So I've been following this issue for quite some time. I support healthcare. I am for a universal health care package. And even though the new Healthcare.gov has its issues, it is an improvement upon the previous situation. (My wife and I feel we are too poor to actually go to get regular checkups and all those tests, so obviously it isn't perfect.) I support gun control. I have friends who are hunters and think the best way I can show my love for my fellow human is to never pick up a firearm. I am for a pay scale that resembles the 1950s rather than the 1910s. I hope this settles my credentials. Sadly it will not. And that's a shame. It really is. It shows that nuanced thinking on an issue must take a back seat to partisan jockeying. The most horrible jockeying is with regards to human lives and the role of women in our society.
Several years ago, when I was in college, several of my friends asked who I would vote for. I wasn't really sure. They immediately said that I must vote for the conservative candidate since he would offer the best chance in getting rid of Roe v. Wade. I immediately countered that if the Republicans (or Democrats) ever did move in that direction, I would have a moral imperative to vote for them; but neither side would, so its a moot issue. Neither side did; but an organization called Center for Medical Progress has did. They did the thing which always needs to be done. They forced people to see their actions. This is what Wilberforce did with slavery in Britain or King did when marching to Selma. It forces people to make a stand. We are no longer permitted to allow the horrors done in our name to be ignored. Evil confronts us and we must respond. More on that later though.
What I find so frustrating is the way that the political Left has circled the wagons around Planned Parenthood. That is actually what spurred this blog. An article in the LA Times chastised Ms. Fiorina for her attack of Planned Parenthood. It even went so far as to demand an apology of her. I care very little for the Republican primary candidates (we are still over a year away from elections and months away from the first caucuses); but why is this journalist going after Fiorina in this way. Indeed in a way that betrays highly un-journalistic standards. So let us look at just three ways in which there has been a non-discussion of this issue.
Firstly, there is the charge of editing. The article from the LA Times declares, "The tapes have been conclusively discredited as heavily edited misrepresentations, but not even the 'full' versions (though somewhat edited, according to Planned Parenthood analysis show the scene Fiorina describes." The conclusive discrediting was provided by a media group in the employ of Planned Parenthood and Planned Parenthood's analysis was that used for the discrediting of the full version. I want you to stop and think about that for a second. This is Kafkaesque. It is an absurdity. That is like a victim of assault being told nothing bad happened because the assailant reviewed all the evidence and declared all was well. This is, sad to say, the logic of a five year old. I do not speak in hyperbole when I ask why this person has not been laughed off of the paper. I would not be able to turn in a college paper with "logic" like that. But ideologues rarely look to logic to be their guide.
This brings me to my second point. If the welfare of women is your goal, then why not invest in organizations that are far more efficient. Democrats for Life point out that the alternative is clear: Community Health Centers. Planned Parenthood has become a corporation. They are about their bottom line. Traditionally democrats have been for support to be provided by the commonwealth. Pound for pound, people are far better served by these Community Health Centers than by Planned Parenthood. The health of women (and men) is far more comprehensive than basic care provided by Planned Parenthood. Even better is the fact that one doesn't have to worry about the albatross of "abortion." Which leads to a really frightening question. If such an organizational alternative to Planned Parenthood exists, why not take it? The sad truth is that by abandoning Planned Parenthood, many democrats fear losing constituents who favor keeping abortion on the books. In essence it is the abortion issue, as much as the Planned Parenthood people would like to tell you otherwise, which is the real issue. If Planned Parenthood did away with abortions tomorrow, the issue would be over very quickly. This isn't about women's rights to health. This is about abortion.
That brings up the third point, women's rights. Throughout history we have been faced with an embarrassment: the indignity visited upon women. No matter where we turn in human culture; we must take a humble and long examination of how we treat women. For so long a woman could give birth to a child and be virtually ignored by the other participant in that union. Great works have talked about this issue. I remember reading novels such as "The Scarlet Letter," plays like "The Importance of Being Ernest" or biographical works such as "Lawrence of Arabia" or the discussions of Hamilton. Of course these works focused on the offspring and not the women for whom the stress must have been great (even factoring in differences of cultures and epochs). I still remember when one of my friends informed me that she was pregnant with a friend's child. I made sure she knew I saw her no differently than before. This is the criticism real feminists have. The woman involved in sex is considered inferior whereas a man is considered virile. The woman who has a child in such a situation can be neglected while the man can choose to continue his life. This is the real issue that should be addressed. We should support life wherever it is. We should support it in our criminal justice system. We should support it in our international negotiations. We should support it even in the face of our enemies. But death as an expedient to expunge shame in a patriarchal society is a step backwards, and that is what Planned Parenthood represents. It represents the easy way out of the deadbeat dad, not the noble way forward of a enlightened woman and the commonwealth to whom she belongs. It takes a stand against all the forces of evil in this world in favor of life and right action.
So we have defunded Planned Parenthood. Good. What will you do with that money now? Will you find some lobbyist to give it to, or will you support the cause that you claim to back? Will you invest in life? I suppose the story of Planned Parenthood, given the sad state of affairs in current American culture, is that we will have defunded a great evil of commission for a lesser evil of omission. And when seen that way, this isn't much of a victory.
No comments:
Post a Comment