A Rational Look at Abortions and Planned Parenthood


Let’s start with Planned Parenthood.

Except in the case of medical necessity, abortion is a life choice that should be made by a woman and a medical professional; not by a politician, religious official or a government agency. As a life choice, unless the mother’s life or health is endangered, the choice to abort should be paid for by the woman, not by taxpayers. How or why Planned Parenthood ever started getting paid by the feds for performing abortions is irrelevant, that funding should stop! Not all funding!

Apparently Planned Parenthood performs many helpful services for women who cannot afford testing or medication on their own, Personally I have no problem with them getting our money for that, as long as the people who use their services actually need that financial help.

Unfortunately, some people who are well off financially got that way and stay that way by cheating the system: getting charity, assistance, food stamps, tax breaks, etc. that they don’t need or deserve. Those are the people who should be ‘cut off!’

As I started out saying, I believe that abortion or no abortion is a decision that belong solely to the prospective mother. I find it bizarre  that, when the prospective mother makes the decision to terminate her pregnancy, suddenly every moralistic idiot in our society finds something to say about it.

Born or Not Born

If a woman made the decision to “have a baby”, not one of the aforementioned moralizing idiots would know about that child until it is born (born defined by Websters: “brought into life by the process of birth”) The well being of that child would be the mother’s ‘legal responsibility. It would be a life protected under our laws and our Constitution. If that child then died by normal circumstance: disease, organ failure or accident, it’s a tragedy for that mother and for that family unit. If that child died through neglect or an intentional act, the law would attempt to bring someone to justice for the act.

If a woman decides, for whatever reason, NOT to have a baby, but she is already pregnant, I believe she should have the right to terminate the pregnancy at some point before the baby is born, i.e., “brought into life . . .”. That decision does not give anyone else a moral responsibility for that baby’s life. That decision does NOT make a woman’s baby public property — that decision does not suddenly make that baby EVERYONE’S child, everyone’s concern or everyone’s problem. The unborn baby is still inside the mother, still feeding on her nourishment, still requiring her blood and respiration. To assume, at that point, that ANYONE but the mother has ANY moral claim to that unborn baby’s existence is completely illogical as well as morally absurd.

The social rules were made centuries ago: women have children or do not have children the circumstances of either case should not be open to discussion or governed by anyone’s moral code, except for the woman’s and, in most cases, the biological father’s.

Planned Parenthood Selling Baby Parts??

(Selling Baby Parts: That’s what Planned Parenthood”s opponents call it because they want the public suitably shocked!)

Having watched some of the videos that have come out it seems that some of Planned Parenthood’s activities may border on illegality, if that is the case, the people who are acting illegally should be brought to justice, like every else who breaks the law. That may justify a federal government supervised reorganization, (since they are using tax money), but as usual the moralizers want to whip everyone into a frenzy and will continue to pretend that totally de-funding the organization is the only option.

Shutting down Planned Parenthood is a poor option. Their mission statement emphasizes reproductive health and education as well as abortions, unless you are ready to assume that Planned Parenthood does NO GOOD for the community, there is no reason to judge it based only on their ability to perform safe, legal abortions or based on someone’s self-righteous opposition to abortion.

Forget Obamacare for now, get a budget deal passed and get on with American life.


butting heads“Back in the day” (as we baby boomers lament) there were Republicans and Democrats and a few Independents. Today we still have Democrats and Independents but the Republican Party finds itself fragmented (and hampered) by idealists, aka: Conservatives and “tea partyers” who have a wonderful understanding of our rights under the Constitution but who apparently do not understand the American political system.

Not that these idealists are wrong about what they are fighting for, e.g., Obamacare really IS destructive, both financially and Constitutionally to America; it takes basic freedoms and choices away from American citizens and it forcibly transfers the cost and responsibility for the health-care of the poor, uneducated and unemployed from the central government (where it belongs) to those who can provide for their own health care with or without insurance as they choose. This is President Obama living up to his pre-election promise to “level the playing field”.

Where, in my opinion, the Conservatives and tea partyers are wrong is that they feel so sure that they are right they operate as if EVERYONE else is wrong as well as inconsequential. As much as the they would like their idealism and dedication to the Constitution to be automatically shared by every other politician and every citizen, these ideals are not universal.

“The most important thing in an argument, next to being right, is to leave an escape hatch for your opponent, so that he can gracefully swing over to your side without too much apparent loss of face.”
Sydney J Harris
American journalist

To be an effective legislator or political leader you must occasionally compromise your personal ideals for the sake of America and Americans. Right now the idealists want the un-American monstrosity known as the Affordable Care act defunded, killed and neutered without regard to the fact that this Act is an existing law that has been declared Constitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court. The fact that the Supreme Court paid no attention to the Constitution when it made that decision really makes no difference at this point. The monstrosity was declared Constitutional and until or unless that decision is successfully overturned, it is the law of the land.

Obamacare CAN be defunded but the idealists can’t get it through their thick skulls that it will NEVER happen while the Senate and the Executive branch are controlled by Democrats. Like deranged goats, they seem to enjoy butting their heads against the wall completely unaware of the facts that make that action futile.

Specter Gets Hectored at His Town Hall Meeting


Arlen Specter

It was an unhappy Arlen Specter who left the town-hall-style meeting in Lebanan, Pennsylvania this morning (Tuesday, 8/1/09). He did all he could to keep the meeting orderly: he had his staff rent a small auditorium at the Harrisburg Area Community College that seated 250 people, but over 1,000 showed up; he limited the questioners to the first 30 people who got in line, but most of those first 30 were mad as hell — not just about the president’s proposed healthcare legislation, which was supposed to be the sole focus of the meeting, but about the entire direction of the Obama Administration; he limited the meeting to 90 minutes and that made the angry crowd even angrier.

Comments flew from the crowd:

“This is about the dismantling of this country,” shouted a stay-at-home mother, “We don’t want this country to turn into Russia.” She was applauded!

“You are trampling on our Constitution!” yelled another man into Sen. Specter’s face. “One day,” he continued while being applauded, “God is going to stand before you, and he’s going to judge you!”

“It says plainly right there, they want to limit the type of care elderly can get,” shouted an office manager from the area, “They are talking about killing people.”

“This is the Soviet Union, this is Maoist China,” another man yelled, “The people in this room want their country back.”

Not all the comments were verbal: People showed up wearing American Flag t-shirts and carrying signs: “Hands Off My Healthcare” and outside, a red car drove around with a large sign saying “Retire Specter 2010.”

To make matters worse, some of the questioners had the actual wording of proposed healthcare legislation in their hands but when they asked specific questions all Sen. Specter could say was what he had been trained to say — he delivered ‘party lines’ such as: “If you like your insurance you can keep it;” “The public option is just that, an option;” “There are five proposed healthcare plans in the House and no final version; and similar approved slogans that fly in the face of all the evidence that suggests that the government is in the beginning stages of taking over the entire healthcare industry and, at some future date, wants all the health insurance companies out of the business of health care insurance.

An excerpt from a New York Times article tells of Senator Specter’s reaction after the meeting:

“He said he thought some of the objectors were genuine grassroots and some were organized, egged on by talk radio. He also noted that his office had sent out mailers notifying them of the event.

Still, he said these events had showed him that “there’s more anger in America today than at any time than I can remember.” He blamed the anger largely on the ailing economy and high unemployment.”

That one statement, that he blames the anger on the economy and unemployment, shows with perfect clarity that Senator Specter doesn’t get it! He apparently isn’t listening to the crowds! The anger is directed at a president and an administration that is attempting to hijack American democracy, destroy the free market and turn us all into residents of his personal Utopia — a Utopia that, to true Americans, resembles a gulog.


New York Times: Eruptions at Sen. Specter’s Town-Hall Meeting

WGAL TV: Video Clips Of Specter’s Town Hall Meeting

PennLive.com: Lebanon Democrats applaud Specter

Feed Me! Heal Me!


Dr. Obama Browsing through the comments section of an MSNBC article titled: Congress: The centrist threat? The subject of government run healthcare came up. Many people displayed that ‘feed me,’ ‘heal me,’ ‘take care of me’ attitude about that shows how little they respect themselves and how little they care about the people who actually pay for their food, healthcare and whatever else. But just about as many expressed their discontent with the prospect of even more “nannycare”. In my view, the following comment by Mr. Charles Morrison of Atlanta, GA provides the most compelling argument against the prospect of our government controlling the healthcare system:

“I keep hearing people talk about how good universal health care is. Why can’t people see what is staring them in the face? Currently the government controls the VA Hospitals. Go ask a Veteran how good that system is working. I got out of the Marines in 2007 with 11 years of service to this fine nation. Needless to say, my military medical record is full of detailed information regarding all service related injuries and ailments, yet the government run VA tells me that the 2 compressed discs in my back are NOT service related when they occurred while I was carrying gear while with the 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU). My shoulder injuries that occurred while in Iraq (for which I had two (2) reconstructive surgeries) also did not happen while in the military in accordance with the VA. Both of these items I have mentioned above are noted in great detail in my medical records. So while I wake up every morning in pain, the government run VA hospital says none of this occurred or is related to my military service. Now if a relatively small government run heath care system like the VA Hospital is being run in this manner, why on Earth would anyone believe for a moment that the government would do a better job on such a grand scale that would be required to run the hospitals for an entire nation?

If you really want to bring the costs of health care down, look at the real cause. Health care costs a lot because doctors and hospital have to pay for liability insurance. Liability insurance costs them so much because if a patient is disgruntled in any way what so ever, they file suit in the hopes of making a buck for free. If we are really serious about bringing health care costs down, we need to look at reforming or putting restrictions on a litigation happy nation.

Thankfully there are still some people like Mr. Morrison who can apply the logic of personal experience to the ridiculous prospect of bureaucrats providing our healthcare in a manner as inefficiently as they do everything else. In this gentleman’s case, he is in a situation that would cause many people to just give up on the government — but he hasn’t given up, he’s speaking out and even suggesting ways to fix its problems.

For our own survival as a truly free people and for the survival of our nation, we must all speak out, we must get rid of our bloated government and stop electing the kind of dunderheads (in Congress AND the Executive Branch) who promote destructive ideas such as National Healthcare when what they should be focusing on is the REAL reasons healthcare is so expensive: two of which are the liability litigation mentioned in the quote and also government’s own over-regulation of all medical-related industries.

Blameless?: The Death of an Abortionist


Dr. George Tiller

The headline of an Opinion column written by JAMES KIRCHICK, in the latest Wall Street Journal (linked below) reads: “The Religious Right Didn’t Kill George Tiller.” Of course that’s an accurate statement but the underlying sentiment — the “story” in the piece — is that anti-abortion activists are completely blameless and that’s absurd.

When you use an emotional issue to stir up powerful sentiments, as the anti-abortion crowd does so well, and when, on a daily basis, you suggest and even call abortion doctors murderers — you need to take SOME of the blame for the death of anyone associated with abortions. Its not hard to imagine a court of law finding all of them accessories before the fact.

Granted, most anti-abortion crusaders are not violent people and just hours after the death of George Tiller the head people of every main-stream anti abortion movement denounced the murder — and then they began distancing their actions and their approaches from any act of murder. So rather than looking at the hate they stir up, at the revolting literature they happily pass out, at the power they possess in the media or at the fact that the ONLY basis they have for doing what they do are their personal religious beliefs; rather than taking responsibility for their own actions they just stand on the balcony and wash their hands of any involvement.

Sorry guys, that blood on your hands won’t wash off!

Tiller’s murderer now has a name! According to the article: “Tiller’s alleged killer, Scott Roeder, is a long-time radical antiabortion activist with reported ties to a militant antigovernment organization called the Freemen.” The “Freemen” is certainly an interesting choice for a name of an organization that advocates the denial of a basic right to pregnant females, the right to complete control of their own body functions.

There are some on the far left who compare anti-abortion crusaders with terrorists and that’s patently ridiculous; what anti-abortion crusaders are are provocateurs — they are simply agitators who loudly and graphically oppose a woman’s right to an abortion and try to pray that right out of existence. They sound the rallying cry for the individual terrorists like Roeder and the organized ones like the Freemen — but since they perform no violent acts themselves, the anti-abortion crusaders manage to escape the appellation: terrorist.

News Links:

Wall Street Journal: The Religious Right Didn’t Kill George Tiller

Washington Post: Clinics in the Cross Hairs

Blog Links:

Abigail’s Leftovers: what should a pro-life Christian think about abortionist George Tiller’s murder?

Where’s The Outrage?: Thoughts on Dr. George Tiller

My other homes for my posts are: The Blogger News Network — it’s real news from real people and Opinion Forum A Forum for Opinions on News, Politics, and Life.

Music Has Charms . . . and Power


“Music has charms to soothe the savage breast;
to soften rocks, or bend a knotted oak.”
— William Congreve, English dramatist (1670 – 1729)

When William Congreve wrote these words into his play, “The Mourning Bride”, he was not making an anatomical reference by his use of the word “breast”. In his time, at the turn of the 18th Century, his reference to the “savage breast” was taken as a reference to uncivilized or irrational behavior. Later when the word breast took on a more specific meaning the word “beast” was substituted but the meaning was not changed and became, perhaps, even clearer.

Science later confirmed Congreve’s inference that music has power over human behavior when it discovered that the human brain has a chemical reaction to music — it produces chemicals that help to improve brain function. One of those chemicals, Serotonin has been found to also improve nerve function.

Now researchers in Finland have taken the role of music in human behavior another step. According to today’s Washington Post:

“Their study of 54 patients who’d suffered a stroke of the right or left hemisphere middle cerebral artery found that those who listened to music for a few hours a day showed better improvements in verbal memory and focused attention, and had a more positive mood than those who listened to audio books or listened to nothing at all.”

The stroke victims were given a choice between listening to music or audio books or nothing at all. Everyone was also given the standard physical therapy.

Here’s a quote from a statement by the chief author of the study, Teppo Sarkamo, of the University of Helsinki and the Helsinki Brain Institute, where he quantifies the improvement:

“We found that three months after the stroke, verbal memory improved from the first week post-stroke by 60 percent in music listeners, by 18 percent in audio book listeners and by 29 percent in non-listeners. Similarly, focused attention — the ability to control and perform mental operations and resolve conflicts among responses — improved by 17 percent in music listeners, but no improvement was observed in audio book listeners and non-listeners. These differences were still essentially the same six months after the stroke.”

An additional fact is that those who chose to listen to music chose their own music. I can’t help but wonder just what music they chose. I can’t imagine Hard Rock, Hip-Hop or Rap having anything but a negative effect on emotional stability and an even worse effect on brain function. That, of course, is a non-scientific rant on my part.

News Links:

CBS News: Music To The Ears Of Some Stroke Victims

Washington Post: Music Therapy Improves Stroke Outcomes

Blog Links:

TuneDex Memories: Stressed? Victim of a stroke? We can help!

Locked and Secure: Strokes, Music And Gambling

Whymrhymer blogs at: My View From the Center