that Guttmacher’s ‘research’ is nothing more than white noise. It’s a pity that the people of Guttmacher wasted time compiling more hot air to throw into the void. I think PP’s funding of such a silly Institute further condemns PP abortion clinics to the category of ridiculous business practices, with no business in health care or the development of said ‘care’.”
      From the NEJM

      • dtgraham

        I wasn’t aware that PP got some or all of their data from Guttmacher. Honestly, now that I know that I’m more convinced than ever of their claims. Guttmacher-developed abortion incidence complication method (AICM) bases it’s estimates on country-specific data and follows an exact scientific approach. Studies using the AICM cover several countries, having passed rigorous peer reviews, and have been published in a number of respected journals. This approach, and the findings it has generated, have also been used in international organizations such as the World Health Organization.

        I’ve studied statistics and quantitative methods but that’s not my field of work per se. If you’re a professional statistician, I bow to your superior knowledge. I don’t agree with everyone in my field either, but in abortion stats, Guttmacher is gold standard my friend. Thanks for the information anyway.

  • silence dogood

    And I suppose you would accept the results of a study funded by Koch Foundation as well……this is total CRAP.

    • Sand_Cat

      A lot like your posts.

  • MasterWes

    Is it just me, or are there other people who can see the similarities to the real life story that took place almost a hundred years ago that resulted in the play and (several versions of ) movie entitled “INHERIT THE WIND”?

    The storyline about a state that mandated public schools teaching Creation and outlawing science ( aka evolution ) and the McCarthy-esque reactions by the two opposing sides showed both the folly and idiocy of legislating by someone’s interpretation of the Bible.

    Methinks it is time to review the story line, maybe some ambitious playwright could adapt the storyline to today’s War on Women and its concurrent themes? The murders carried out in the name of the Bible at abortion clinics? The inability of anti-abortionists ( I refuse to call them Pro Lifers – they will kill a woman who would die without an abortion for their cause’s sake ) as well as the lack of support for these babies once they are born? Anyone agree?

    • silence dogood

      You are relying on a Hollywood piece of fiction as well as a town “gag” to make some kind of point ? You know nothing of the history of the episode itself and subsequent film. But then again those on the left never deal in truth.

      • Sand_Cat

        You, on the other hand – besides being a not-too accomplished liar yourself – can’t even recognize “the left,” an epithet you apply to any reasonably sane person who isn’t out in Hitlerland with you. Or is it just that you get your hands mixed up?

        • silence dogood

          It was Hitler who was slaughtering innocents — including the unborn.

          • Joseph Squerciati

            Explain to me the logic in opposing Birth Control AND opposing Abortion when more of the former means less of the latter .The only people who can do that are the Catholic Bishops and MOST modern day Catholics completely disregard the Church’s teaching on Birth Control .

          • silence dogood

            On what basis do you make the inference that what you state in any way reflects what I think. Your statement is vacuous and likely is more closely reflective of Muslims than Catholics.

          • silence dogood

            Although I know for the cowards the Catholics are an easy target.

          • Joseph Squerciati

            I happen to be a Catholic and find myself greatly saddened by the church .I believe had Pope John Lived their position on birth Control would have changed .The pill was invented by a Catholic doctor who was attempting to find a surer way than Rhythm .

            We had a joke about the Rhythm Method . What do you cal people who use the Rhythm Method ? ANSWER Parents .In my day young Catholic marrieds used to Priest shop until the found a priest who would not condemn them for using Birth Control .

            Sadly the same old men who have no idea what it is like to support a family are still refusing to allow Birth Control and NOW they are even Claiming that the religious freedom of Catholics is under attack because of the requirement to cover Birth Control as part of a health insurance .This hogwash , rather it is THEY who would deny NON catholics Their Religious Freedom if they happen to work for a Catholic Institution

          • silence dogood

            Well stated particularly the retrospective. I should not have called you out on the Catholic issue. However substitute the word abortion for your use of the term birth control. As you suggest the Church hasn’t had a birth control issue for at least a full generation. It is a violation to religious freedom to require a practicing Catholic to fund an ABORTION.

        • silence dogood

          By the way your remarks are not cogent Sand Man.

          • Sand_Cat

            Wow, you like that word, “cogent.” Is that the only two-syllable word you can spell?

          • silence dogood

            This remark by you is simply stupid. Not cogent applies to most of your other dribble.

          • charleo1

            Well look, The Right is looking for some cogent spokesman, to square their little fraudulent circle jerk, about how closing clinics where poor women access their birth control, and preventative tests, like mammograms, and pap smears. Is going to reduce the number of abortions. But, you’re not it. For one thing, they don’t have a cogent position to defend.
            The law of the land says, if the woman is rich, or poor, the decision to undergo an abortion is hers, through the 22nd week. As most of these White, well to do politicians are lawyers, are well aware. Why don’t they go pick on someone their own size, like the Supreme Court? Instead of the mostly powerless by comparison, poor women? Who, by the way, should not need to struggle for her Rights to control her body, anymore than these well financed legislators need to fight to enjoy their Constitutional Rights to unlimited, secret campaign contributions. Like the Citizens United verdict provides them. That’s the way it used to work in this Country. If rich, well connected, and powerful politicians didn’t agree with a law, they fought the Courts. Not the poor women, in their State. Who now find themselves more unfortunate still, for having to live under these, in the neck of the woods I come from, are considered, less than men. Who have no compunction about abusing women. But, that was before some cowards, decided to ditch their inconvenient democratic principals. And, insulate themselves from most of the citizens in their State. And, become something less than Americans, and use their now illegitimate positions, to pander to the small minorities in their gerrymandered districts. While violating the Constitutional Rights of those they have removed from their
            districts. And don’t have a lobby they’ll need to be concerned about. Except for the American people, writ large. So in the end, a good spokesperson will need to defend the politics of the anti-choice campaign. There is no pro abortion faction. Unless one counts the added number of abortions that will become necessary, and will be carried out. Safely at a clinic, or in a back ally, because the Right has a political problem. But, has no problem using some of our society’s most vulnerable people, in an attempt to solve it.

          • silence dogood

            What are you….. like in the third grade …… ?

          • charleo1

            Sure. You could answer some questions from a third grader?
            But, it’s beneath you right? I can’t count the times big mouths like yourself start out saying things like, “You’re relying on a piece of Hollywood fiction, as well as a town gag, to make some kind of point?” “You know nothing of the history of the episode itself, and subsequent film.” It’s fairly obvious, what you’re actually relying on is bluster. First you say, let me relate to you, I’m really smart! And I’m not going to be nice! Well, let me have
            it Tiger! Turn that gigantic brain loose on a hapless Liberal, that’s pretty sure you’re terrified, intellectually of a wet paper bag. Much less you’re horrid Right Wing opinions.

          • silence dogood

            Ok I’ll let you have it…here you go…http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/cm/v19/n1/inherit-the-wind-analysis I’m guessing you are too much of a pea brain to bother to read it.

          • silence dogood

            Or try a more “routine” source http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scopes_Trial

          • silence dogood

            Or this one…..http://www.themonkeytrial.com/ It’s all BS like most of the other crap you’ve been told you have to believe

  • ATC333

    While not a fan of Barney Frank, his comment nailed the GOP approach to “life”. “It begins at conception, and ends at childbirth”. Once the child is born,both the child, and that mother are on their own. “Too bad, so sad, get a job”. Meanwhile, the Right Wing of the GOP does everything in its power to block and stall any meaningful job creation legislation, choosing instead to treat our current economy as “The New Normal”, and they will do nothing to create jobs, increase minimum wage (now less than 70% buying power of minimum wage 20 years ago) or increase taxes on the top 2% to cut deficits and fund job creation program. That groups real effective tax rate is far below the claimed 39% the Right loves to throw out, much less the up to 90% rate back following
    WW II.

    It is almost as though the Right is doing all in its power to insure this Nation and its People cannot recover from the economic meltdown their failed economic theories substantially created, seeking instead to continue their redistribution of wealth to the top 2%.

  • disqus_ivSI3ByGmh

    Whenever I hear someone refer to themselves as Pro-Life, I always feel the following questions MUST be asked:

    1. Are they opposed to abortion?
    2. Are they in favor of reduced-cost or free prenatal care for the mother?
    3. Are they in favor of supplemental nutrition programs to assist the mother and child (WIC, etc.)?
    4. Are they in favor of nutrition support programs that provide free or reduced price meals to school children of reduced economic means?
    5. Are they in favor of reduced-cost or free health care for children of reduced economic means?
    6. Are they in favor of the Death Penalty?

    If they answer NO to any of the above, then I question their bona fides as Pro-Life. Most of them will only answer yes to number 1. That makes them Anti-Abortion, not Pro-Life.

    • jonesky

      Amen. It can also be enlightening to ask that person how many unwanted kids have they adopted and/or are supporting. The silence that usually results is kind of soothing.

    • whodatbob

      Most “Pro- Life” hypocrites would answer yes to 1 & 6! It is OK for the state to kill adults and let children starve.

  • Allan Richardson

    The right wingnuts consider life sacred before birth, but afterward, YOUR life is LESS sacred than THEIR money!

  • Sand_Cat

    As I said elsewhere, the GOP, and especially its “pro-life” wing, are among the most anti-life and anti-family organizations in the US. The party’s consistent evaluation of absolutely everything – except abortion – purely in terms of money, whether it be human health and safety or the other living creatures unfortunate enough to share this world with us and it’s constant promotion of war and the use of force to resolve all problems are only the beginning. I have long said that life begins at conception and ends at birth for the “pro-life” crowd (I see it attributed here to Barney Frank as well), but even that is too charitable. Try preventing the discharge into the environment or addition to our food and water of birth-defect- or even miscarriage-inducing chemicals if you think otherwise.
    The phrase “pro-life” is sickening and disgusting, and should be avoided by all who oppose slavery for women in the name of “choosing life.”

  • Janice Adams

    There is only one conclusion to be reached by the right’s behavior. The overlords of the right wing politicians (the corporations that fund them) want one thing. Cheap labor. The answer to this is what they have in China and India and other areas where jobs are outsourced: over population. Anywhere in the world where jobs that used to be done by Americans are outsourced have vast populations that can be drawn on. People starving because they have no governmental resources to fall back on. No laws defending the workers from deplorable working conditions or child labor and people willing to do work for a couple of dollars a day. We used to call them third world countries. And so, what these corporations want is the same conditions in the USA. A “Made in the USA” label on something is a valuable asset when compared to other countries. That is what they want. No abortions, no birth control, no public education, women too burdened with children to get educated, no healthcare options. Just millions of poverty ridden people willing to do anything to earn a few dollars a day so they can feed their hungry broods, who will also go to work at 6 and 7, much like the poor children of the 17th and 18th century did. The scenario is dismal to say the least. How do we avoid it? We get rid of Republicans who espouse these draconian changes in the face of America. We vote them out of power and never let them back in again. We fight for laws that remove money from electoral races. We move forward and refuse to go backward.