I came across this article in "In These Times" today.
http://inthesetimes.com/ittlist/entry/1296 /the_gops_sex_addictionand_why_it_might_not_hurt_the_party_this_fa/
The article talks about Wisconsin passing a bill that repealed the state’s standards for sex eduction. If Governor Scott Walker signs the bill that passed two weeks ago, as
expected, contraception education will become optional. Abstinence
education will still be mandatory.
This repeal of the Healthy Youth Act shows The GOP's motivations over sex and reproduction rights since the GOP's stance on contraceptive coverage has been a main issue in the presidential primaries.
States passed 93 restrictions on abortions in 2011 which is triple the old record of 34.
Anderson sites three main factor that encourage this "War on Women."
1.Faith- against all studies that show that offering abstinence only education has significantly higher rates of teen pregnancy doesn't stop people from repealing laws that would help educate young adults.
2. Population Growth- many conservatives think that slowing the rate of population growth is eeil or "a conspiracy to re-engineer the American economy and gradually introduce socialism."
3. Tea Party repression- tea partiers are getting a record umber of restrictions on abortions passed which are keeping these ultra-conservatives happy.
Anderson also says that unfortunately this "War on Women" will not hurt the GOP but will be a popular point with evangelical and the elderly who ted to vote more.
Another map that's been floating around that I thought was interesting is this map that shows how much more women pay than men for health insurance.
http://fusewashington.org/actions/aca-map/
It seems ridiculous that women are still being publicly discriminated against in the 21st century. Not only is it happening, but it will also help the GOP candidate win their primaries.
Any thoughts?
Friday, March 30, 2012
Thursday, March 29, 2012
A Town Divided
As the weeks have gone on I have watched news about the Trayvon Martin case develop. It is getting nationwide recognition now and it seems as if everyone has something to say about it. I would just like to say that his death was a tragedy and George Zimmerman should have been arrested. If he wanted to claim self-defense that is fine, but he should have done it in front of a jury. One group that I was not expecting to hear from were people on Zimmerman's side. They must have known the backlash that would result from their siding with him. Zimmerman has claimed that Martin punched him in the face and hit his head into the ground. However, the witnesses say that this is not the case. I know that the police may be hesitant to arrest him now because it may spark the belief that if a large enough group of people want someone arrested then they will be arrested, even if it is not warranted. This is not the case though. A large group of people want this person arrested because this person should have been arrested a month ago. Many people in Sanford have now said that they no longer feel safe in their own town. If I lived in a town that supported a man who killed a young man just for carrying a bag of Skittles then I would be scared as well. I was just wondering what your thoughts were on this crazy situation and what you believe the police should do at this point?
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
French Presidentail Elections
NYT Article
I'm sure you all have heard about the killing of French soldiers, Jewish children and a Rabbi in Toulouse, France. The suspected murderer was found, confronted in this apartment after a 32 hour stand off and killed once a raid on his apartment happened. He was found to be a member of Al Qaeda. This is interesting to politics, and especially me since I will be in France for the Presidential elections, because the candidates running for president suspended their campaigning during this national crisis. I thought this posed a very question to presidential campaigns in the United States where elections seem to run through every part of our lives.
Would presidential campaigns ever be suspended in the United States for any reason?
I can't imagine a crisis of any type that would have candidates willing to suspend their campaigns. National events seem more and more to be welcome to presidential candidates because it allows them to win brownie points by supporting the country on what is usually a one sided event. In the example of France, all of the candidates were in support of finding this terrorist actor and ending the killings. However, in the United States, more and more often I find that candidates take national events and use them to take low blows at other candidates. Critiquing any fault in speech or handling of the affair.
Your answer or opinion?
I'm sure you all have heard about the killing of French soldiers, Jewish children and a Rabbi in Toulouse, France. The suspected murderer was found, confronted in this apartment after a 32 hour stand off and killed once a raid on his apartment happened. He was found to be a member of Al Qaeda. This is interesting to politics, and especially me since I will be in France for the Presidential elections, because the candidates running for president suspended their campaigning during this national crisis. I thought this posed a very question to presidential campaigns in the United States where elections seem to run through every part of our lives.
Would presidential campaigns ever be suspended in the United States for any reason?
I can't imagine a crisis of any type that would have candidates willing to suspend their campaigns. National events seem more and more to be welcome to presidential candidates because it allows them to win brownie points by supporting the country on what is usually a one sided event. In the example of France, all of the candidates were in support of finding this terrorist actor and ending the killings. However, in the United States, more and more often I find that candidates take national events and use them to take low blows at other candidates. Critiquing any fault in speech or handling of the affair.
Your answer or opinion?
Tuesday, March 27, 2012
Silencing the Guns
This blog post by Westen, discusses the lack of progress on weapons legislation since the shooting of Gabby Giffords in Tucson. He points out that in times of tragedy, our Congress can come together in support of one of their own or of mourning families across the country. But when it comes to moving forward and doing something about it, their bipartisanship is nowhere to be found. Since the shooting in Tucson, there have been school shootings (such as Ohio), medical center shootings (U of Pitt), and more. All of these shootings were done with semi-automatic weapons or extended magazines. The big question Westen is posing, should the N.R.A. really have this much power? And how can something be done to stop the onslaught of shootings due to relaxed gun laws?
"North Korea moves long-range rocket to launch pad"
http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/26/world/asia/korea-obama-visit/index.html
A South Korean Defense Ministry official said that Pyongyang moved a long-range rocket it plans to test fire to a launch pad Monday. What do you think what US should do?
Is it time for the United states to move a missile or atomic weapon because atomic weapons kills people less than the war. There is an example of as atomic bomb, little boy, in Hiroshima, Japan in 1945.
A South Korean Defense Ministry official said that Pyongyang moved a long-range rocket it plans to test fire to a launch pad Monday. What do you think what US should do?
Is it time for the United states to move a missile or atomic weapon because atomic weapons kills people less than the war. There is an example of as atomic bomb, little boy, in Hiroshima, Japan in 1945.
Monday, March 26, 2012
Iowa charaties getting short changes; Nonprofits with large salaries
Telemarketers for Iowa Charities Keep Most of the Money They Raise
This is the link to an article I remember seeing nearly a year ago - "Iowa charities that use outside telemarketers received an average of just 22 cents of each $1 raised, a Gazette investigation found."
When I read this I found it appalling. So apparently it's not just KONEY people who are attempting to gain benefit from an atrocity. "When DialAmerica called on behalf of Special Olympics Iowa for 24 months, ending in October, the non-profit received $142,100 of the $982,766 generated. That’s 14.5 cents for each $1, or 85.5 percent to DialAmerica, because some donors chose to give to the non-profit without purchasing a magazine."
How can this be? What can we do about it? Can we do anything about it? How can DialAmerica claim to be a socially responsible organization "helping" these nonprofits?
But it's obviously not just organizations in Iowa though. ChildFund International’s CEO makes double the salary of the average nonprofit CEO. The President made a salary of nearly $318,000 in 2010.
How can we say that this is okay? Are our nonprofits really doing good if their fundraisers benefit a for-profit company? And should nonprofit President's earn the top 5% of salary earners?
This is the link to an article I remember seeing nearly a year ago - "Iowa charities that use outside telemarketers received an average of just 22 cents of each $1 raised, a Gazette investigation found."
When I read this I found it appalling. So apparently it's not just KONEY people who are attempting to gain benefit from an atrocity. "When DialAmerica called on behalf of Special Olympics Iowa for 24 months, ending in October, the non-profit received $142,100 of the $982,766 generated. That’s 14.5 cents for each $1, or 85.5 percent to DialAmerica, because some donors chose to give to the non-profit without purchasing a magazine."
How can this be? What can we do about it? Can we do anything about it? How can DialAmerica claim to be a socially responsible organization "helping" these nonprofits?
But it's obviously not just organizations in Iowa though. ChildFund International’s CEO makes double the salary of the average nonprofit CEO. The President made a salary of nearly $318,000 in 2010.
How can we say that this is okay? Are our nonprofits really doing good if their fundraisers benefit a for-profit company? And should nonprofit President's earn the top 5% of salary earners?
Sunday, March 25, 2012
How Kennedy helped shape Mitt Romney
Very interesting article.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/us/politics/ted-kennedy-helped-shape-mitt-romneys-career-and-still-haunts-it.html?_r=1&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20120325
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/us/politics/ted-kennedy-helped-shape-mitt-romneys-career-and-still-haunts-it.html?_r=1&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20120325
Sunday, March 18, 2012
Ugandans react with anger to KONEY video
After KONY
2012 video attracted over 82 million views on YouTube up to date, the local
people of Lira town in Uganda finally got to see the video that the world
was talking about. A local charity “The
African Youth Initiative Network” organized a screening of the movie and invited locals to come and watch the most important video of that week or maybe of
the year. Many of them were looking forward to watch this video
since it was the central discussion in social media, shared/watched
all over the world, what they looked forward was to see a video that would present their struggle and
problems. Yet, what they found was
different from what they expected I guess. Malcolm Webb, a journalist of
Aljazeera explained that the people he spooked to “anticipated seeing a video
that showed the world the terrible atrocities that they had suffered during the
conflict and the ongoing struggles they still face trying to rebuild their
lives after two lost decades.” However, after
watching the video he noted that the mood changed in the crowd and many saw this video as “inaccurate account that belittled and commercialized their
suffering, as the film promotes KONY bracelets and other fundraising merchandise,
with the aim of making KONY infamous.”
So what do you make out of the KONY 2012
camping then? As I stated in my previous op-ed about KONY, I have countless
question and continue to ask more about the video and the NGO itself. But also
want to understand more about how much of an impact this video might have on
locals and outside of Uganda. If this video was done with its best intention
for the local people, then how come the locals are so angry about that? I guess
sometimes awareness is important because at list out of this video many people know that “Uganda”
is a country and “Joseph Kony” exist. If the people that shared/watched the
video about Kony have no power or refuse to do anything about it and just give money
to Invisible Children for awesome camping of poorly portrayed Ugandans who is winning
here?
Here is the link that will take you aljazeera video:
Saturday, March 17, 2012
The Construction of Political "Losers": Generation Y's Turn?
OPINION
| March 11, 2012
Opinion: The Go-Nowhere Generation
By TODD G. BUCHHOLZ and VICTORIA BUCHHOLZ
Americans have historically been on the move, but young people these days seem to prefer staying put.
The above link to an article from Sunday's New York Times will be of interest to most capstoners and others interested in the "politics of demonization." We've seen this process at work for ages, but it has become especially pervasive and brutal in times of economic pinch when the factors conspiring to limit our options in the material world are too complex or remote to warrant an effort to understand, let alone manipulate with a public-policymaking system that, itself, is broken. We've seen this phenomenon in particularly mean-spirited and discouraging form since President Obama was elected at a time in our history coincident with the meltdown of our financial system and, in turn, the macroeconomy of not only the states but most of the globe. We've seen it in the "construction" of "Obamacare," the general, conservative public's characterization of the Patient Protection and Health Care Affordability Act as a socialist, big government takeover of one-sixth of the US economy. There is the more primitive expression of the same dynamic in efforts to delegitimize Obama himself: he's not really an American, as the birthers insist; he's a Muslim, as 25% of GOP primary voters in Tennessee recently claimed. He's a radical leftist, harbors disdain toward small town residents, is a elitist through and through, and so on and so forth interminably. We've seen this in the efforts of Austrian-school economists to define our fiscal problems as the result of runaway spending, taking our eyes off the fact that government revenues have never been as small as a percentage of GDP in some 60 years. And most recently, we've seen the battle over meaning in the "construction combat" over the efforts of some to define the proposed HHS rule for contraceptive converage as a threat to religious liberty, while American women have seen this and the state-level initiatives to require invasive ultrasounds of women considering abortion as a no-holds barred assault on women's rights and an expansion of government into the relationship between a woman and her doctor. Even in what passes as the academic realm, we see Charles Murray's effort to affix blame for our socio-economic ills on the morality shortfall of the residents of Fishtown, not on the 1% who have benefitted handsomely from our tax policies and from profits drawn from investments in firms who have exported jobs to cheap-labor offshore locales.
So now we encounter an attempt to locate the roots of our collective ills in Generation Y, arguably the single most victimized collective of the New Gilded Age and its polarized politics. This is not without precedent either. As Generation X became of college age, it too was pilloried -- mostly by Baby Boomers -- as lacking in work ethic, content to exercise its rights as a generation of slackers and slobs. I would encourage all of you, as members of Generation Y, to take a look at the latest form the quest for losers has taken since it lowers its sights on you. And then I would suggest a look at some rebuttals by your cohorts that have materialized in the form of letters to the editor, reachable via the link below. Close scrutiny will reveal yet another concourse ripe for picking as a Q study of the core political dynamics at issue in such efforts to construct reality out of whole cloth, the very essence of politics in the Age of Social Media.
OPINION | March 17, 2012
Letters: Generation Y Stands Up for Itself
Readers respond to a Sunday Review article, "The Go-Nowhere Generation."
Opinion: The Go-Nowhere Generation
By TODD G. BUCHHOLZ and VICTORIA BUCHHOLZ
Americans have historically been on the move, but young people these days seem to prefer staying put.
The above link to an article from Sunday's New York Times will be of interest to most capstoners and others interested in the "politics of demonization." We've seen this process at work for ages, but it has become especially pervasive and brutal in times of economic pinch when the factors conspiring to limit our options in the material world are too complex or remote to warrant an effort to understand, let alone manipulate with a public-policymaking system that, itself, is broken. We've seen this phenomenon in particularly mean-spirited and discouraging form since President Obama was elected at a time in our history coincident with the meltdown of our financial system and, in turn, the macroeconomy of not only the states but most of the globe. We've seen it in the "construction" of "Obamacare," the general, conservative public's characterization of the Patient Protection and Health Care Affordability Act as a socialist, big government takeover of one-sixth of the US economy. There is the more primitive expression of the same dynamic in efforts to delegitimize Obama himself: he's not really an American, as the birthers insist; he's a Muslim, as 25% of GOP primary voters in Tennessee recently claimed. He's a radical leftist, harbors disdain toward small town residents, is a elitist through and through, and so on and so forth interminably. We've seen this in the efforts of Austrian-school economists to define our fiscal problems as the result of runaway spending, taking our eyes off the fact that government revenues have never been as small as a percentage of GDP in some 60 years. And most recently, we've seen the battle over meaning in the "construction combat" over the efforts of some to define the proposed HHS rule for contraceptive converage as a threat to religious liberty, while American women have seen this and the state-level initiatives to require invasive ultrasounds of women considering abortion as a no-holds barred assault on women's rights and an expansion of government into the relationship between a woman and her doctor. Even in what passes as the academic realm, we see Charles Murray's effort to affix blame for our socio-economic ills on the morality shortfall of the residents of Fishtown, not on the 1% who have benefitted handsomely from our tax policies and from profits drawn from investments in firms who have exported jobs to cheap-labor offshore locales.
So now we encounter an attempt to locate the roots of our collective ills in Generation Y, arguably the single most victimized collective of the New Gilded Age and its polarized politics. This is not without precedent either. As Generation X became of college age, it too was pilloried -- mostly by Baby Boomers -- as lacking in work ethic, content to exercise its rights as a generation of slackers and slobs. I would encourage all of you, as members of Generation Y, to take a look at the latest form the quest for losers has taken since it lowers its sights on you. And then I would suggest a look at some rebuttals by your cohorts that have materialized in the form of letters to the editor, reachable via the link below. Close scrutiny will reveal yet another concourse ripe for picking as a Q study of the core political dynamics at issue in such efforts to construct reality out of whole cloth, the very essence of politics in the Age of Social Media.
OPINION | March 17, 2012
Letters: Generation Y Stands Up for Itself
Readers respond to a Sunday Review article, "The Go-Nowhere Generation."
Friday, March 16, 2012
MUN
Honorable Chairs, Distinguish Delegates
Wartburg Model United Nations (WMUN) finally took place after six week of preparation from the exec team, countless meeting, awesome delegates and big help from Dr. Billet and Dr. Thomas. Thank you all for making this possible and I hope that everyone enjoyed as much as I did.
But what now? I would like to open a discussion and hear what you guys think about MUN? Do you think the experience was worthy and suggest to others to be involved in MUN? Can you relate what we did in MUN with class experience? Did you learn anything out of this three days experience? How can we keep the conversation and discussion going? Do you think that a class like Capstone for Political Science and International Relations should have MUN included as their class project in the future? I guess this is more a post session comments, reflection. What do you think can be improved? How can we keep WMUN alive on campus?
…I yield my time to the chair and the rest of delegates: d
Delegation of France
Thursday, March 15, 2012
Is Obama's Fate Predetermined?
http://outfront.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/14/can-president-obama-end-150-year-streak/?hpt=hp_bn3
On a less serious note, this article argues that the winner of the presidential election may already be decided. If fate does exist it could be that Obama's chances at reelection aren't too great. Apparently in the past 150 years every presidential election that took place on November 6th has been won by the Republican candidate.
http://outfront.blogs.cnn.com/2012/02/29/did-the-oscars-clinch-the-election-for-president-obama/
But then there's the theory that Obama will win because of the Oscar results. When the same film is named Best Picture at the Golden Globes and the Oscars the Republican candidate wins, whereas if two different films win these top honors the Democratic candidate is elected. However, this trend has only existed for the past 50 years.
More likely than not these are just coincidences, but if either of them were true it might simplify the campaign process.It's unlikely that most people would be opposed to this. I guess we'll have to wait and see.
On a less serious note, this article argues that the winner of the presidential election may already be decided. If fate does exist it could be that Obama's chances at reelection aren't too great. Apparently in the past 150 years every presidential election that took place on November 6th has been won by the Republican candidate.
http://outfront.blogs.cnn.com/2012/02/29/did-the-oscars-clinch-the-election-for-president-obama/
But then there's the theory that Obama will win because of the Oscar results. When the same film is named Best Picture at the Golden Globes and the Oscars the Republican candidate wins, whereas if two different films win these top honors the Democratic candidate is elected. However, this trend has only existed for the past 50 years.
More likely than not these are just coincidences, but if either of them were true it might simplify the campaign process.It's unlikely that most people would be opposed to this. I guess we'll have to wait and see.
Syria's First Lady
http://outfront.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/01/asma-al-assad-fearless-critic-of-barbarism-unless-its-aimed-at-her-own-people/
A lot of blame has been placed since the crisis in Syria began, but this is the first article I've read criticizing, Asma Al-Assad, the First Lady of Syria. It highlights her nonexistent efforts at bringing an end to the situation. She has previously spoken up for the human rights of civilians in other countries when they experienced similar turmoil, so the question is being asked why not now, when it's her own country? Many people view her actions as hypocritical and they aren't comforted by the fact that she has take the time to comfort victims of the violence. Some individuals feel that Mrs. Assad has condemned the people of Syria to death, by not standing up and vocalizing arguments for their rights.
I find it hard to disagree with this argument. It would be different if Mrs. Assad hadn't ever stood up against human brutality in the midst of conflict. However, since that isn't the case it looks like she has abandoned the Syrian citizens. If she has argued with her husband and asked him to bring an end to the violence, this isn't apparent to anyone else.
A lot of blame has been placed since the crisis in Syria began, but this is the first article I've read criticizing, Asma Al-Assad, the First Lady of Syria. It highlights her nonexistent efforts at bringing an end to the situation. She has previously spoken up for the human rights of civilians in other countries when they experienced similar turmoil, so the question is being asked why not now, when it's her own country? Many people view her actions as hypocritical and they aren't comforted by the fact that she has take the time to comfort victims of the violence. Some individuals feel that Mrs. Assad has condemned the people of Syria to death, by not standing up and vocalizing arguments for their rights.
I find it hard to disagree with this argument. It would be different if Mrs. Assad hadn't ever stood up against human brutality in the midst of conflict. However, since that isn't the case it looks like she has abandoned the Syrian citizens. If she has argued with her husband and asked him to bring an end to the violence, this isn't apparent to anyone else.
Wednesday, March 14, 2012
Is Limbaugh being treated fairly?
While I do not agree with the things that Rush Limbaugh says, it is almost like people hold him to a double standard. No, I'm not talking about the way that he attacks people, but the people that he attacks. His rants fall on almost everyone except for white, conservative men. But, a lot of his attacks fall on to women. They are easy targets as there aren't a lot of them in politics and those that are involved are generally a pain for Limbaugh. However, by degrading women with words like "whore" and "slut", words he frequently uses, he isn't just hurting individuals, but hurting women as a whole.
However, there is another political pundit who does just as much damage to women: Bill Maher. While Maher tends to keep his comments related to women in the political field (Palin, Bachmann, Clinton), the fact the he still uses degrading language that affects all women is just as bad as what Limbaugh does. While Obama said that the remarks were "reprehensible", he has not spoken out against the misogynistic language that Maher constantly uses. Maher also just donated one million dollars to the Obama Super PAC; money that was earned by berating women. Many female rights groups are calling on Bill Burton, the super PAC founder, to either reject this money or donate it to a charity for abused women.
Please do not take this post the wrong way. I am not defending what Limbaugh said. I am only trying to impose that because of how the comments were stated and whom they were stated about, there is a double standard in affect that shouldn't be allowed. The ultimate group that is victimized isn't the Democrats or Republicans, but women.
Disclaimer: This article is aimed at showing that many women (mostly democrats) should not support Bill Maher. The video that is linked in the article is anti-obama.
http://edition.cnn.com/2012/03/12/opinion/christoph-terrel-bill-maher/
However, there is another political pundit who does just as much damage to women: Bill Maher. While Maher tends to keep his comments related to women in the political field (Palin, Bachmann, Clinton), the fact the he still uses degrading language that affects all women is just as bad as what Limbaugh does. While Obama said that the remarks were "reprehensible", he has not spoken out against the misogynistic language that Maher constantly uses. Maher also just donated one million dollars to the Obama Super PAC; money that was earned by berating women. Many female rights groups are calling on Bill Burton, the super PAC founder, to either reject this money or donate it to a charity for abused women.
Please do not take this post the wrong way. I am not defending what Limbaugh said. I am only trying to impose that because of how the comments were stated and whom they were stated about, there is a double standard in affect that shouldn't be allowed. The ultimate group that is victimized isn't the Democrats or Republicans, but women.
Disclaimer: This article is aimed at showing that many women (mostly democrats) should not support Bill Maher. The video that is linked in the article is anti-obama.
http://edition.cnn.com/2012/03/12/opinion/christoph-terrel-bill-maher/
Monday, March 12, 2012
Oped on Social Issues
This morning on
Meet the Press, the Governors of Maryland and Virginia, Democrat and Republican
respectively, took positions and debated many different topics. Governor
O’Malley of Maryland spoke about the move of the GOP to the fringe right. “If
you look at the presidential campaign, I mean let’s be honest, there has been a
lot more time spent pandering to the extreme right-wing ideologues of the new
Republican Party than has been spent talking about jobs and the economy,” This
was immediately rebutted by Governor McDonnell. McDonnell spoke about how the discussions
on social issues have been a political move by the Democrats to avoid
discussing the economy. “McDonnell said he thinks Democrats are just trying to
shift attention away from jobs, the economy and the nation’s debt by focusing
on social issues, because the nation is still struggling economically”
(Associated Press).
In
what universe is Governor McDonnell living in? The move towards social issues
has exclusively been a Republican effort in many state legislatures. The move
towards social issues, specifically birth control and abortion rights, have
been acted upon in Kansas, Texas, and Governor McDonnell’s home state of
Virginia. In all three of these cases, which is just a small sample set, all legislation
that relates to these social issues have been Republican-led.
It is utter
hypocrisy to claim that the constant focus on social issues is Democratic
gamesmanship when the GOP continues to introduce anti-choice legislation. I’m
sorry Governor McDonnell, but no Democrat forced you to support the trans-vaginal
ultrasound bill, that ultimately had to be amended due to political pressure.
It is cowardice to claim that Democrats are the ones bringing these arguments
to the forefront to avoid talking about the economy and jobs, when it is
clearly the Republican position to try and shed decade’s worth of pro-choice
legislation. Essentially, the Republicans are saying: “How dare you oppose our
invasive encroachment on your constitutionally protected civil rights!”
On the point of
constitutionality, this debate had seen its resolution in the Supreme Court
case of Griswold vs. Connecticut, where they found the constitution protected
the right to privacy. This was not a recent decision made by the Supreme Court.
This was decided in 1965. This should not be what encompasses political
relevance in 2012.
Republicans can
spin their legislation any way they want. But to not take ownership of the legislation
they are putting forward, and passing into law in many cases, is cowardice. It
is their party’s choice to make the social agenda relevant again. Republicans
should tread carefully, as the legislation being put forth directly impacts
close to half of the United States population. This demographic does not take
kindly to others deciding what is right and wrong for their own bodies and
their own circumstances. If Republicans think they can continue to push this
type of legislation without political kickback in the form of voter turnout,
they will be sorely mistaken.
Md. Gov. O’Malley, Va. Gov. McDonnell Debate Economic and
Social Issues in
Presidential race. (2012, March
11). Washington Post. Retrieved March
11, 2012
Silencing Limbaugh
http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/10/opinion/fonda-morgan-steinem-limbaugh/index.html?hpt=hp_c1
Many people, from politicians to celebrities to soldiers, are calling for the FCC to remove Rush Limbaugh from his post as a radio talk show host based on his hate inciting speech towards women, gays and lesbians, non-white races, etc...
People are complaining that his syndicator, Clear Channel Communications, who have always stood behind what Limbaugh has said, have been accused of not using their license "in the public interest" because of the dehumanizing nature of his speech.
Many people, Rush included, say that his speech isn't hateful at all, but humor based or that he is simply creating entertainment for his fans.
Personally, I don't understand how he hasn't been dropped yet. While he is entitled to say the things that he says, he shouldn't be allowed to in the way that he has been. It reminds me of the Don Imus "knappy headed hoes" comment. He was fired in an instant. Why hasn't this happened with Limbaugh yet?
Many people, from politicians to celebrities to soldiers, are calling for the FCC to remove Rush Limbaugh from his post as a radio talk show host based on his hate inciting speech towards women, gays and lesbians, non-white races, etc...
People are complaining that his syndicator, Clear Channel Communications, who have always stood behind what Limbaugh has said, have been accused of not using their license "in the public interest" because of the dehumanizing nature of his speech.
Many people, Rush included, say that his speech isn't hateful at all, but humor based or that he is simply creating entertainment for his fans.
Personally, I don't understand how he hasn't been dropped yet. While he is entitled to say the things that he says, he shouldn't be allowed to in the way that he has been. It reminds me of the Don Imus "knappy headed hoes" comment. He was fired in an instant. Why hasn't this happened with Limbaugh yet?
It's the Men's Turn
http://current.com/community/93693946_ohio-senate-bill-offers-male-lawmakers-a-taste-of-their-own-medicine.htm
Even though it is seen as a bit of a joke, here is the bill proposed by Ohio Senator Nina Turner that would require men to seek psychological help and jump through other hoops before they would be written a prescription for Viagara. She believes that it is time to turn the table on the men in this country who think it is up to the government to decide what is best for our reproductive health. I agree with her. According to Jansing & Co. there have been about 242 bills that restricting women's rights to reproductive health decisions recently. When they say that there is a "War on Women" this election year I believe them.
Even though it is seen as a bit of a joke, here is the bill proposed by Ohio Senator Nina Turner that would require men to seek psychological help and jump through other hoops before they would be written a prescription for Viagara. She believes that it is time to turn the table on the men in this country who think it is up to the government to decide what is best for our reproductive health. I agree with her. According to Jansing & Co. there have been about 242 bills that restricting women's rights to reproductive health decisions recently. When they say that there is a "War on Women" this election year I believe them.
Saturday, March 10, 2012
College and Snobbishness Revisited
"Perhaps if our leading colleges encouraged more humility and less hubris, college-bashing would go out of style and we could get on with the urgent business of providing the best education for as many Americans as possible."
This is the concluding sentence from a thought-provoking essay by Andrew Delbanco, a professor of American Studies at Columbia, which appeared in the New York Times Thursday. Entitled, "A Smug Education," the essay looks at the history of the US's great institutions of higher education and their origins as affiliates of religious traditions. Hence Harvard, Yale, and Princeton are cited as educational institutions established by our earliest Protestant settlers. And Delbanco reviews the early history of such colleges, in the same way that David Ricci does, reminding us that the ideal graduate was one who was not filled with self-pride and the ambition to leverage the degree to make millions. Rather, the early ideal was to recognize, with gratitude, one's humble place in the universe, a universe filled by untold secrets even for the most knowledable. So, despite the huge rebuttal to Rich Santorum's calling President Obama a snob for recommending college for most young people (he didn't recommend a four-year degree for all), Delbanco finds an element of truth in Santorum's rant among America's most elite institutions of higher learning. Their students, he says, have too often strayed from the core message of their founders: learning is a privilege and not a ticket to a life of luxury. The real learned among us know this in their bones: what we know is a tiny fraction of what we don't know. And that kind of knowledge is cause for humility, not hubris.
Here's the link:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/09/opinion/colleges-and-elitism.html?src=me&ref=general
This is the concluding sentence from a thought-provoking essay by Andrew Delbanco, a professor of American Studies at Columbia, which appeared in the New York Times Thursday. Entitled, "A Smug Education," the essay looks at the history of the US's great institutions of higher education and their origins as affiliates of religious traditions. Hence Harvard, Yale, and Princeton are cited as educational institutions established by our earliest Protestant settlers. And Delbanco reviews the early history of such colleges, in the same way that David Ricci does, reminding us that the ideal graduate was one who was not filled with self-pride and the ambition to leverage the degree to make millions. Rather, the early ideal was to recognize, with gratitude, one's humble place in the universe, a universe filled by untold secrets even for the most knowledable. So, despite the huge rebuttal to Rich Santorum's calling President Obama a snob for recommending college for most young people (he didn't recommend a four-year degree for all), Delbanco finds an element of truth in Santorum's rant among America's most elite institutions of higher learning. Their students, he says, have too often strayed from the core message of their founders: learning is a privilege and not a ticket to a life of luxury. The real learned among us know this in their bones: what we know is a tiny fraction of what we don't know. And that kind of knowledge is cause for humility, not hubris.
Here's the link:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/09/opinion/colleges-and-elitism.html?src=me&ref=general
Why U.S. shouldn't rush to war in Syria
http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/08/opinion/clark-syria-intervention/index.html
Why does the United States have to get involved in their mess? It's up to the Arab League to get involved?Is it wasting people's lives in US, resources, and time by thinking and playing "policemen in the world" and let them sort it out?
Why does the United States have to get involved in their mess? It's up to the Arab League to get involved?Is it wasting people's lives in US, resources, and time by thinking and playing "policemen in the world" and let them sort it out?
Thursday, March 8, 2012
"KONY 2012"
KONY 2012 is a film and campaign by Invisible Children that aims to make Joseph Kony famous, “not to celebrate him, but to raise support for his arrest and set a precedent for international justice.” The mission of Invisible Children is to “uses film, creativity and social action to end the use of child soldiers in Joseph Kony's rebel war and restore LRA-affected communities in central Africa to peace and prosperity.” Therefore, Invisible Children wants to make KONY famous until December 31, 2012 so the world will know more about what is happening back in Uganda. “Wow” is the first word that pops in my mind as one must be blind for the past years to not have a clue about Kony and what was going on back in Uganda since his 2005 indictment by the International Criminal Court in The Hague. However, I think the campaign itself is good for awareness but my question is why now? How come the world woke up with one YouTube post? Or maybe it did not wake up since this might be just a week-long discussion without any action. If one wants to know more about Invisible Children and Joseph Kony, a Ugandan guerrilla leader of the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA), there are countless sources out there that you can find. I am glad I’ve seen the video and heard others talk about KONY but I am wondering if people are more interested in the cause or just the movie itself. I myself did not simply share the video on Facebook and claim that I am empowered by this video like many other friends of mine. At first it was interesting to hear my Facebook friends talking about this, and sharing this video and feel bitter for a second, but then I thought, does every war criminal need to be famous in order for people to take action and feel sympathetic and be aware of the need for helping others.
But, what I wanted to focus here is the power of Social Media; watching KONY 2012 brought countless questions about the power of social media and how people do not question WHY? Or do not even understand what the cause is but still use the “like” button just because everyone else is doing so. It amazes me how within two days or so the video named “KONY 2012” was viewed by 43,354,020 folks around the world as I am writing this … and the Facebook has been boomed with countless posts about KONY. It’s crazy how much impact the social media have nowadays; I mean even when I think about the recent Arab Spring, Occupy Wall Street movement, KONY, and now I wonder what’s next? Because the film and campaign is everywhere and it continues to be the hottest topic in Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and other Social Medias. This has been something that has also been an important topic that I’ve been talking about to my friends on campus. This video was shared by so many people, yet many of them had no clue what the story is. They speak no English but still like the campaign and video. My question here is how we have come to this point that we don’t question much. KONY is not the only war criminal around the world in the list of people that abuse human rights, there are many others that some of us have never heard of.
As I continue questioning KONY and the power of social media I would like to note what one of my friends said today to me as we were discussing about injustice and this video in particular. He said, “it made me laugh to see how people started sharing this video like crazy, like that’s some isolated key of human brutality just screaming for our help or whatever like, millions of people became humanitarians, sharing posts with their iPhones and new MacBook’s, and for a moment they even felt better a bit, and when we start talking about, dunno, brutality in iPod/iPhone factories, barely anyone shares that (using their iPhones), cause that makes me realize how F***** up we have become.”
Finally, I question myself about how many people out there are suffering and never get a chance to raise their voice; how many young kids around the world suffer injustice and domestic abuse; how many war criminals are free out there and no one even cares because there are always other important political items in the agenda that needs to be followed.
Here is the YouTube link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4MnpzG5Sqc
Here is the YouTube link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4MnpzG5Sqc
Wednesday, March 7, 2012
The World's Next Superpower
Washington Rules emphasizes the United States' belief that it has a duty to look out for the rest of the world. This viewpoint enforces the generally accepted fact that the U.S. is the world's current superpower. However, there is debate as to whether or not our country will sustain this position in the coming years. A lot of people seem to believe that China holds the potential to replace the U.S., but there are other hypotheses as well. I came across the following article that questions if Canada might be a contender. While the article raises some significant facts, I don't think it presents enough evidence to suggest that Canada might become the world's next superpower. But who knows...
I also recently discovered a book entitled No One's World: The West, the Rising Rest, and the Coming Global Turn which suggests that if the United States does lose its status as the world's superpower, maybe there will not be a country that takes its place. (At least this is what I gathered from the description given on Amazon.) This is an interesting claim that merits some consideration. How might international relations be different if there wasn't a country viewed as the superpower of the world? Would such a condition be an improvement to today's world?
Tuesday, March 6, 2012
An interesting look at the Catholic perspective
This is a blog post that discusses Rick Santorum's disgrace with JFK's 1960 speech in Houston. The author of this post, also a Catholic, paints an interesting portrait of what JFK's presidency meant to the Catholic population of the time. Very interesting to see two sides of that spectrum.
http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/05/the-view-from-bay-ridge-in-1960/?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20120306
http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/05/the-view-from-bay-ridge-in-1960/?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20120306
Syria...The next Libya?????
Apparently.. most of us watched as CNN replayed the McCain speech in the house where he called upon the US government to intervene in Syria and stage airstrikes.....I however, do not agree with him considering the 'untimely' situation of Iran's heat raising and Netanyahu's visit and comments of Israel having the right to safe guard and protect herself....This is too much for Obama, I should say.....
What do you think of McCain's airstrike plea????
What do you think of McCain's airstrike plea????
Monday, March 5, 2012
Talk about crazy politics!
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/06/world/europe/fraudulent-votes-for-putin-abound-in-chechnya.html?hp
In this New York Times article, it talks about how a precinct in Chechnya had a turn out rate of 107%. Thousands of votes were for Putin and 1 vote was for Zyuganov. This is both statistically improbable and there were about 100 extra votes cast. Election commissions don't monitor Chechnya because it is too dangerous.
It interests me that such an obvious effort was put into cheating, however, the article said that this probably wouldn't even be looked into.
In this New York Times article, it talks about how a precinct in Chechnya had a turn out rate of 107%. Thousands of votes were for Putin and 1 vote was for Zyuganov. This is both statistically improbable and there were about 100 extra votes cast. Election commissions don't monitor Chechnya because it is too dangerous.
It interests me that such an obvious effort was put into cheating, however, the article said that this probably wouldn't even be looked into.
Student Debt: The Next Bubble to Burst?
Thanks to Isaiah Corbin for passing along this link:
http://dissentmagazine.org/atw.php?id=696
Warning: this is a clear-eyed appraisal of the costs this generation of college students is bearing so that they will not be destined to live their entire lives in Fishtown.
http://dissentmagazine.org/atw.php?id=696
Warning: this is a clear-eyed appraisal of the costs this generation of college students is bearing so that they will not be destined to live their entire lives in Fishtown.
Sunday, March 4, 2012
Seriously?
I just had to post this. My cousin is a FAR to the right
conservative. He tends to find "socialist, communist
liberalism" in everything. He called Madonna's performance at the
Super Bowl "The luciferian symbolism during the Maddona halftime show was
thick... Satan worship in full effect." Now he is going off on
a rant about the Dr. Seuss movie "The Lorax." He wrote on
Facebook "Took the kids to "The
Lorax" last night. Can't even see a decent kids movie without the
socialist-anti-capitalist-environmentalist agenda anymore. The indoctrination of our kids continues. there is a time and place to get your views
heard, keep it out of the kids movies that is all I ask. Socialism and
communism have failed time and again. Capitalism has made this country the most
prosperous in the world in a very short time. Now capitalism is under attack
like it is something evil. The real evil is government control and that is
exactly what socialism and communism is all about." If you
didn’t know, according to Wikipedia, the Lorax is a children's book written by Dr. Seuss and
first published in 1971. It chronicles the plight of the environment and the Lorax, who speaks for the
trees against the greedy Once-ler. As in most Dr. Seuss works, most of the
creatures mentioned are original to the book.
The book is commonly recognized as a fable concerning industrialized society and
the danger it poses to nature. I was
just wondering what your thoughts are on his statement about liberalism
sneaking into all movies? I personally
believe it is a load of bologna, especially since it is a Dr. Seuss book…give
me a break. He was just trying to teach
kids a good lesson: Respect the
environment.
Saturday, March 3, 2012
Sad, But True
www.livescience.com/18706-people-smart-democracy.html/
This article states that people in this country are simply not smart enough to make political decisions wisely. We have all believed this was true, but now it is being scientifically proven! We assume that people can choose the best candidate for this country, but since most of the topics of debate are above people's heads (taxes) then how can they choose? Not only are people not understanding these topics, but they are even too ignorant to admit that they do not understand. Their studies also showed that people put their skills in a variety of areas as "above average."
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts." --Bertrand Russell
This article states that people in this country are simply not smart enough to make political decisions wisely. We have all believed this was true, but now it is being scientifically proven! We assume that people can choose the best candidate for this country, but since most of the topics of debate are above people's heads (taxes) then how can they choose? Not only are people not understanding these topics, but they are even too ignorant to admit that they do not understand. Their studies also showed that people put their skills in a variety of areas as "above average."
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts." --Bertrand Russell
Another Rush Limbaugh Blunder
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/02/rush-limbaugh-sleep-train-sandra-fluke-slut_n_1315900.html
As many of you probably have heard, Rush Limbaugh recently called Sandra Fluke a "slut" for wanting to speak in favor of birth control at a Congressional hearing. I find this not only outrageous, but personally offensive. It has been shown that out of all of the women from the ages of 15-44 who are sexually active, approximately 99% of them have used some sort of contraceptive method. Currently, 62% of ALL women in the same age range use a contraceptive method.
So, not only should I be offended, but so should most of the women in America. I was extremely happy to hear that some of his advertisers had pulled their commercials, but is this what it takes? It takes Rush Limbaugh calling a woman a slut? What about all of the other ludicrous things he has spoken of? Like when he claimed that volcanoes are more to blame for the depletion of the ozone than humans are? Or when he said, "The ocean will take care of this on its own if it was left alone and left out there. Its natural. It's as natural as the ocean water is."--Talking about the BP oil spill. He needs to be held accountable for every mistake he makes because people listen to him and worst of all, they believe him.
Just in case any of you want to sign the petition telling his advertisers to stop supporting him...I signed it with pleasure!
http://act.credoaction.com/campaign/ads_limbaugh/?rc=LA_Rush_03022012_ad2
As many of you probably have heard, Rush Limbaugh recently called Sandra Fluke a "slut" for wanting to speak in favor of birth control at a Congressional hearing. I find this not only outrageous, but personally offensive. It has been shown that out of all of the women from the ages of 15-44 who are sexually active, approximately 99% of them have used some sort of contraceptive method. Currently, 62% of ALL women in the same age range use a contraceptive method.
So, not only should I be offended, but so should most of the women in America. I was extremely happy to hear that some of his advertisers had pulled their commercials, but is this what it takes? It takes Rush Limbaugh calling a woman a slut? What about all of the other ludicrous things he has spoken of? Like when he claimed that volcanoes are more to blame for the depletion of the ozone than humans are? Or when he said, "The ocean will take care of this on its own if it was left alone and left out there. Its natural. It's as natural as the ocean water is."--Talking about the BP oil spill. He needs to be held accountable for every mistake he makes because people listen to him and worst of all, they believe him.
Just in case any of you want to sign the petition telling his advertisers to stop supporting him...I signed it with pleasure!
http://act.credoaction.com/campaign/ads_limbaugh/?rc=LA_Rush_03022012_ad2
Friday, March 2, 2012
The Effort to Delegitmize Obama: Religion's Role
OPINION
| March 01, 2012
Campaign Stops: Leaps of Faith
By MOLLY WORTHEN
What do President Obama's conservative Christian critics really mean when they portray him as an enemy of religious freedom?
Today's "Campaign Stops" feature of the NY Times features the above essay by Molly Worthen. It follows a recent revival of the irrational elements of the President's critics in seeking to villify Obama's character, his politics, the authenticity of his citizenship, and the nature, if any, of his religious beliefs. The worst in the latest chain of insane allegations is the revival of the long-settled issue of Obama's birth certificate. This most recent appeal to the paranoid element in American conservatism, made by Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Arizona, claims to have evidence that the birth certificate produced by the president as a means of closing the shameful chapter in our history, when the birther movement was taken up by Donald Trump, was an electronic forgery, not a copy of an original hardcopy. (That Sheriff Joe's efforts coincide with a Justice Department investigation of chronic violations of federal law with racial profiling and abuse of Latinos run amok is not likely a mere coincidence. Yet it shows the Right's absolute absence of shame in treating this president as "not one of us."
The most recent attacks by Rick Santorum and Senators Blunt and Rubio of Obama's assault on the First Amendment's separation clause in the provisions guaranteeing contraceptive coverage to women in the employer-based insurance policies that will continue under the aegis of "Obamacare" are a new twist on the efforts of his critics to demonize Obama. The proposition that the Affordable Care Act contains provisions by this president to deprive American's of religious freedom is preposterous on its face. But then again, it wasn't long ago that Frankling Graham, son of the aging "Pastor to Presidents," the Reverend Billy Graham, accused Obama of being a Muslim by virtue of his father's religious heritage. But the new narrative taken by the Obama haters goes further, insisting that this president is seeking to impose his own religious views -- "phoney theology," as Santorum puts it -- on Americans who have religious reasons to oppose the use of contraceptives.
Why the combination of fear tactics with projected (paranoid) attitudes -- "worldviews" that some Christians take offense with -- in the latest round of Obama assaults? Is there something here that I'm missing? Is this truly a sense that Christians have a point on? Or is it, as Jonathan Chait's essay in the New York magazine noted by Mr. Nelson's earlier post, a desperate attempt by a demographically shrinking Republican base to cast their political aspersions on the president dressed up in a sublimated form of White Christian Identity Politics in the parts of the South where race and religion are a dangerous mix in the animosity toward those with different views and different skin color?
Another concourse awaits interrogation.
Campaign Stops: Leaps of Faith
By MOLLY WORTHEN
What do President Obama's conservative Christian critics really mean when they portray him as an enemy of religious freedom?
Today's "Campaign Stops" feature of the NY Times features the above essay by Molly Worthen. It follows a recent revival of the irrational elements of the President's critics in seeking to villify Obama's character, his politics, the authenticity of his citizenship, and the nature, if any, of his religious beliefs. The worst in the latest chain of insane allegations is the revival of the long-settled issue of Obama's birth certificate. This most recent appeal to the paranoid element in American conservatism, made by Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Arizona, claims to have evidence that the birth certificate produced by the president as a means of closing the shameful chapter in our history, when the birther movement was taken up by Donald Trump, was an electronic forgery, not a copy of an original hardcopy. (That Sheriff Joe's efforts coincide with a Justice Department investigation of chronic violations of federal law with racial profiling and abuse of Latinos run amok is not likely a mere coincidence. Yet it shows the Right's absolute absence of shame in treating this president as "not one of us."
The most recent attacks by Rick Santorum and Senators Blunt and Rubio of Obama's assault on the First Amendment's separation clause in the provisions guaranteeing contraceptive coverage to women in the employer-based insurance policies that will continue under the aegis of "Obamacare" are a new twist on the efforts of his critics to demonize Obama. The proposition that the Affordable Care Act contains provisions by this president to deprive American's of religious freedom is preposterous on its face. But then again, it wasn't long ago that Frankling Graham, son of the aging "Pastor to Presidents," the Reverend Billy Graham, accused Obama of being a Muslim by virtue of his father's religious heritage. But the new narrative taken by the Obama haters goes further, insisting that this president is seeking to impose his own religious views -- "phoney theology," as Santorum puts it -- on Americans who have religious reasons to oppose the use of contraceptives.
Why the combination of fear tactics with projected (paranoid) attitudes -- "worldviews" that some Christians take offense with -- in the latest round of Obama assaults? Is there something here that I'm missing? Is this truly a sense that Christians have a point on? Or is it, as Jonathan Chait's essay in the New York magazine noted by Mr. Nelson's earlier post, a desperate attempt by a demographically shrinking Republican base to cast their political aspersions on the president dressed up in a sublimated form of White Christian Identity Politics in the parts of the South where race and religion are a dangerous mix in the animosity toward those with different views and different skin color?
Another concourse awaits interrogation.
Should College Be For Everyone?
http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/03/01/should-college-be-for-everyone/?hp
This Room for Debate topic in today's NYTimes has several short essays taking various pro and con views on the question, Is college (as we know it) really for everyone? The essays together constitute a "concourse," which in Q methodology is a "universe of discourse" in which strands of differing subjectivity merge and depart in what sometimes appears to be a random manner to a detached observer. Using a sampling frame -- technically, a scheme for ensuring a balanced and comprehensive sample of such subjectivity -- someone interested in seeking to find order in this concourse would draw a small number (usually 35-50) of these statements and find a P-set (small but varied group of respondents: college, non-college, young, old, American, international) and ask them to sort the statements in a Q sort. The resulting factors would reflect the common viewpoints underlying these various essays. Typically, such studies show a smaller number of deeper views than the several essays would suggest and, at the same time, more complexity than the simple pro and con of college attendance. This would be a very do-able project for one or two Capstoners curious about this matter and looking for ways of satisfying a big chunk of the writing requirement.
This Room for Debate topic in today's NYTimes has several short essays taking various pro and con views on the question, Is college (as we know it) really for everyone? The essays together constitute a "concourse," which in Q methodology is a "universe of discourse" in which strands of differing subjectivity merge and depart in what sometimes appears to be a random manner to a detached observer. Using a sampling frame -- technically, a scheme for ensuring a balanced and comprehensive sample of such subjectivity -- someone interested in seeking to find order in this concourse would draw a small number (usually 35-50) of these statements and find a P-set (small but varied group of respondents: college, non-college, young, old, American, international) and ask them to sort the statements in a Q sort. The resulting factors would reflect the common viewpoints underlying these various essays. Typically, such studies show a smaller number of deeper views than the several essays would suggest and, at the same time, more complexity than the simple pro and con of college attendance. This would be a very do-able project for one or two Capstoners curious about this matter and looking for ways of satisfying a big chunk of the writing requirement.
Thursday, March 1, 2012
Dorothy and Toto might not want to go back to Kansas
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/29/kansas-abortion-bill-governor-sam-brownback_n_1307076.html
Kansas Governor Sam Brownback, is ready to double down on his beliefs.
"Brownback, speaking to The Huffington Post Monday following the National Governors Association meeting, said that while he has not read the 69-page bill, he is likely to sign the proposal since he opposes abortion rights. Brownback, a former U.S. senator, has signed several anti-abortion bills since he took office last year. "I am pro-life," Brownback said. "When I campaigned I said that if a pro-life bill got to my desk, I will sign it. I am not backing away from that."
His beliefs are his to hold, but the piece of legislation he is expected to sign into law is excessively draconian.
"Among the provisions is one which would exempt doctors from malpractice suits if they withhold information -- in order to prevent an abortion -- that could have prevented a health problem for the mother or child."
I'm not sure if I understand this. Doctors are supposed to commit to a code of ethics before practicing, and to withhold information that could threaten the patient's life, or the life of the unborn, seems to be backwards.
What is everyone's take on this? This could be a generational thing but it seems to be more than that.
Kansas Governor Sam Brownback, is ready to double down on his beliefs.
"Brownback, speaking to The Huffington Post Monday following the National Governors Association meeting, said that while he has not read the 69-page bill, he is likely to sign the proposal since he opposes abortion rights. Brownback, a former U.S. senator, has signed several anti-abortion bills since he took office last year. "I am pro-life," Brownback said. "When I campaigned I said that if a pro-life bill got to my desk, I will sign it. I am not backing away from that."
His beliefs are his to hold, but the piece of legislation he is expected to sign into law is excessively draconian.
"Among the provisions is one which would exempt doctors from malpractice suits if they withhold information -- in order to prevent an abortion -- that could have prevented a health problem for the mother or child."
I'm not sure if I understand this. Doctors are supposed to commit to a code of ethics before practicing, and to withhold information that could threaten the patient's life, or the life of the unborn, seems to be backwards.
What is everyone's take on this? This could be a generational thing but it seems to be more than that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)