- Government interests
- August 26th, 2012
After the thoughtless remarks by the misinformed senator, I then found out the Republican party is really interested in women's health. To be more precise women's access to health care. It seems we women are not capable of deciding what to do with ourselves and need laws and judges to determine what will be done with us.
I realize that the abortion question is important. How children are concieved and then cared, or not cared for, does have reflect on our society. My question is does the government belong in this discussion.
I wonder why the government has to be involved. It seems strange that the same party who wants the government out of our pockets and doesn't want government run healthcare, is passing laws and structuring a platform that takes away pregnant women's civil rights. It also has the government monitoring by any means available the most intimate parts of a family's life.
Republican senators have tried to pass laws having rape victims audited by the IRS. These same senators also have tried to pass laws that would have women being investigated if they have a miscarriage and also laws that if a pregnant women comes into a hospital that no matter what the family or the mother decide that the baby comes first even if it means that the family will end up with two deaths instead of one.
How is this keeping the goverment out of our pockets? How much money was spent passing laws that are based on a personal strict interpretaion of the bible. So much for the government not imposing a religion.
Abortion needs to be debated. It is an invasive, permenant procedure for a temporary problem. The problem is when the government gets involved, the authority of families and individuals is usurped. Roe v. Wade includes the word choice in its language. One of the things overlooked when Tebow's mother continued her pregnancy was, that she legally had the choice to refuse the option doctors recommended. If Roe v. Wade didn't exist would she have been allowed to refuse an abortion?
If a doctor recommends a certain treatment the patient can refuse. If that patient is a women will she be allowed to refuse if the republicans have their way?
Barry Goldwater was an ultra conservative politician who was against abortion. However he pointed out that the government did not belong in the discussion. This discussion belongs to the families involved. When you quote the Bible about this, don't forget that a women's family has the authority in these matters and that in the wedding vows it is stated "let no man put asunder". If the government decides when an abortion can be done what birth control is allowed, the government is stepping into an area that according to both the Bible and the Constitution, it doesn't belong.