Time to get moving...again...
I realize that this is something on the order of the 3rd or 4th time I've said this, but now I'm SERIOUSLY going to start updating more often. I swear. I finally have something to do here other than Bush-bash (not that that's getting old, by any means, it's just getting less effective).
I have decided, after careful thought, to support Ned Lamont for US Senate in Connecticut. For those of you who don't know, that's where I'm from, and that's where I vote. I'm supporting Mr. Lamont because I've gone over his platform, researched a few things, and am thoroughly disillusioned with Sen. Lieberman, whose continual support of our current criminal regime-and an unpopular war-have wrecked any faith I may have had in his political and moral integrity.
So. That being said, go here. Sign up. Help out. Do what you can. The Democratic primary is on the 8th of August. Let's get someone in there who actually will vote with the public's desires.
Well, now that I've gotten that out of the way, I can begin with the main subject of today's rant/news. Republican idiocy and blindness, not to mention arrogance and obvious power-hunger, has struck again. Over the course of the past couple of days, a bill has been put through the Senate. S.403, entitled the "Child Custody Protection Act." It was a bill to make bringing a minor across state lines for an abortion-without parental notice if the home state requires parental notification for minors-a federal crime. There was an amendment to that bill, to appropriate more funding for the teaching of non-abstinence sex education in schools. That was defeated.
In and of itself, the bill is actually a somewhat decent idea, giving parents an extra tool to keep an eye on what their kids are doing (God knows that they need it, what with all the sex and drug dealing on myspace.com. Seriously! How can that be on the web? Nobody should have the right to put things like that online where some predator might find them. Parents shouldn't have to watch their kids. That's the state's job, and dammit if somebody isn't getting sued about it! ) The amendment is just necessary. If you're going to make bringing someone for an abortion a crime, you should at the very least be doing something to try and lower the teenage pregnancy rate. However, the bill was passed passed-without the amendment. Why are we going to make it even harder for teenaged girls to have control over their lives, and hurt those close to them, AFTER we deny them knowledge that could prevent the entire situation? Allow me to explain.
The bill, which can be found here, is supposed to be a bill to give parents greater control over their children, and to help them stay informed of what their children are doing. Specifically female children. Or male children who happen to be in a sexual relationship and take their girlfriend across state lines for an abortion, and get sent to prison for a year. Or the grandparent who takes the girl. They can be arrested and jailed, too! Now, I'm all for not having an abortion. I'm a Catholic, and something about the whole procedure just seems not right to me. However, I firmly believe that it is the lesser evil to terminate a pregnancy than to bring a child into the world who is not going to be brought up in a safe, secure, caring, and loving household, with a mother and father to nurture and provide.
Before anyone says/thinks it, don't give me any righteous talk about giving the child up for adoption. I'll come to that pet peeve of mine a little later.
So, to continue. The bill, as it is, stands to put a lot of good, well-intentioned people behind bars, or slap them with hefty fines, for doing something that they feel is right. While I admit parents have the right to be notified about what their child is doing, in particular something like this, I can honestly say that I would much rather it be notification after the fact. The way this is being criminalized makes no sense. According to the bill, only the person or persons doing the transporting can be punished. The parents and minor involved are immune to any sort of civil or criminal penalties.
I think I can see where that came from. The Republicans who wanted this passed are, most likely, religious. Therefore, it stands to reason that they most likely disapprove of pre-marital, and especially by teens, sexual activity. Since they can't outlaw that, as it would clearly be religiously based and therefore unconsitutional (oh, wait...), they've decided to go after those who would help to promulgate the lifestyle that they disapprove of. Something about this I saw in the Register Citizen, from an AP report this morning truly made my blood boil. Sen. Tom Coburn, from Oklahoma, was quoted to say something to the effect of "No good ever came from premarital sex."(Paraphrased, from an AP article. I'll have the info up when I find the newspaper I read it in)
Obviously the honorable Senator hasn't met the majority of college students these days. Nearly everyone I know at school has had a relationship that had some level of sexual involvement. Do you know something? The vast majority of those relationships were healthy and constructive, and helped all parties involved to grow as human beings. Does it make them any worse human beings for what they've done? The senator might think so. I certainly do not. While some of my friends do regret things they've done, most come away from these relationships better and wiser people.
The other thing about that, is who would want to not have sex before marriage? How else are you going to know what sort of a lover your future spouse will be? I, for one, would not want to be stuck with someone for the rest of my life who was a bad lover. You may call me selfish all you want. I call myself a pragmatist.
Now that that little side-rant is done, I can get back to ripping S.403 up one side and down the other. To continue from where I left off: Punishing those who help the minor in question. What a wonderful way to espouse family values. Your brother helped you get an abortion? That makes you both sinners! Only your brother goes to prison, though. You stay free. You have no criminal record, he does. His life is ruined. Yours? Well, you're going to hell anyway, so what does your life matter?
These are the kind of people we're dealing with. This is the sort of thing we have to fight. It is my firm belief that a woman's right to choose is sacrosanct. Not because I think abortion is right, but because I have no right to tell her otherwise. Males, the majority in government, have absolutely no idea what a woman goes through, and never can. It is therefore both morally reprehensible, and utterly hypocritical, to think that we can tell her what she can and can't do. This is the point we must make. That is the case we must prove. Can we do it? I damn sure hope so.
I promised earlier to deal with the question of, "Why not just carry the child to full term and then give it up for adoption?" Because of the social stigma. I knew a girl when I was in high school who got pregnant my sophomore year. She managed to hide it very well, and carried the baby to full term. As far as I know, she is living quite happily as a single mother. However, she had both a supportive family and an understanding community. Not all girls are so lucky as she. If parental notification is going to be required, safe harbor should be as well. It will do no good to force a girl to carry a child to full term then give it up for adoption, or to force her to notify her parents or get their consent, if she is going to be abused or stigmatized in any way, like the poor girl from near Birmingham, Alabama was last April. A 12 year-old girl told her mother she had had sex. Her mother poured bleach down her throat and then suffocated her to death.(Found in the Birmingham News, April 12, 2005)
Things like that MUST BE PREVENTED if parental notification is going to be required. And that is for all things of this sort. The right of privacy, specifically from Roe v. Wade, is one of the most sacrosanct rights we have as Americans. It, and all our other civil rights, have fallen under attack these past six years. Action must be taken. I am through with my random rant for the day.
I bid you good day, and happy geekings.
-Teh Josh
I have decided, after careful thought, to support Ned Lamont for US Senate in Connecticut. For those of you who don't know, that's where I'm from, and that's where I vote. I'm supporting Mr. Lamont because I've gone over his platform, researched a few things, and am thoroughly disillusioned with Sen. Lieberman, whose continual support of our current criminal regime-and an unpopular war-have wrecked any faith I may have had in his political and moral integrity.
So. That being said, go here. Sign up. Help out. Do what you can. The Democratic primary is on the 8th of August. Let's get someone in there who actually will vote with the public's desires.
Well, now that I've gotten that out of the way, I can begin with the main subject of today's rant/news. Republican idiocy and blindness, not to mention arrogance and obvious power-hunger, has struck again. Over the course of the past couple of days, a bill has been put through the Senate. S.403, entitled the "Child Custody Protection Act." It was a bill to make bringing a minor across state lines for an abortion-without parental notice if the home state requires parental notification for minors-a federal crime. There was an amendment to that bill, to appropriate more funding for the teaching of non-abstinence sex education in schools. That was defeated.
In and of itself, the bill is actually a somewhat decent idea, giving parents an extra tool to keep an eye on what their kids are doing (God knows that they need it, what with all the sex and drug dealing on myspace.com. Seriously! How can that be on the web? Nobody should have the right to put things like that online where some predator might find them. Parents shouldn't have to watch their kids. That's the state's job, and dammit if somebody isn't getting sued about it! ) The amendment is just necessary. If you're going to make bringing someone for an abortion a crime, you should at the very least be doing something to try and lower the teenage pregnancy rate. However, the bill was passed passed-without the amendment. Why are we going to make it even harder for teenaged girls to have control over their lives, and hurt those close to them, AFTER we deny them knowledge that could prevent the entire situation? Allow me to explain.
The bill, which can be found here, is supposed to be a bill to give parents greater control over their children, and to help them stay informed of what their children are doing. Specifically female children. Or male children who happen to be in a sexual relationship and take their girlfriend across state lines for an abortion, and get sent to prison for a year. Or the grandparent who takes the girl. They can be arrested and jailed, too! Now, I'm all for not having an abortion. I'm a Catholic, and something about the whole procedure just seems not right to me. However, I firmly believe that it is the lesser evil to terminate a pregnancy than to bring a child into the world who is not going to be brought up in a safe, secure, caring, and loving household, with a mother and father to nurture and provide.
Before anyone says/thinks it, don't give me any righteous talk about giving the child up for adoption. I'll come to that pet peeve of mine a little later.
So, to continue. The bill, as it is, stands to put a lot of good, well-intentioned people behind bars, or slap them with hefty fines, for doing something that they feel is right. While I admit parents have the right to be notified about what their child is doing, in particular something like this, I can honestly say that I would much rather it be notification after the fact. The way this is being criminalized makes no sense. According to the bill, only the person or persons doing the transporting can be punished. The parents and minor involved are immune to any sort of civil or criminal penalties.
I think I can see where that came from. The Republicans who wanted this passed are, most likely, religious. Therefore, it stands to reason that they most likely disapprove of pre-marital, and especially by teens, sexual activity. Since they can't outlaw that, as it would clearly be religiously based and therefore unconsitutional (oh, wait...), they've decided to go after those who would help to promulgate the lifestyle that they disapprove of. Something about this I saw in the Register Citizen, from an AP report this morning truly made my blood boil. Sen. Tom Coburn, from Oklahoma, was quoted to say something to the effect of "No good ever came from premarital sex."(Paraphrased, from an AP article. I'll have the info up when I find the newspaper I read it in)
Obviously the honorable Senator hasn't met the majority of college students these days. Nearly everyone I know at school has had a relationship that had some level of sexual involvement. Do you know something? The vast majority of those relationships were healthy and constructive, and helped all parties involved to grow as human beings. Does it make them any worse human beings for what they've done? The senator might think so. I certainly do not. While some of my friends do regret things they've done, most come away from these relationships better and wiser people.
The other thing about that, is who would want to not have sex before marriage? How else are you going to know what sort of a lover your future spouse will be? I, for one, would not want to be stuck with someone for the rest of my life who was a bad lover. You may call me selfish all you want. I call myself a pragmatist.
Now that that little side-rant is done, I can get back to ripping S.403 up one side and down the other. To continue from where I left off: Punishing those who help the minor in question. What a wonderful way to espouse family values. Your brother helped you get an abortion? That makes you both sinners! Only your brother goes to prison, though. You stay free. You have no criminal record, he does. His life is ruined. Yours? Well, you're going to hell anyway, so what does your life matter?
These are the kind of people we're dealing with. This is the sort of thing we have to fight. It is my firm belief that a woman's right to choose is sacrosanct. Not because I think abortion is right, but because I have no right to tell her otherwise. Males, the majority in government, have absolutely no idea what a woman goes through, and never can. It is therefore both morally reprehensible, and utterly hypocritical, to think that we can tell her what she can and can't do. This is the point we must make. That is the case we must prove. Can we do it? I damn sure hope so.
I promised earlier to deal with the question of, "Why not just carry the child to full term and then give it up for adoption?" Because of the social stigma. I knew a girl when I was in high school who got pregnant my sophomore year. She managed to hide it very well, and carried the baby to full term. As far as I know, she is living quite happily as a single mother. However, she had both a supportive family and an understanding community. Not all girls are so lucky as she. If parental notification is going to be required, safe harbor should be as well. It will do no good to force a girl to carry a child to full term then give it up for adoption, or to force her to notify her parents or get their consent, if she is going to be abused or stigmatized in any way, like the poor girl from near Birmingham, Alabama was last April. A 12 year-old girl told her mother she had had sex. Her mother poured bleach down her throat and then suffocated her to death.(Found in the Birmingham News, April 12, 2005)
Things like that MUST BE PREVENTED if parental notification is going to be required. And that is for all things of this sort. The right of privacy, specifically from Roe v. Wade, is one of the most sacrosanct rights we have as Americans. It, and all our other civil rights, have fallen under attack these past six years. Action must be taken. I am through with my random rant for the day.
I bid you good day, and happy geekings.
-Teh Josh
posted by The Josh at
6:49 PM
0 Comments
