Home : Blogs : Fort Worth Real Estate - - - Karen Anne Stone : Fort Worth Real Estate Online

One Step Forward for Healthcare... One Giant Leap Backwards for Women's Freedom of Choice.

This morning as I was scanning the list of those who voted against the Health Care bill that was passed by the House yesterday, I saw that Dennis Kucinich voted against passage, I really wondered what the full story was behind his vote.

I am also very upset that the conservative bishops of the Catholic church chose to try and impose their religious beliefs upon the country by pressuring a group of conservative Democrats to vote against a woman's right to control her own body, and her own future... by inserting a major provision in the bill that was in a major way "Anti-Choice" for women.

This is just another example of insecure men wanting to continue controlling women, and another step by our country towards an American Taliban Theocracy. It appears that Conservative Americans, and conservative Iranians DO have quite a bit in common.

I do not fear any so-called "socialist agenda"... but I DO fear a country ruled and governed by the religious beliefs of one group of people. That is what Iran is, and that is what Saudi Arabia is. I do not want that for America. Conservative Americans... believe what you want... just don't force it on me !

Posted by Fort Worth Real Estate - - - Karen Anne Stone on 11/08/2009 01:10 PM

Comments (103)

Politics and Religion in the Networking Channel

a womans right to choose, healthcare reform

Post is included in group: The Left Is Right!
Post is included in group: Wrong Right Turn
Post is included in group: Proud to be a Liberal
Post is included in group: Live Free or Die
Post is included in group: Calling All Nurses

103 Comments on One Step Forward for Healthcare... One Giant Leap Backwards for Women's Freedom of Choice.

NOV

Hi Karen Anne ~ This reminds me of the instant recoil I did when I saw a brief segment on the news showing a priest at the pulpit urging church members to vote against gay marriage in Maine. Just the idea that this is what people have to listen to in church blew my mind.

I've really been wondering lately about the health coverage for men vs. women (isn't Viagra covered?) - my coworker's share of the cost for her mammogram was over $400. That's an outrage. And so is this.

Liz

Your headline should read 'one giant step BACK for health care and 10 steps back for women'.

I fear both, obamas socialist agenda and being ruled but any religious faction. Both the radical muslims and obama's agenda are terroristic threats to our way of life.

Liz: I am almost positive that Viagra IS covered. The fact that mammograms are not fully covered is a disgrace. And in regards to the catholic church and abortion rights... I had a friend who used to say that if men (and priests) could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament. Now... that just might be a tad "over the edge"... but, then again, it might now. :)

If a church wants to quit being only a church, and become a political organization, too... fine. But... if that is the case... then it MUST also lose it's tax-exempt status it gets for being a "church."

John: The conservative "agenda" is very close to that of the Taliban, and of Muslim extremists. Full control according to their religious beliefs. The "religious right" (they are neither religious, nor right) imposing their will and beliefs upon ALL Americans IS a terrorist threat. They have killed those who disagree with them... as can be seen by the recent murder of Dr Tiller.

The religious right IS a radical religious faction... except in their own minds. They actually believe they are doing "god's will." What an incredibly dangerous group of people.

Wow, you say no to a theocracy but yes to socialism. I say no to both.

Ross: Is this all you can say ? You made the same comment to another comment I made today on another post. Your imagined fear of this bill leading to "socialism" is simply that. It is "imagined." It is also your political opinion. You have yours, I have mind.

And yes... I say no to both socialism and theocracy. But this is not socialism. And... much of what religious conservatives favor, and are tending towards... IS a Theocracy. You are free to believe what you wish... both your poitical and your religious beliefs. Just to NOT attempt to force them me, or on the entire country.

Karen Anne,

How am I attempting to force my beliefs on you, pray tell? I am glad to hear you do not want to live under socialism in any form.

Karen Anne, Good Blog... I feel like the whole thing is 100% going backwards...It will be interesting to see how it all works out.

Have a great Sunday.

Many women and children are in desperate need of health care--often because the man who fathered the children is not providing for them, and the woman has limited income because the task of raising the children falls completely on her shoulders. If we deny the right to an abortion, then we are obligated to care for the children born with more than sub-standard care.

I was a social worker for a short time, and in my experience it is women and children who suffer the most in the system our country operates. I'm putting my soapbox aside...

Karen Anne, why are there people in this country who wish it nothing but failure? I've ordered my burka, got yours?

Ross: When one political party, or religious party, which is a more realistic term, tries to legislate their own religious beliefs... thus turning them into law... then they are forcing their religious beliefs on me. That... is un-American.

Tana: Thank you for your kind words. Yes... there are those in this country who would LOVE to see American, and American women, go back to where every woman simply played the role of June Cleaver in the Leave it to Beaver sit-com. Just be an obedient wife, and know your place. This is not acceptable.

Norma: the wod IS desperate. And... you know as well as I do... that although conservatives want to deny the right to abortion, there is no way they are going to consent to supporting social programs to care for those unwanted children. What hypocrites !

And Norma, you may feel free to bring your soapbox to any of my blog posts... any time you wish. I do, and so do those who comment on my posts, I do support your right to freely speak your opinions.

I have friends who are social workers... who have told me about the deplorable conditions they have seen that resulted from men who fathered children... abandoning them, and not paying a penny towards their care. If you "father" a child... you should be liable for the expense of caring for it... fifty percent... no if's, and's or but's. And I do mean "liable." As in putting a lien on their home, and if not paid, then foreclosed upon... with the proceeds being put in trust until the child's 18th birthday.

And... if "society" removes the ability to have an abortion, then "society" should in turn take responsibility for their care. Ya can't have it just one way.

Good Lord No its not acceptable! Have Mercy! I would rather be in prison that live like June Cleaver!

Terry: That is easy. They are insecure, and they are extremely self-centered. Selfish people like that only see to those who agree with them. The recent acts of "Pope" Benedict XVI... in welcoming the Anglican Church conservatives... both of whom who deny women and gays rights in their church... to join the Catholic church... is further proof of their aberrant behavior and beliefs.

He should be free to express his beliefs, but if they become political beliefs, then the tax-exempt status of his churches must then lose their tax-exempt status.

Then... we could use that money... to support women's and children's health care. What a cool idea ! I was raised to be a "nice Catholic girl from Cleveland..." but what the Catholic church has become is a very far cry from the original and personal teachings of Jesus Christ.

WWJI... Who Would Jesus Insure ?

Tana: June Cleaver ? That's just what so many of them wish. Go to Terry Haugen's recent blog post showing a video about women in the House attempting to be heard, but being shouted down by male Conservatives... and you get just a small hint of what they want... as far as women "knowing our place."

Karen Anne, absolutely, any church that engages in political activity, as the Mormon Church did to defeat Prop 8 in CA, should loose their tax exempt status because they are no longer a house of worship but a bully pulpit from which they try to foist their beliefs on other people.

Cleveland eh? I once heard a joke about Cleveland. What is the city motto? Cleveland, whats the point? I've never been there but can only imagine :-)

Karen Anne..I guess they want women to go back to the old days ..Women rights to choose what she wants to do with her body should be between her and her doctor ..not her and the STATE or the rest of the world...Good for you Karen ..you go girl give em H_ll.....:0)

HELPFULHANNAH

Welcome to socialized medicine. The state obviously thinks it has the right to make that decision. Hello death panels. How many women will die now because they weren't permitted to have an abortion??

Good question Bob. But weren't you against using tax money for abortions anyway? I was wondering, since private health insurance covers Viagra for men, but not mammograms for some women, will men still have access to Viagra with this plan? Women and children have died for lack of health care period. At least the ones who fall through the cracks will have access.

Karen, I apologize for my last comment. It was not directed at you or your blog.

I have had a personal dealing with the abortion issue, and I can only say this. Although I don't agree with abortion being used a birth control measure, I understand a woman's choice sometimes.

But, healthcare is a double edged sword. Once the budget cuts come, it will affect all aspects of our healthcare system. You know yourself, money talks and no money means cuts.

Terry: it's an easy rule to understand, and to implement. Nothing personal. If it's a church, it's a church. If it is political in its actions... then forget about the tax-exempt status. No prejudice, just follow the rules.

And... you little weenie... Cleveland is a wonderful town. The people could NOT be more friendly, and I guarantee you they would NOT vote against health care for women.

Hannah: How can it be any simpler. A woman's medical choices should be between her and her doctor. Period ! The days of men being in control of women's bodies and women's lives... should end... be that in the United States, Iran, Saudi Arabia, or wherever.

Terry: I had to look for a minute... but wow... a woman's burka made out of an American flag. But, then again, that is exactly what they want to do. Theocratic control... over women, and over the country.

Bob: Whoa there, big fella. The preamble to the Constitution says that this country exists... "to provide for the common defense, to promote the general welfare..." Both of those. You want one... you get both. Death panels ? I thought you would know better than to believe that nonsense.

Terry: I wonder how much money would be freed up if men's Viagra treatment is no longer covered. Funny... they want giving them the ability to make the kids to be paid for... but not what happens afterward. Trust me... if men could get pregnant... there would be no question that this would be covered.

Hey... here's a great idea. For every "unwanted" child that is born... we pick a male who would deny health coverage to women and children... and pump him up with the right mix of estrogen, progesterone and prolactin to enable him to lactate (trust me, it can be done)... and then force him to breast feed that child for one year. I wonder how long he'd put up with sore nipples before he voted for the next child care bill ? LOL

Bob: Budget cuts, huh ? Well... if there is one place where budget cuts should be the last alternative, it should be health care. Let me see... so you understand a woman's choice "sometimes ?" Question: IF... it could be medically possible for a man to carry a child after conception... would you carry it rather than have it aborted ?

Karen Anne,

I totally agree with your comment to me - #11 - that that would be way un-American. Karen Anne, for 33 years I have lived with an equal partner but she is way smarter than me so in fact she just lets me feel equal.

The choice of abortion should never be used as a means of birth control. That is what I meant on the "sometimes". In answer to your question, IF I didn't want to have a baby, I would do what is necessary not to get pregnant. If I was irresponsible and did get pregnant, I would make my decision and pay for whatever choice I make. I wouldn't expect you Karen to pay for a procedure that is not life threatening. It would be like asking you to pay for viagara if I needed it.

Terry, In reference to tax dollars, I don't want my tax dollars used for abortions. If a woman's life is at risk and there is not other alternative, then so be it. If she's just lazy and didn't feel like taking the pill, or was stupid in her choice, then - No, I don't want my tax dollars wasted on such a procedure. And since it is my tax dollars, I should have a say in it.

Karen Anne,

Once again I commend you for your brilliant insight and ability to place your views in such a well versed way on paper..

As you know I am a Bible believing Jesus filled Christian...But that is the extent of what I have in common with most here calling themselves Christians..

I am in TOTAL agreement with you that when these religious zealots attempt to force ALL Americans to live according to their morals and beliefs it makes us a Nation No different than those filled with Muslim extremists forcing their inhabitants to live according to their beliefs...

Some say America was founded on Judeo Christian Principles BUT that is Not true

The original Pilgrims fled to Holland to avoid the Religious rules being imposed on them by England..

Many on the original ships, in fact, over half, were simply business men and laborers looking for work and financial gain... The remaining came to establish FREEDOM of religion or to choose NO religion at all. I have said many times we need to only read history to find out these facts... The true "Christians" remained in Holland to where they first fled....

Our Founding Fathers were almost all Deists.... Including George Washington. They believed in a Personal God that should Never be discussed in Public but only behind closed doors in religious meetings.... They Never claimed Jesus as Savior nor that laws should be made according to scripture. Many were Masons... that never spoke of God and the Bible outside the Church building itself...

Now we have Christian Extremists and religious fanatics that are demanding ALL laws be established in this Country to be Christian by nature...

Indeed Karen Anne Christians have EVERY RIGHT to live as they Choose BUT NOT to force our beliefs on others. PERIOD.

They are all mad because Obama chooses to govern ALL Americans Fairly NOT just under Christian Dictatorship..

I wonder if they succeeded in electing Christian leaders who made all laws according to THEIR beliefs what kind of UPRISING would happen in this Country?

Because there are many atheist, agnostic, Muslim, Jewish, Mormon, Budist and combined religious and non-religious people in America whom most likely would indeed revolt... Rightly so..

I am still waiting for ONE Christian to prove with Scripture that God instructed us to change man made laws to suit our beliefs.I do however find where God said we are to come out from among them and be ye separate....... To render unto Caesar what is his and unto God what is His...and that we are pilgrims wandering in a strange and foreign land...

Sorry Karen Anne,

Linda Mae-what is your problem? Please tell me so I may understand where you are coming from and where it is you would like to go.

Ross: It sounds like your long-time partner is very wise indeed... other than being with you in the first place... LOL. <ducking>

Bob,

I do agree that we do have the right to refuse that our tax dollars be spent on abortions except in cases of rape , incest and where the life of the mother is in danger...

Any women who uses abortion as Birth Control should pay for it herself...

Karen Anne, LOL no need to duck :)

Bob: In this country, in providing for the "general welfare"... we do not get to pick and choose which dollars pay for what... and which do not. The easiest example that comes to mind is the tax dollars of a childless couple paying taxes, and having the money used for schools. That... promotes the "general welfare..." and is good for the entire country regardless of whether or not that particular child had children. Same thing for repairing the roads... with money coming from someone who does not drive.

Also... following your analogy... do people who in good conscience are against the war in Iraq and Afghanistan... are they able to choose NOT to have their tax dollars pay for the war ? Noper. Same thing for paying for abortions. Same... exact... thing.

Karen ANNE, I agree with the analogy you just gave Bob,,

what I am trying to say is we have the right to voice our opinion we do not want to pay for abortions but in the end you are correct.. We have no say so in where those tax dollars finally go....UNFORTUNATELY

Bob and Linda: The main question in abortion, to me, anyway, is whether having an abortion involves the killing of a human person. The yes-or-no to that question is simply a religious opinion... or a religious belief. Since I am not blessed with infinite intelligence, I do not know the answer. But... if I am to guess... I would think it would come down to viability of the fetus. Whether or not it could exist independently outside the womb. It is NOT a human person after one month, or three months... or maybe even five or six. It may have what I would call "human potential..." but it is not a human person.

Since I taught seventh and eighth grade for nine years... most of my examples are frozen in that time frame. So... an example I will use... is that of "baking a cake."

Let's say a cake takes an hour to bake. And... when that hour is up, and the "ingredients" are removed from the oven... wow... it's a cake.

But... how bout after thirty minutes. If I remove the pan from the oven... containing all the ingredients I placed in it at the beginning... is it a cake ? Can you put icing on it and stick candles in it, and then sing Happy Birthday ?

Prolly not. A half-done pan of cake ingredients is not a cake. Follow that same reasoning and you have answered the abortion question. So no... having an abortion when the fetus is still a fetus... is not killing a human person... because you do not yet have a human person. At least... that is my belief.

And... just as I cannot, nor should not, be able to force YOU to have an abortion, you should not, nor should some religious-instigated law prevent a woman from having one if that is what she and her doctor choose.

Ross: Regarding Linda Mae's comment... I think she is just adding to the knowledge base here that counters what many religious extremists say when they maintain that America was founded as a Christian nation. That is not true, and I beleive pretty much all of what Linda Mae has said about the Founders being primarily Deists and Masons. I do not believe she is aiming anything at you in particular.

Karen Anne, Half baked cakes? You compare the creation of a human being to baking a cake? That is shocking. That is just too laughable.

Using that kind of logic, then if the cake falls, or isn't perfect when it comes out of the oven, most good cooks will throw it out. Do you do that with babies too now?

A human life is created and begins to grow in the woman's body when the egg is fertilized.

I see no comparison between a human life and a piece of pastry. Just not following the analogy here.

Karen Anne I know we have been down this road before, but my first son was born after only 21 weeks of pregnanccy he lived for about an hour Abortion is murder period.

I have to agree with Hugh on this. I'm so sorry for your loss.

If it grows like a baby, looks like baby in the womb and has a chance for life, I believe it is a human life, a baby.

Hi Karen-Anne

This was one step forward for universal health care. The price was too high though. Women's rights have all too often been scarificed for one cause or another these days. Why a woman's right to choose is so problematic even today is baffling.

To those who pontificate on abortion:

More than half of all pregnancies are aborted SPONTANEOUSLY...Nature and therefore God do not hold such early "life" too dearly. I am not God and neither is anyone else on this board. Those who claim to have a private line to God's ear need to rethink your arrogance. A pregnant women however IS a human being and has a right to decide what to do with her body.

As for "not wanting my tax dollars spent on aborition." Well....I didn't WANT my tax dollars to be spent on a useless unwarrented war in Iraq. You don't always get to dictate how your tax dollars are spent.

From heatlh care passage in the House to a heated debate over abortion. Active Rain is indeed a fascinating place to hang out.

There are a lot of polar opposites weighing in on this post. Where does a fiscal conservative who feels uncomfortable telling a pregnant woman what to do with her own body go for a little rant?

Ruthmarie, you are right.

So, the lawmakers have decided not to spend the money on abortion. Guess we all have to bite the bullet sometimes.

I'm just glad our lawmakers don't bake cakes.

Bob: Give me a break. It's the concept. Complete vs potential. I told you at the beginning that my example was very simple... from a seventh grade mind. I was just comparing the concept of actual and potential. Period !

Melissa: That is your "belief." It is a belief... a religious belief... that cannot be proven. My example was very, very simply meant to convey the difference between potential and complete. Nothing else. I am sorry you were not able to follow that.

Hugh: I am very sorry for your loss. I really cannot imagine the heartache you felt, and continue to feel. My example in no way was meant to diminish your sense of loss. You are in my thoughts.

I agree with you, AR is a very interesting place to talk about many subjects.

We all can share our views and learn something. I'm glad for blogs like this, it is an opportunity for all of us to discuss personal values and opinions.

Melissa: Again... using your very own words... you "believe" it is a baby. That is your right. I am not saying you are wrong. I am not omnicient. I just do not agree, and my belief is otherwise.

I do not intend for this to become an argument about abortion... and what a person's religious BELIEFS are as far as what constitutes human life. So, folks... call off the dogs.

Regardless of what your religious belief is... you must live your own personal life according to it. You have no right... whatsoever... to try and force your beliefs on someone else.

Melissa: We can, and are free to "discuss" our beliefs. However... we have no right... none at all... to require others to either believe them, or live their lives according to them. None !

Ruthmarie: You are correct... as usual. It is always great to have you present your informed ideas on my posts. Yes, we don't always get to dictate where and how our tax dollars are spent. And... a woman's body is hers... and hers alone. Only she and her doctor have the right to decide what is best for her.

And yes... I agree once again. What arrogance a person must have to assume that they have a private line to God's ear... and God to theirs. Again... that is a "belief." Why is a concept of a person holding a "religious belief" so difficult to understand ?

My comments are not intended to force my belief upon anyone. They are my opinion alone.

When you write a blog & folks comment, we all have the ability to respond with our personal opinion.

Yes my opinion is based upon religious beliefs. I do not deny that. I'm proud of it. I'm also glad you have this blog so others can share ideas and information.

Margaret: You can rant right here... on this post. Feel free to state your opinions. As you can see... many opinions are states...but, for the most part, they have been stated in a very civil manner... rather than getting into an all-out food fight ! LOL.

I am a fiscal conservative... but to conserve money and dishonor a woman's right to choose what she and her doctor decide to do with her body... is wrong.

Bob: That is just the problem. The lawmakers did NOT "decide" not to spend money on abortions. They were pretty much told... with blatant pressure from the Catholic bishops on the conservative Democrats... that they either delete paying for abortions, or lose the entire health bill. Technically yes... it is a decision. In reality... it is blackmail... and they sold out women in the process.

hey Karen - it is a difficult argument. What about the baby's right to choose? Does no one speak for the baby? What about the man's right to choose? It's his baby too you know. I often wonder how I would have reacted if my daughjters mom had gone off and killed one of them without talking to me about it. You really think it's OK that I - who by the way has raised both of my daughters on my own because she didn't want anything to do with them - would have had no say in the death of my daughters? How can anyone be OK with that?

For the record I make exceptions for rape and incest.

Karen, you replied to margaret, but I think you meant me :) I start to forget peoples names too when I'm responding to so many blog comments.

I'm curious, what is your opinion about doctors who do not want to perform certain procedures because it is against their beliefs. This is going to be a very heated topic in the coming months.

I'm glad you are a fiscal conservative, so am I. It is important to point out to others that just because we are both conservatives does not mean we agree on everything. Being a conservative does not been we all fit in to a cookie cutter shape regarding our moral or political views.

Just another reason why these blogs are healthy for expanding the mind and giving others a glimpse of our personal opinion so they can decide for themselves.

I encourage everyone to watch the interview with Johnson regarding the baby trying to get away from the probe that was going to kill it.

Watch Abbey Johnson's interview on Huckabee, I'm sure it will be on U tube.

Melissa: No... I DID mean Margaret. She specifically asked in her comment where she could rant. I said here was a good place. :)

As far as a doctor not being forced to perform an abortion because it is against her or his belief... that get's kind of fuzzy. She has beliefs, but she also is IN that hospital to minister to patients. I am guessing that an easy way out for me to answer this... would be that it is ok for that doctor to decline... as long as there is another doctor available to perform the service the patient and her doctor recommend.

Or... they should, if it will not harm the patient... take her by ambulance to the nearest hospital what would perform the operation. In any case... if the woman is in danger... I don't care what the doctor's belief it... they must take care of the patient.

If the hospital in general has this position... I would think they should at least be required to have someone immediately available... just in case that delaying the operation would harm the mother. In no situation whatsoever... should the woman be harmed just because of a religious belief... if there are no other options for the woman... and she is in immediate danger.

By the way... I do not allow links to any videos in the comment section of my posts. If a commentor has a belief, they should be able to express it themselves... rather than use a video as a crutch.

Melissa: Regarding Mike Huckabee... I find him to be an amiable fellow. Pleasant to watch, but he is a "fooler." He is a fundamentalist preacher... and I believe he is dangerous. I believe that, if he were to be in a position of power... he would implement his own religious beliefs, if possible, and force them upon the people he was supposed to be "governing."

Melissa: If you will read the comment above you... in my comment # 62... I said I do NOT allow links to videos... period. Please remove the link. If anyone wants to watch it... they can easily find it. Thank you so much.

I'm sorry I posted the link just in case folks wanted to see it. In her own words it was more descriptive of her views after running a clinic. Even if you personally do now allow a link on your blog, I encourage you to watch it privately.

Thanks :)

Karen- comment with link has been removed. I agree with you, if folks want to see the interview they can look on youtube and just type in Abbey Johnson interview with Huckabee.

I agree, sometimes blogs get so bogged down with links, videos and pictures. Not a problem.

Have a good night. At least we got rain today here in Texas :)

Melissa... I was already watching the beginning of the video... and was quickly turned off by Huchabee's feeble attempt to twist one of Ms Johnson's initial statements. She said the purpose of Planned Parenthood was primarily "prevention." Huckabee said... "Yeah... prevention of births." She said no... prevention of pregnancies."

When I saw that... I figured it was just more of the same Fox News manipulation... so I stopped watching.

Now... if you would kindly remove the link... I would appreciate it. Thanks so much...

This thread has been interesting to read. I just want everyone to know that I commend them for debating, letting their opinions be known and sharing thoughts without assaulting one another, I would love to see more of this.

Perfect! Cheers!

Karen- I went to the comment with the link and hit delete. So it should be gone soon. Once again, I had no idea that was one of your preferences for bloggers, so it will not happen again on your blog.

I encourage you to watch the whole thing, I'm not always in agreement with the fox news rep that is interviewing, but the comments from this woman's heart spoke volumes.

Simon: Nice to see you again. Now... the "baby" is a baby human when it is born. While in utero... it is a fetus. It is not a person... although it has that potential when it becomes viable.

So, if a fetus cannot be deemed to be a person (that is a "belief"... which is fine for some, not so for others) then it is up to the mother what she does. As for the father. That's easy. If HE is the one who is pregnant, he has the right to choose what to do with his own body. He does NOT have the right to choose what to do with his wife's body.

Of course, if the two of them, according to their own belief system, believe that to be true... that is their choice. But... bottom line... the person who is pregnant... it is "their" body, and their life... and only that person and her doctor have the right to choose what is best for the woman carrying the child.

---------

Simon... your own personal situation must be governed by the facts as you see them. I applaud you that you raised both daughters on your own... and I am sure you did a great job of it.

--------

Additionally... you mentioned that you "make exceptions" for rape and incest. I totally understand what you are saying, and I agree in advance that what I am about to say will sound strange... but... BUT... if aborting an unborn fetus is murder... it should still BE murder even if that "child" is the result of rape or incest. Those who are anti-abortion believe it is killing a human if it is aborted... but that same human... well... it's ok to "kill" it if it was the result of rape or incest. I am sorry... but that "fetus" or that "child" had nothing to do with how it got there... so how can it be "ok" to make an exception... and say that "killing it" is ok cuz it's an "exception."

Sorry to sound like I am jumping on you... but I am not. It's just that this "exception" has always puzzled me. Like... this killing is bad, but this other one is acceptable. Am I making any sense, here ?

Tana- I agree, isn't this nice? I love to reach out to other people and talk to them about all kinds of issues, figure out how their mind ticks. It also helps me to be a more informed person.

We need more communication with each other to grow as a whole.

Melissa: Thanks for removing the link. And... please feel free to come back to my posts and share your viewpoints. I respect you for the way you presented them. Take care...

Karen Anne, I will agree to disagree with you on this issue and wish you a good night.

Tana and Melissa: Most of the folks who comment on my political and religious posts know that may say whatever they wish... as far as their beliefs are concerned... as long as they respect each other... and state their views in a courteous manner. Yes... this works quite well. The world would be a much better place if each of us... regardless of our viewpoints... could at least open our minds to trying to understand where the other person is coming from. Sometimes we might even learn something. I know I have.

As far as the links... I have seen posts totally "garbaged up" by commentors who seem unable to state their views themselves, but simply point to a video, a poster, or some other so-called visual aid. My view is that if a commentor is not able to tell us their views... perhaps they are simply "parrotting" the views of others they heard somewhere else. It seems to have worked out well for everyone here... both the writer (me) and the commentors... on both sides.

Another thing: I also encourage those who comment to answer comments to those other commentors as they choose. It creates a great conversation.

Bob: Same here. Have a great night... sleep well.

Karen- thank you for realizing I'm not the girl in the play ground throwing stones.

I also believe in the case of rape or incest that an abortion is permissible. Yes, this does go against my pro-life beliefs. I guess when it comes down to carrying the child of a rapist it would take a lot of faith for me to get through that. The seed of something so evil living in my body would be difficult.

I am in favor of the morning after pill that prevents the egg from being fertilized in the case of rape. If I was raped tonight, I could get that pill in the ER. I believe women do need to govern their own bodies, but I also think many use abortion as a form of birth control and that is unacceptable to me.

NOV

Karen Anne,

I guess because I'm a liberal too (which in the eyes of many of your readers makes me un-American or worse, regardless of my, or my family's service to this country) that I don't get the "we're turning into socialists" mantra. I just assumed that the right is using the term as "scare tactic" to re-engage its base after several unsuccessful election cycles, but the comments to your blog seem to be "liberally" sprinkled with the term.

Do people understand the real meaning of the terms they use, or are many just throwing around terms they hear in the media, or from the pulpit, without thought or study.

Keep on keeping on, Karen Anne, as your voice is neither shrill or strident, but a voice of reason in a sea of confusion.

Karen Anne: All the hub-bub about abotion, and taxpayer not going toward it, made me want to climb on top of a mountain and scream. It's really ridiculous. I'm against single mother's continuing to have children, yet my taxpayer money goes toward social programs to help support those kids.

AH - Chris Ann has the correct priority...The trouble with most right-wingers is that they will neither supply the money for the abortion NOR for the rearing of an unwanted child. For many it seems as though the "rights" of the fetus end at birth! If we insist that they "stay in the oven" then we have to support their care once they are born - and really are PEOPLE!

America was founded on the principal that you can pretty much do what you want so long as you don't mess with anyone else. For that matter you can talk about what you think "right-wingers" think and what should and shouldn't be in church, or any where else, so long as you don't mess with me and my family.

By the same token, you can do whatever you want with your healthcare and health insurance that you want ... so long as you don't bother me. But ... if you want me to pay for it, then that is an entirely different matter.

I don't want to pay for socialized medicine. I don't think more government is the answer to almost any problem. If there is a way for you to get your socialized medicine without taking my money, then I'll support you. But the fact is, I'm looking at taxes and debt for my grandchildren to pay for Cash for Clunkers and Stimulus and lots of other boondoggles.

Please don't confiscate more of my wealth.

Coming in here rather late... but I just had to put in my 2 cents...

Back in #39, Karen Anne, you said (somewhat abreviated here to get to the point),

"The main question in abortion ... is whether having an abortion involves the killing of a human person. The yes-or-no to that question ... if I am to guess... I would think it would come down to viability of the fetus."

The problem with that guess is that it leaves the question in a completely subjective and variable place. But I believe the question should be answered much more objectively. I'm content to grant that it should be answered on scientific grounds as opposed to strictly religious grounds. But to answer it that way means fetuses of late are becoming human persons much earlier than they were, say, 50 years ago... due to advances in medicine.

Like you, I don't buy the argument that two cells joined together at conception equates to a human person. For logical and scientific reasons, I believe the cells become an individual being at the point of oxygenation of the blood - creating a separate blood supply. That happens at about 2 weeks, according to the texts I've read.

Hi Karen Anne ~ Are you watching Rachel Maddow? I hope so - and if not - it repeats in an hour and a half. She has a lot about this on the show tonight. Very interesting connection with "The Family" too. Edited to add - I just finished reading all the comments - hurrah for civil discussion! - and have to say I love the cake analogy. I'll be using it.

Liz

Will: As was said above... we don't always get to dictate where our tax dollars are spent. Your income is not confiscated... it is taxed, just like everyone else's. In any government there is an inherent "pooling" of resources... and those resources can and do get spent in paying for "promoting the general welfare..." as it says in the preamble to the Constitution. You don't have a choice in dictating which individual things your tax dollars are spent on... nor do I. If I did... there are many conservative programs that I would choose not to have my dollars pay for.

Another silly example might be paying for road repair... and being forced to have your tax dollars pay for it... even though you do not have a car.

"Taxation is the Price of a Civilized Society" (these words are chisled into marble on the Internal Revenue Service Building, in Washinton, D.C.)

Complain as is your right. Then consider the alternatives.

NOV

Karen, for the record, I don't want to confiscate your money to pay for "conservative programs". (In fact, I don't know of any "conservative programs". There are lots of wasteful Republican programs that I don't want to pay for either.) I'm willing to pay for roads, and the defense of the nation and beyond that not much else. The reason I'm so miserly with tax money is that I live and work close enough to Washington DC to tell you first hand there is not one government program that is efficient or cost-effective.

The government can't even get out flu-shots and you want them to take over the whole thing? If you want a peek at the dark future of government-run health care imagine a combination of Cash for Clunkers, the DMV, the VA hospitals and the "Scooter Store" all running a trillion over budget. Social Security is headed for insolvency. The War on Poverty and War on Drugs, like most government initiatives, didn't solve any problems ... just cost a mountain of money.

I'm sure you mean well, but have you ever thought about the many unborn Americans whose money you'll be spending to get the things you want? One day the national debt will have to be paid. I wonder what kind of health care you'll get after the country is bankrupt?

For my part, I'd rather go sick than have you pay for my care. I'd rather have no doctor than borrow money from my grandchildren to pay for my doctor. And, I'd rather use charity to help others than use money confiscated by the government for the purpose of building bureaucracies and election machines.

Karen Anne - I am not an intelligent person by any means, but you posed a question about halfway through your comments stating that you wondered if human life truly began in the womb or after birth. I truly believe (and not by religious measure) that human life begins at conception. Having been pregnant twice (and loving every minute of it) I discovered some most amazing things. I have two beautiful boys that started on 'the inside' and on 'the inside' they had much the same personalities as they do now. I have a very shy boy and he would be so quiet on the inside when others were around.... and as soon as I was alone he would play and move. My other boy is quite active (always)... jumping off the back of the couch at age two, doing somersaults at age 1.... just all out busy. When he was on 'the inside' I would watch him play with his hands and feet - I loved seeing him move around. He would push his hands against my belly or his foot and I would push him back... it was so much fun. He's the same way today. Anyways..............

I am going to subscribe to all the smart, liberal women here. It's refreshing to read some common sense.

NOV

I find it very interesting the number of people who are "anti-socialism". "Promoting the general welfare" is socialism. Having roads paid for by taxes is socialism. Having a public school system is socialism. The Veterans Administration is socialized healthcare. The Medicare that gives me healthcare is socialism. Fire protection is socialism. Police protection is socialism. Public utilities are socialism. We have had socialism almost from the beginning with this nation. Social Security is in trouble primarily because we don't tax everyone's income to pay for it. The measure of a great nation is how it takes care of its poorest people.

NOV

Karen Anne: What an amazing post and group of comments! And ... as you pointed out... done with such civility. You can be proud that you started and lead this discussion.

After reading all of the commentary in its' entirety ... I think the best comment was the one made in #92 by David Helm, as it showed such compassion and truth. "The measure of a great nation is how it takes care of its poorest people." Our nation's measurement is still pending ...

Gene

Karen Anne,

I have to jump back in and agree with Gene just above... David in #92 speaks so simply yet profoundly...

If only all in America thought as he just spoke what a Great Country this would be... But unfortunately Greed has over taken most people that the sentiment " I am my brother's keeper" has almost ceased to exist.

Perhaps the Right would rather we did away with taxation...

Hence no more public schools, or police, or fire departments, or Military, or VA, or Medicare, or Welfare, or Pell grants, or Scholarships, or Food stamps for the Starving, or emergency room treatment, or Social Security, and oh my God just about NO MORE ANYTHING...........

If you are going to do away with the Health Care Reform Bill because it is a Socialist Agenda.... I think we must do away with all Socialized forms of government...

Isn't this like people who read the Bible with scissors in hand picking and choosing which Words they agree with? Now they want to pick and choose what government programs they agree to pay taxes for........because in the end this is why most are against the Bill.

Linda, Yes, the far right wants to do away with all taxes, and consequently, all public schools, all public roads, fire departments, traffic signals, Medicare, Welfare, the military, or anything else that taxes pay for.

Come on Guys... we're starting to get more than a little silly here. Please, kids... put your thinking caps back on... and put away your squirt guns. Or... maybe we have just about played this one out ?

NOV

I believe in a woman's right to decide. Abortion should not be a form of birth control.

I also believe that abortion is murder. So the woman does have the right to kill her unborn child.

There are many forms of birth control available to women and men.

If a couple does not protect themselves, then the life that is vacuumed out in the abortion clinic is their fault. Have you seen the pics of the little dead babies?

One night of sex to create a child and kill a child.

Melissa: The beginning of two of your sentences says it all. I BELIEVE. Fine. That is your right. But... what you believe should NOT be allowed to control the actions and take away the freedom of choice on decisions made between a woman and her doctor.

As far as paying taxes, and having those funds pay for certain areas of women's health care... like abortions... Jon Stewart said it best. Paying taxes is like going to the zoo. If the price of admission is $20... you can't say "Here is $18.50... I don't like zebras."

What a great analogy.

America is NOT a Theocracy. The actions of all are NOT to be dictated by the religious beliefs of any one group. Period. That is Iran. That is Saudi Arabia. That is NOT America.

NOV

Darn it Karen Anne, I'm angry! Angry that I didn't have enough common sense to answer like Dave Helm in comment nimber 92. That about says it all.

"Confiscation" is a point of view, not a description. I agree with Dave, let the libertarians here find their own way, but stop using the services, schools, roads, etc. that my taxes pay for.

(One last thought...the anti-government folks in power for the last 15 years who disassembled useful departments and programs insured that when they were necessary they would be too under-funded to function. There is something very disingenuous when a small government/no government party gets in power and hamstrings the government, then when its functions are needed says "See, I told you it wouldn't work!" Self-fullfilling prophecy. Fortunately the free market, and for profit option always works in an unregulated environment - for examples, see Wall Street 2008-2009, and Blackwater [Iraq 2003-2009])

NOV

Interesting post, Karen Anne. I don't have time to read quite all of the posts, but have skimmed many of them.

Obviously this is a very complex problem, and most of us haven't studied enough original American history documents to be so opinionated in our opinions (I include myself in that - but I'm learning). Reading Thomas Paine's Common Sense (available free on the internet) is quite eye-opening. He is very specific about government's role - which we've gone WAY beyond. Some commenters are correct - many of the programs we already have are "socialist," which proves just how hard it is to get rid of them once we vote them in. For instance, the federal government has no business with education - that is a local issue.

Other than the obvious necessity of having the federal government oversee interestate roads, the judicial system and the military, there is very little need for most of what they control. I am totally astounded by how many people want to give probably the MOST INEFFICIENT organization on earth total control of their own health care. Say what??

As for using my tax dollars to pay for a woman's "right" to kill her child - I find that appalling and morally offensive.

Beth: I agree with you. I do NOT agree with using MY tax dollars to pay for a woman's right to kill her unruly six-year old son. He just needs to learn to behave better. Take away his toys for awhile.

Now... if what you mean is having your tax dollars used to kill an "unborn" child... you are talking about a fetus. That is not a child... it is a fetus. It is right here where we get into what you believe to be a tenet of your religion, and what I believe to be a matter of science. A fetus is a fetus.

Also... as far as each individual citizen having the "right" to approve exactly WHAT their tax dollars will pay for... that could not possibly work. I have been against the "War" in Iraq... actually the Invasion of Iraq, from the start. So have many others. Should we be allowed to withhold our tax dollars because we believe that the Invasion of Iraq was against International Law ? I believe we should be able to do that... but it would never work. Compromise has to rule... whether we like it in certain instances or not.

Education ? You agree that the government can determine the use of, and overseeing of interstate roads, but you do NOT believe it should have a hand in education ? How silly. As a country, we must be able to depend upon a degree in one state being the equal of a degree in another. To have fifty different levels of validation of degrees... a different one for each state... would be totally unworkable.

Melissa: I too believe there should be other types of birth control rather than abortion.

For example... men who have been convicted for rape. Now, I know mistakes can be made, so I would NOT make this the punishment for, let's say, the first two convictions. But... just like the "three strikes" law... the third time is the "charmer." Any man who is convicted of rape, and it is the third strike... should be castrated. And, I do not mean that silly thing they call "chemical" castration. I mean total, actual surgical removal. It has been scientifically proven that men who do not have a penis or testicles will no longer rape women.

Karen Anne,

After reading this post and most of the comments that followed I felt compelled to chime in. Like many of those commenting I do not want to see my tax dollars going to abortions under any circumstances. I can live with a woman's freedom of choice, but do not feel it is OK to trample on someones moral beliefs to finance abortion. Abortion is murder, at 8 weeks the fetus has a visible heart beat, life has begun cells are rapidly developing this is a life.

Liberals argue equal government for all when they make the argument for same sex marriage, an issue that I do support. I do agree that our Government does owe equal rights to all, from the gay couple that wants nothing more than to have the right to enter into marriage to the baby in the womb.

For all those who think religion has no place in political conversation, you need to return to the history of this country. The separation of church and state was established not to protect the government from the church, but to protect the church from the government.

Thank-you for this interesting discussion. I look forward to future dialogs.

One other point. Women have always had several choices in what to do with their bodies.

The Choice to abstain from having sex.

The Choice to use protection.

The Choice to take responsibility for their previous bad choices.

The matter at hand isn't the Choice of women it is the lack of choice the government would give to those who believe abortion is murder in a health care plan that forces our tax dollars to pay for abortion.

Cindy: The thing that hits me first about your comment... is your idea of taking away a woman's reproductive choice as far as what she and her doctor deem best... because of a "belief" of yours. You are free to believe whatever you wish. This is America. You are NOT free, however, to then turn that "belief" of yours, that is YOUR belief, and turn that belief into a law, and the FORCE all women to abide by that belief.

Again... your "belief" is that abortion is murder. That does not make it so. You are fee to live your belief by choosing not to have an abortion yourself. You are not free... to dictate the choices that should be, by law, available to other women who do not share the same set of religious beliefs as you do.

You may not "want" to see your tax dollars going for abortions. Fine. I did not "want" to see my tax dollars going for the Invasion of Iraq. But... just as I did not have the legal ability to force my belief on others, neither do you.

Cindy... religion DOES have a place in any discussion. Religion just does NOT have a place in allowing one group of people with a certain religious belief... to enforce that belief on another group.

What cannot be allowed to happen... is for the government to adopt the views of the church, and then force them on it's citizens. This is NOT Iran. This is NOT Saudi Arabia. This is America.

Cindy: Thanks so much for your comment. Please return again... and share your opinions.

NOV

Karen,

Religious beliefs,

medical needs.

Two different subjects.

Terry: You're trying to make actual SENSE again with your comment. I thought I warned you about that. That's almost Un-American these days. But... oops... you are Canadian... and you folks often make more sense than "we" do. Silly me.

Leave a response…

Name:

Email:
(optional)

Comment:

What does the graphic say?